A proposal for a mileage tax?

[thereisnospoon]

Miles-Driven Could Replace Gasoline Tax, LaTourette Says - Bloomberg

This issue?...AGAIN?...
There are those who believe that because with gasoline prices expected to hover around $4 per gallon, any increase in the federal gasoline tax( 18.6 cpg) would be politically unpalatable.
So in order to enact another federal money grab, these geniuses are proposing a mileage tax.
The problem with this is how to implement this.
The current technology is GPS devices. These devices would in effect allow government bureaucrats to track the movements of all who operate automobiles.
This smacks of Big Brother.
Another issue. We are being asked by our elected officials to find ways to conserve fuel. Cars and trucks are manufactured to burn fuel more cleanly and more efficiently. The government stands and cheers. However, those in charge are also concerned with lower revenues generated by fuel taxes. So they propose an alternate tax. In effect we are being punished for doing the right thing.
Comments?

 

[Agit8r]

That's an incredibly stupid idea. A way to "broaden the base" and exempt the monied interests from what the rest of us have to burden

 

[thereisnospoon]

That's an incredibly stupid idea. A way to "broaden the base" and exempt the monied interests from what the rest of us have to burden

Would you be so kind as to expand on "exempt the monied interests"?

 

[Agit8r]

That's an incredibly stupid idea. A way to "broaden the base" and exempt the monied interests from what the rest of us have to burden

Would you be so kind as to expand on "exempt the monied interests"?

Sure. Presently everyone who goes to the gas station pays the same rate at the pump. But if e were being charged by a mileage sensor, it would be easy enough for fleet vehicles and whatnot to be exempted from having the censor, much like it is with emission standards in some places.

 

[DiamondDave]

They realized 'wait a minute.. when we mandate weaker more fuel efficient cars, we can not get as much in gas tax.. lets make another tax because we need more money to spend because we are fucking big government power addicts'

That is all

 

[BillyV]

I doubt they could ever make this any more "politically palatable" than raising the gas tax. It doesn't matter, anyway; the expansion of electronic tolling would be just as effective at raising money without having a GPS installed in your vehicle. They are already using them for express lanes on interstates and to take tolls at major turnpikes; give it a few years and there won't be any non-toll roads. It's better than having them track your car's every move.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's a terrible idea. It sounds like its net effect would be to penalize people with fuel efficient vehicles.

 

[DiamondDave]

It's a terrible idea. It sounds like its net effect would be to penalize people with fuel efficient vehicles.

Like I said above

 

[boedicca]

They realized 'wait a minute.. when we mandate weaker more fuel efficient cars, we can not get as much in gas tax.. lets make another tax because we need more money to spend because we are fucking big government power addicts'

That is all

This is the correct motorcycle.

 

[BillyV]

It's a terrible idea. It sounds like its net effect would be to penalize people with fuel efficient vehicles.

But, wait...I thought taxes weren't a "penalty"; they're just paying your "fair share".

In any case, there's nothing fair about fuel efficient vehicles paying less for roads; the maintenance of those roads is not reduced because a vehicle gets better gas mileage.

 

[Agit8r]

It's a terrible idea. It sounds like its net effect would be to penalize people with fuel efficient vehicles.

But, wait...I thought taxes weren't a "penalty"; they're just paying your "fair share".

In any case, there's nothing fair about fuel efficient vehicles paying less for roads; the maintenance of those roads is not reduced because a vehicle gets better gas mileage.

Typically the weight of a vehicle corresponds to it's fuel economy, and it need hardly be said that the weight of the vehicle corresponds to the amount of damage that it exacts on the road.

 

[BillyV]

It's a terrible idea. It sounds like its net effect would be to penalize people with fuel efficient vehicles.

But, wait...I thought taxes weren't a "penalty"; they're just paying your "fair share".

In any case, there's nothing fair about fuel efficient vehicles paying less for roads; the maintenance of those roads is not reduced because a vehicle gets better gas mileage.

Typically the weight of a vehicle corresponds to it's fuel economy, and it need hardly be said that the weight of the vehicle corresponds to the amount of damage that it exacts on the road.

Except that would not correspond to the evidence:

Engineering and transportation experts contacted Monday insisted that roads are typically designed for heavy trucks that weigh "at least double," if not 10 times what an SUV does.

They argued that there is virtually no difference between the road damage caused by a 5,401-pound Lexus LX-470 or a 5,070-pound Toyota Sequoia, and the wear and tear caused by a 3,950-pound Ford Crown Victoria, a 4,049-pound Cadillac Deville or a Mercedes Benz S-Class that weighs 4,200 pounds.

"That much extra weight is not going to cause any more damage than a regular passenger vehicle. You'd have to weigh what a truck weighs -- at least double the weight of an SUV" to cause additional wear and tear, said Sidney Guralnick, a distinguished professor of civil and architectural engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Chicago's SUV Tax and Road Damage: Do the Numbers Add Up? - The 312 - September 2011 - Chicago

Heavy trucks already pay a separate highway tax. Passenger vehicle weights do not change the maintenance requirements.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I doubt they could ever make this any more "politically palatable" than raising the gas tax. It doesn't matter, anyway; the expansion of electronic tolling would be just as effective at raising money without having a GPS installed in your vehicle. They are already using them for express lanes on interstates and to take tolls at major turnpikes; give it a few years and there won't be any non-toll roads. It's better than having them track your car's every move.

Think hard about what you posted. What do you think electronic tolling is, if not tracking your every move? THINK!

 

[Agit8r]

But, wait...I thought taxes weren't a "penalty"; they're just paying your "fair share".

In any case, there's nothing fair about fuel efficient vehicles paying less for roads; the maintenance of those roads is not reduced because a vehicle gets better gas mileage.

Typically the weight of a vehicle corresponds to it's fuel economy, and it need hardly be said that the weight of the vehicle corresponds to the amount of damage that it exacts on the road.

Except that would not correspond to the evidence:

Engineering and transportation experts contacted Monday insisted that roads are typically designed for heavy trucks that weigh "at least double," if not 10 times what an SUV does.

They argued that there is virtually no difference between the road damage caused by a 5,401-pound Lexus LX-470 or a 5,070-pound Toyota Sequoia, and the wear and tear caused by a 3,950-pound Ford Crown Victoria, a 4,049-pound Cadillac Deville or a Mercedes Benz S-Class that weighs 4,200 pounds.

"That much extra weight is not going to cause any more damage than a regular passenger vehicle. You'd have to weigh what a truck weighs -- at least double the weight of an SUV" to cause additional wear and tear, said Sidney Guralnick, a distinguished professor of civil and architectural engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Chicago's SUV Tax and Road Damage: Do the Numbers Add Up? - The 312 - September 2011 - Chicago

Heavy trucks already pay a separate highway tax. Passenger vehicle weights do not change the maintenance requirements.

fair enough. I guess the only fair way would be to impose the whole tax on diesel then.

 

[tjvh]

Typically the weight of a vehicle corresponds to it's fuel economy, and it need hardly be said that the weight of the vehicle corresponds to the amount of damage that it exacts on the road.

Except that would not correspond to the evidence:

Engineering and transportation experts contacted Monday insisted that roads are typically designed for heavy trucks that weigh "at least double," if not 10 times what an SUV does.

They argued that there is virtually no difference between the road damage caused by a 5,401-pound Lexus LX-470 or a 5,070-pound Toyota Sequoia, and the wear and tear caused by a 3,950-pound Ford Crown Victoria, a 4,049-pound Cadillac Deville or a Mercedes Benz S-Class that weighs 4,200 pounds.

"That much extra weight is not going to cause any more damage than a regular passenger vehicle. You'd have to weigh what a truck weighs -- at least double the weight of an SUV" to cause additional wear and tear, said Sidney Guralnick, a distinguished professor of civil and architectural engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Chicago's SUV Tax and Road Damage: Do the Numbers Add Up? - The 312 - September 2011 - Chicago

Heavy trucks already pay a separate highway tax. Passenger vehicle weights do not change the maintenance requirements.

fair enough. I guess the only fair way would be to impose the whole tax on diesel then.

Wow... Another brilliant idea to raise our already inflated grocery bills.

 

[Clementine]

The ones who will get hammered are those living in small towns and have to drive a ways to their jobs in the cities. We have so many farming communities and small towns and the majority drive a minimum of 30 miles to their factory jobs. Some drive 50+ one way. And because they have no choice but to put the miles on their vehicles just to get to work, they'll be severely punished.

One of the worst ideas ever. Government is drooling over the money people possess. They, not unlike the average criminal, are forever trying to come up with ways to part us from our money or property.

 

[BillyV]

I doubt they could ever make this any more "politically palatable" than raising the gas tax. It doesn't matter, anyway; the expansion of electronic tolling would be just as effective at raising money without having a GPS installed in your vehicle. They are already using them for express lanes on interstates and to take tolls at major turnpikes; give it a few years and there won't be any non-toll roads. It's better than having them track your car's every move.

Think hard about what you posted. What do you think electronic tolling is, if not tracking your every move? THINK!

It's tracking you at a toll booth, not everywhere. I use one every day and have yet to get "hassled by the man". The point is, if they want to track you now they can; a GPS installed in your vehicle, however, makes it intrusive to the extent that they can trace
ANYWHERE you go at any time, wherever you might go that you would rather not share with the world. Do you really want the IRS to have a record of everywhere you go? I don't.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Well if the goal is a nation of electric cars, they would have to at some point. sorry to say its a no brainer.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Typically the weight of a vehicle corresponds to it's fuel economy, and it need hardly be said that the weight of the vehicle corresponds to the amount of damage that it exacts on the road.

Except that would not correspond to the evidence:

Engineering and transportation experts contacted Monday insisted that roads are typically designed for heavy trucks that weigh "at least double," if not 10 times what an SUV does.

They argued that there is virtually no difference between the road damage caused by a 5,401-pound Lexus LX-470 or a 5,070-pound Toyota Sequoia, and the wear and tear caused by a 3,950-pound Ford Crown Victoria, a 4,049-pound Cadillac Deville or a Mercedes Benz S-Class that weighs 4,200 pounds.

"That much extra weight is not going to cause any more damage than a regular passenger vehicle. You'd have to weigh what a truck weighs -- at least double the weight of an SUV" to cause additional wear and tear, said Sidney Guralnick, a distinguished professor of civil and architectural engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Chicago's SUV Tax and Road Damage: Do the Numbers Add Up? - The 312 - September 2011 - Chicago

Heavy trucks already pay a separate highway tax. Passenger vehicle weights do not change the maintenance requirements.

fair enough. I guess the only fair way would be to impose the whole tax on diesel then.

Diesel is already taxed more.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I doubt they could ever make this any more "politically palatable" than raising the gas tax. It doesn't matter, anyway; the expansion of electronic tolling would be just as effective at raising money without having a GPS installed in your vehicle. They are already using them for express lanes on interstates and to take tolls at major turnpikes; give it a few years and there won't be any non-toll roads. It's better than having them track your car's every move.

Think hard about what you posted. What do you think electronic tolling is, if not tracking your every move? THINK!

It's tracking you at a toll booth, not everywhere. I use one every day and have yet to get "hassled by the man". The point is, if they want to track you now they can; a GPS installed in your vehicle, however, makes it intrusive to the extent that they can trace
ANYWHERE you go at any time, wherever you might go that you would rather not share with the world. Do you really want the IRS to have a record of everywhere you go? I don't.

You're not paying attention: THERE WILL BE NO TOLL BOOTHS! Open-road tolling has sensors all along the road. It IS tracking every move!