Some states want to punish fuel-efficient car drivers!

[necromancer]

How can that be? The right wing has controlled at least two branches of
the US government for 26 of the past 28 years. They've told us that
government isn't the solution to the problem, it is the problem.

It wasn't the size og govt, it was who the govt was bowing down to...

They shrunk the size of government (just ask them), eliminated reams of
burdensome regulations,

Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act, TSA, Real ID(which so far they
have been unsuccessful at)...

they've spent billions of dollars protecting
delicate corporations from the hoi polloi. Are you saying that the
Republicans were *wrong?*

Yep. And now, it is payback time...

 

[P J]

Just suck it up and raise the gas tax.

That causes people to drive even less, so it could get into a vicious
cycle. Reminds me the nicotin taxes that became such a large part of
state revenues. The more they raise it, the less they get out of it.
pj

 

[Brent]

How can that be? The right wing has controlled at least two branches of
the US government for 26 of the past 28 years. They've told us that
government isn't the solution to the problem, it is the problem. They
shrunk the size of government (just ask them), eliminated reams of
burdensome regulations, they've spent billions of dollars protecting
delicate corporations from the hoi polloi. Are you saying that the
Republicans were *wrong?*

Republicans are little different from democrats. They are also statists
and have expanded the size and scope of government greatly. Then again
you seem to know at least the later. Shattering people's illusions is
another story entirely.

 

[Brent]

Yep. And now, it is payback time...

Exactly how? By the democrats also expanding the size and scope of
government? The people are going to be the losers again.

 

[Scott in SoCal]

That causes people to drive even less, so it could get into a vicious
cycle. Reminds me the nicotin taxes that became such a large part of
state revenues. The more they raise it, the less they get out of it.

In Canada they raised the cigarette tax so high at one point that
people actually <gasp!> cut back on their smoking and revenue started
to fall off. They promptly lowered the tax.

But our addiction to oil is much, much worse than our addiction to
nicotine. For most people, it's MUCH easier to cut back on smoking
than it is to cut back on driving.

 

[Studemania]

In one of my college economics classes way back when, the professor
discussed the fairness of weighing your salad bar puchase and paying per
ounce vs. per plateful.  Interestingly enough, many students used the
"it's not fair" cry on the per ounce method...

At some US Naval officer clubs you used to pay according to the height
of your sandwich.

 

[P J]

In Canada they raised the cigarette tax so high at one point that
people actually <gasp!> cut back on their smoking and revenue started
to fall off. They promptly lowered the tax.

Whoa, that's something!

But our addiction to oil is much, much worse than our addiction to
nicotine. For most people, it's MUCH easier to cut back on smoking
than it is to cut back on driving.

True, but for many driving is a necessity of life, while smoking is not.
Being able to go wherever you want and whenever you want is also an
important part of freedom that public transportation can not provide as
fully as one's own car. Most politicians know it and that's why they
feel they can tax it to death and there will still be people driving.
pj

 

[Jay Giuliani]

I am all for use taxes, I just don't see this as manageable.

The problem is that in transporation this means tolls and the entire
infrastructure and industry which growa around them.

Imagine your surprise at registration time when you are presented a huge
mileage based tax bill.

It may seem fair but what about the person that has to drive a long way to
work because there is no effective public transit system available.
Promises of Light rail which will not be built for years will not pay that
renewal tax.

I think it will be hugely unmanageable.

Just raise the gas taxes

By the way, I remember those same clubs doing the Mongolian BBQ by the ounce
as well.

In one of my college economics classes way back when, the professor
discussed the fairness of weighing your salad bar puchase and paying per
ounce vs. per plateful. Interestingly enough, many students used the
"it's not fair" cry on the per ounce method...

At some US Naval officer clubs you used to pay according to the height
of your sandwich.

 

[Gordon McGrew]

Hmmmmm.....

Put scales at the gas pump, and dynamically calculate the tax when the
handle is lifted...hmmm...

And the driver is weighed along with the car, of course.

 

[Gordon McGrew]

Lets see if I understand this. I live in Oregon and I have two vehicles,
one weighs 2,000 LB, the other weighs 3,000 LB. one gets 20 MPG, and the
other gets 35 MPG, doing 60 MPH on the interstate. I pay MORE in gas taxes
for the one than the other, per 100 miles driven, right?

The one that gets 35 MPG has only two seats, the other seats seven. I
have a wife and four children, all of us can NOT travel in the one that gets
20 MPG. If I must take us all, 100 miles away, to my in-laws house. I
need to make five trips in both directions with one, at total of ten trips
and only one each way with the other, for a total of two.

Now my question is, which situation would cause the most damage when I'm on
that trip and should I sell the one that weighs 2,000 LB and gets 20 MPG to
pay the per mile tax and keep the other because I have a wife on four
children or should just keep the one that weighs 2,000 LB and gets 20 MPG
and just leave my wife and kids, as well as Oregon?

Take the bus.

 

[Sharx35]

In Canada they raised the cigarette tax so high at one point that
people actually <gasp!> cut back on their smoking and revenue started
to fall off. They promptly lowered the tax.

But our addiction to oil is much, much worse than our addiction to
nicotine. For most people, it's MUCH easier to cut back on smoking
than it is to cut back on driving.

Smoking is totally nonessential. SOME driving is essential. However, in my
observation, ONE trip
a week to buy groceries is all that is needed. Fess up, how many of you make
MORE than one driving trip a week
to buy groceries? Clue: one does NOT need fresh lettuce every frigging
day--it WILL keep for a fair while in the fridge.
I buy gas every TWO weeks, groceries every TWO weeks, except for milk which
I buy ONCE a week. Library trips are ONCE a week. No need to rent or buy
DVD's etc..I get them on my WEEKLY library trips..which I often walk to,
BTW.

Commuting for hours is pure bullshit most of the time. Surely, you can MOVE
closer if the job has any permanence at all. I have NO sympathy for those
who commute for HOURS year, after year, after year. Live closer to where you
work, damnit.

 

[Studemania]

Smoking is totally nonessential. SOME driving is essential. However, in my
observation, ONE trip
a week to buy groceries is all that is needed. Fess up, how many of you make
MORE than one driving trip a week
to buy groceries? Clue: one does NOT need fresh lettuce every frigging
day--it WILL keep for a fair while in the fridge.
I buy gas every TWO weeks, groceries every TWO weeks, except for milk which
I buy ONCE a week. Library trips are ONCE a week. No need to rent or buy
DVD's etc..I get them on my WEEKLY library trips..which I often walk to,
BTW.

Commuting for hours is pure bullshit most of the time. Surely, you can MOVE
closer if the job has any permanence at all. I have NO sympathy for those
who commute for HOURS year, after year, after year. Live closer to where you
work, damnit.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Unintentionally, I have always lived within a mile of the shops, Bing
70 years ld (Japoanese style) I still will often walk a miles to get
to some businesses where there won't be a heavy load to tote.

 

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

Fess up, how many of you make
MORE than one driving trip a week
to buy groceries? Clue: one does NOT need fresh lettuce every frigging
day--it WILL keep for a fair while in the fridge.
I buy gas every TWO weeks, groceries every TWO weeks, except for milk which
I buy ONCE a week. Library trips are ONCE a week. No need to rent or buy
DVD's etc..I get them on my WEEKLY library trips..

So you don't have any kids in your house. Big whoop. Put a couple
growing kids in your house and see how your grocery runs get. Every two
weeks? hahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Jeff]

Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline
By RYAN KOST, Associated Press Writer Ryan Kost, Associated Press Writer
   – Sat Jan 3, 7:38 am ET

PORTLAND, Ore. – Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring
ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of
how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring
devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as
Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric
hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely
with gasoline taxes.

"I'm glad we're taking a look at it before the potholes get so big that
we can't even get out of them," said Leroy Younglove, a Portland driver
who participated in a recent pilot program.

The proposal is not without critics, including drivers who are concerned
about privacy and others who fear the tax could eliminate the financial
incentive for buying efficient vehicles.

But Oregon is ahead of the nation in exploring the concept, even though
it will probably be years before any mileage tax is adopted.

Congress is talking about it, too. A congressional commission has
envisioned a system similar to the prototype Oregon tested in 2006-2007.

The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure
Financing is considering calling for higher gas taxes to keep highways,
bridges and transit programs in good shape.

But over the long term, commission members say, the nation should
consider taxing mileage rather than gasoline as drivers use more
fuel-efficient and electric vehicles.

As cars burn less fuel, "the gas tax isn't going to fill the bill," said
Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, a member of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.

The next Congress "could begin to set the stage, perhaps looking at some
much more robust pilot programs, to begin the research, to work with
manufacturers."

Gov. Ted Kulongoski has included development money for the tax in his
budget proposal, and interest is growing in a number of other states.

Governors in Idaho and Rhode Island have considered systems that would
require drivers to report their mileage when they register vehicles.

In North Carolina last month, a panel suggested charging motorists a
quarter-cent for every mile as a substitute for the gas tax.

James Whitty, the Oregon Department of Transportation employee in charge
of the state's effort, said he's also heard talk of mileage tax
proposals in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado and Minnesota.

"There is kind of a coalition that's naturally forming around this," he
said.

Also fueling the search for alternatives is the political difficulty of
raising gasoline taxes.

The federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993, and nearly two dozen
states have not changed their taxes since 1997, according to the
American Road & Transportation Builders Association.

In Oregon's pilot program, officials equipped 300 vehicles with GPS
transponders that worked wirelessly with service station pumps, allowing
drivers to pay their mileage tax just as they do their gas tax.

Whitty said the test, which involved two gas stations in the Portland
area, proved the idea could work.

Though the GPS devices did not track the cars' locations in great
detail, they could determine when a driver had left certain zones, such
as the state of Oregon. They also kept track of the time the driving was
done, so a premium could be charged for rush-hour mileage.

The proposal envisions a gradual change, with manufacturers installing
the technology in new vehicles because retrofitting old cars would be
too expensive. Owners of older vehicles would continue to pay gasoline
taxes.

The difference in tax based on mileage or on gasoline would be small —
"pennies per transaction at the pump," Whitty said.

But the mileage tax still faces several major obstacles.

For one, Oregon accounts for only a small part of auto sales, so the
state can't go it alone. A multistate or national system would be needed.

Another concern is that such devices could threaten privacy. Whitty said
he and his task force have assured people that the program does not
track detailed movement and that driving history is not stored and
cannot be accessed by law enforcement agencies.

"I think most people will come to realize there is really no tracking
issue and will continue to buy new cars," Whitty said, noting that many
cell phones now come equipped with GPS, which has not deterred customers.

Others are worried that a mileage tax would undermine years of
incentives to switch toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.

"It doesn't seem fair," said Paul Niedergang of Portland, that a hybrid
would be taxed as much as his Dodge pickup. "I just think the gas tax
needs to be updated."

Lynda Williams, also of Portland, was not immediately sold on the idea
but said it was worth consideration.

"We all have to be open-minded," she said. "Our current system just
isn't working."

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

Jeff

 

[Sharx35]

So you don't have any kids in your house. Big whoop. Put a couple
growing kids in your house and see how your grocery runs get. Every two
weeks? hahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Typical fucking LIEbrawl DEMONrats--their KIDS rule the house.

 

[Mike Hunter]

The question you should be asking is why are they not taxing mass transit
users, to help pay for the resources (road repair and building) that they
use, instead of take money from those that are currently paying for the
resources (road repair and building) that they use?

Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline
By RYAN KOST, Associated Press Writer Ryan Kost, Associated Press Writer
– Sat Jan 3, 7:38 am ET

PORTLAND, Ore. – Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring
ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of
how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring
devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as
Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric
hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely
with gasoline taxes.

"I'm glad we're taking a look at it before the potholes get so big that
we can't even get out of them," said Leroy Younglove, a Portland driver
who participated in a recent pilot program.

The proposal is not without critics, including drivers who are concerned
about privacy and others who fear the tax could eliminate the financial
incentive for buying efficient vehicles.

But Oregon is ahead of the nation in exploring the concept, even though
it will probably be years before any mileage tax is adopted.

Congress is talking about it, too. A congressional commission has
envisioned a system similar to the prototype Oregon tested in 2006-2007.

The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure
Financing is considering calling for higher gas taxes to keep highways,
bridges and transit programs in good shape.

But over the long term, commission members say, the nation should
consider taxing mileage rather than gasoline as drivers use more
fuel-efficient and electric vehicles.

As cars burn less fuel, "the gas tax isn't going to fill the bill," said
Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, a member of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.

The next Congress "could begin to set the stage, perhaps looking at some
much more robust pilot programs, to begin the research, to work with
manufacturers."

Gov. Ted Kulongoski has included development money for the tax in his
budget proposal, and interest is growing in a number of other states.

Governors in Idaho and Rhode Island have considered systems that would
require drivers to report their mileage when they register vehicles.

In North Carolina last month, a panel suggested charging motorists a
quarter-cent for every mile as a substitute for the gas tax.

James Whitty, the Oregon Department of Transportation employee in charge
of the state's effort, said he's also heard talk of mileage tax
proposals in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado and Minnesota.

"There is kind of a coalition that's naturally forming around this," he
said.

Also fueling the search for alternatives is the political difficulty of
raising gasoline taxes.

The federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993, and nearly two dozen
states have not changed their taxes since 1997, according to the
American Road & Transportation Builders Association.

In Oregon's pilot program, officials equipped 300 vehicles with GPS
transponders that worked wirelessly with service station pumps, allowing
drivers to pay their mileage tax just as they do their gas tax.

Whitty said the test, which involved two gas stations in the Portland
area, proved the idea could work.

Though the GPS devices did not track the cars' locations in great
detail, they could determine when a driver had left certain zones, such
as the state of Oregon. They also kept track of the time the driving was
done, so a premium could be charged for rush-hour mileage.

The proposal envisions a gradual change, with manufacturers installing
the technology in new vehicles because retrofitting old cars would be
too expensive. Owners of older vehicles would continue to pay gasoline
taxes.

The difference in tax based on mileage or on gasoline would be small —
"pennies per transaction at the pump," Whitty said.

But the mileage tax still faces several major obstacles.

For one, Oregon accounts for only a small part of auto sales, so the
state can't go it alone. A multistate or national system would be needed.

Another concern is that such devices could threaten privacy. Whitty said
he and his task force have assured people that the program does not
track detailed movement and that driving history is not stored and
cannot be accessed by law enforcement agencies.

"I think most people will come to realize there is really no tracking
issue and will continue to buy new cars," Whitty said, noting that many
cell phones now come equipped with GPS, which has not deterred customers.

Others are worried that a mileage tax would undermine years of
incentives to switch toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.

"It doesn't seem fair," said Paul Niedergang of Portland, that a hybrid
would be taxed as much as his Dodge pickup. "I just think the gas tax
needs to be updated."

Lynda Williams, also of Portland, was not immediately sold on the idea
but said it was worth consideration.

"We all have to be open-minded," she said. "Our current system just
isn't working."

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

Jeff

 

[Elmo P. Shagnasty]

So you don't have any kids in your house. Big whoop. Put a couple
growing kids in your house and see how your grocery runs get. Every two
weeks? hahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Typical fucking LIEbrawl DEMONrats--their KIDS rule the house.
[/QUOTE]

What the **** are you talking about?

Kids eat. A lot. Preaching about "just go to the grocery store every
two weeks" is done out of ignorance of how things are in the real world.

As for my politics...I don't think I mentioned them, did I? So how did
you (a) decide what political persuasion I am (all on your own!), and
(b) change this from "going to the grocery every two weeks" into a
discussion on politics?

You're an idiot, an asshole, and ignorant--all in one fell swoop. Mr.
Hat Trick, that's what you are.

 

[Scott in SoCal]

So you don't have any kids in your house. Big whoop. Put a couple
growing kids in your house and see how your grocery runs get. Every two
weeks? hahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Not to meniton daily trips to and from the school (that is 3 blocks
away), soccer practice (at the schoolyard), piano lessons, gymnastics,
ballet...

 

[Scott in SoCal]

In message

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

"But that's so *unfair!*"

- Quote from a random customer at a gas station being asked by a TV
reporter how he felt about a proposed gas tax rate increase.

 

[Nate Nagel]

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

Jeff

Fuel efficiency would be discouraged, and also the proposed tax would
necessitate higher tax levels due to the buraucracy and infrastructure
required to implement it, than would a straight increase in gas tax.
The latter would not only continue incentivizing conservation but would
a) be much more economical and b) would likely have the same or less
impact on the average road user.

nate