If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bloomberg)   I Can't Drive 55 ..... Miles: Abolishing the U.S. gasoline tax and replacing it with a levy based on miles driven could happen "tomorrow" regardless of hurdles   (bloomberg.com) divider line 97
    More: Interesting, Steve LaTourette, gasoline taxes, Federal Highway Administration, Infrastructure Committee, Highway Trust Fund, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Republican Main Street Partnership, House Transportation  
•       •       •

13822 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Mar 2013 at 10:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-27 09:34:15 AM
11 votes:
How about a tax on all the assholes who drive in the left lane TEN MILES UNDER the limit, and refuse to yield to faster traffic..

And by 'tax', I mean 'drone strike'.
2013-03-27 08:54:05 AM
7 votes:
How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).
2013-03-27 11:07:05 AM
4 votes:
lets see... I drive ~22000 miles per year.
at $0.015/mile, that's $330 under the new tax

under the old version, those miles are split around 19000 miles at 22 mpg and 3000 miles at 60mpg. 864 gallons + 50 gallons = 914 gallons. at $0.184/gallon, that's $168.18 under the old tax

you're punishing truckers more than anything else. increased shipping costs means everything is going to cost more, people will spend less, and the economy starts sucking even more. Looks like you didn't think your cunning plan all the way through.
2013-03-27 10:57:00 AM
4 votes:
Sounds like another way to raise taxes on the middle class/poor and cut taxes for the rich. Sounds fantastic.

Let's just go for a fair tax policy next so we can really tell these poverty stricken assholes to get a better job and carry their own weight.
2013-03-27 10:51:12 AM
4 votes:
They aren't "replacing" shiat. This will be a new tax on top of the existing gasoline tax, no matter what they say.
2013-03-27 02:46:53 PM
3 votes:

stovepipe: MrSteve007: You know what's rad? Not paying any gas tax!

Or for fuel . . .

This
[carreleasedates.com image 620x391]
plus this
[iowaenvironmentalfocus.files.wordpress.com image 850x637]
= never paying for farking gasoline or gas taxes again! I love living that life.

That's a real nice solar setup you got there.  Be a shame if a hail storm came and farked it all up.


Hailstorms don't fark up solar panels.  Recently I threw some of the glass we use in our PV modules on a concrete floor.  It bounced.  That shiat is ridiculously strong.
2013-03-27 11:05:32 AM
3 votes:
Doesn't the gas tax already tax you per mile driven?  And at the same time that it encourages efficient vehicles?  If there is a shortfall, the rate can be increased.  I don't like the idea of a GPS dealiewhatsit logging all my travels to the feds.
2013-03-27 10:52:25 AM
3 votes:
Problem with the mileage tax is it looks back in time and someone can accumulate a hefty bill they can't afford.

Gas tax is like Withholding Tax.   Government gets their money upfront.   You can't get a refund of your fuel tax either.
2013-03-27 10:23:28 AM
3 votes:
I think this is bullshiat.  The healthcare program I'm applying for only has a handful of clinical sites that are in the county, some are 90 minutes each way.  Mass transit isn't an option for most people.  Why go after motorists when you could go after the trucking and freight industries?  An empty truck with trailer is at least 30,000 lbs, and they can weigh up to 80,000 lbs when they're loaded up with cargo.  That wears down infrastructure a lot more than my car....

bdub77: Hurdles being like huge retail companies like Walmart with fleets of trucks on the road constantly and lots and lots of cash to pay for this bill to die quickly and quietly. Right?


Walmart (and FedEx and UPS etc) would love for individual motorists to foot the bill for our infrastructure, or to pay the same amount for their massive fleets of huge trucks that individual motorists do with their cars.
2013-03-27 10:14:36 AM
3 votes:

ZAZ: Who believes the gas tax would vanish?

In my state the government already knows how many miles you drive. Once a year the inspection station plugs into your computer and gets a data dump. It would be easy to combine the mile tax and municipal property tax into one consolidated registration fee.

Or they could just take 1.5 cents per mile target revenue times typical miles per year and charge $200 per year to register a car.


Only 19 states (18 + DC) require yearly safety inspections, so it would be easy to combine this in those states, but the other 32 states would have to implement some sort of inspection program - met with backlash of "Why do I have to bring my car in to let some government agent plug a computer in and see where I've been driving?"

/31 states do have emissions testing, but generally only in major metropolitan areas for pollution concerns -- most are not implemented statewide.
2013-03-27 03:21:53 PM
2 votes:
My commute is about 70 miles round trip and takes 40 minutes to an hour (traffic sucks).  When the weather is good, I ride my motorcycle.  Otherwise I drive my rather small car.  Public transportation would take over 2 hours EACH WAY even if transfers are perfectly timed (and they never are).

So because I drive fuel efficient vehicles the government has decided I need to be punished?  I have a plan.  It involves tar, feather, rope and a few trees (some assembly required).
2013-03-27 02:49:34 PM
2 votes:

ferretman: Do you even no how many products you use contain petroleum? Just about anything plastic, make-up, lubrication products etc.; all use petroleum derivatives.


And do you know how much petroleum is forever wasted by burning it up in American automobiles vs. actually going to useful products?

And frankly, there's plenty of alternatives: corn-based plastic is fairly common, before we had plastic we had ebonite, and there's plenty of synthetic lubrication products out on the market. I'm not saying we remove all fossil fuel use, but we could easily reduce our needs by 75% by switching to viable alternatives that are already on the market. I have. And the US Navy is rapidly doing it too.

This isn't science fiction any more. The era of cheap fossil fuels is coming to an end - the faster people realize it, the better off our nation will be.
2013-03-27 01:44:27 PM
2 votes:
Steve LaTourette is a creep who wants to tax you for having a gas efficient vehicle.
He was supposedly elected by the people of Ohio, and reelected a number of times.
But he is really owned by big oil.

He hates people, he hates efficiency, he hates you.
http://www.ontheissues.org/OH/Steven_LaTourette_Energy_+_Oil.htm

Shame on Bloomberg for the article title.
It should read "Steve LaTourette: Who is this creep?  Ohio elected this guy? SRSLY?"
2013-03-27 01:39:13 PM
2 votes:

ferretman: Just don't complain when the cost for items goes up. All additional taxes/costs put onto manufacturers or shippers will be passed onto the consumer.


Currently, those companies are paying for road repairs via the fuel tax.  If this change goes into effect, they will get off scott free, paying by the mile as if their trucks were cars.  Do you think the reduced cost will be pass on to the consumer?
2013-03-27 12:27:20 PM
2 votes:

wildcardjack: buckets_of_fun: markie_farkie: How about a tax on all the assholes who drive in the left lane TEN MILES UNDER the limit, and refuse to yield to faster traffic..

And by 'tax', I mean 'drone strike'.

There simply are not enough drones....yet.

I had a hallucination one day in traffic about giant robot beetle drones, painted black and white with flashing red-blue eyes, enforcing traffic laws by landing on offenders cars.


img163.imageshack.us
2013-03-27 12:24:37 PM
2 votes:

slayer199: I'm rather conflicted on this because I think people that drive more should pay more for the road infrastructure they use.

On the flip side, there was a strong incentive to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle to offset rising fuel prices.  So the government disincentivizes fuel-efficiency and indirectly promotes telecommuting.

The bottom line is that this won't have the desired effect because people that have long commutes will adapt.


I have a better idea. Everyone uses the roads or benefits from their use. So just pay for the damned things out of the general tax fund and stop trying to control everyone's life through the tax system. If taxes need to be high to pay for all of the nonsense, then just raise the rate and deal with it. I'm just sick of all of these hidden taxes.
2013-03-27 12:23:20 PM
2 votes:
"Policymakers could immediately replace it with a tax of about 1 1/2 cents per mile"

"The existing taxes are 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline"



So vehicles that get 12.26 mpg or less would pay less taxes as a result.

/USA, USA, USA!
2013-03-27 11:48:50 AM
2 votes:
Well, I guess they have to do something<sarcasm>.    And soon people just won't be buying as much gasoline and then how will government steal from them?  After-all, these guys are about to reinvent the auto industry<not sarcasm>.

 Wikispeed - 2 seat mid engine, rear wheel drive roadster, five star crash rating pending, 0-60 in 5 seconds, 100+MPG, and the best part is that in spite of all of that it can't meat federal safety requirements because it doesn't have air bags, only a five point racing harness commonly used to make 200MPH crashes survivable.  And they even have the audacity to be in the continuing process of redesigning parts so that they can be fabricated in a home workshop making the owner completely independent of the auto industry's planned-obsolescence business model. The only way conceivable to build the car is license the manufacture out to as many shops as decide to opt in, because they can't build more than I believe fifty before the air bag thing kicks in.
http://www.wikispeed.com/Affordable

Thank you internet.  This is a first of many transformative ways you will free humanity from oligarchy(hopefully).
2013-03-27 11:42:56 AM
2 votes:
Either go with a full usage tax code scheme and ditch the income tax, or ditch all of these nickle and dime hidden taxes and go with an income only tax.


We have no clue our final tax bill at the end of the year.  The tax system is intentionally idiotic, and people in here are fine with adding new ways for them to add to it.
2013-03-27 11:39:24 AM
2 votes:

Tom_Slick: vernonFL: I do know there are exemptions for diesel (shouldn't they be tested MORE?)

The problem with diesels is up until recently with DEF (Diesel Exhaust Fluid) there was no way to "clean" diesel exhaust, so what ever comes out of the engine is what comes out of the exhaust pipe.  Emissions testing just tests all the equipment that cleans the exhaust.


Only half true.  DIesel emissions systems have only appeared recently... but the amount of soot and other nano-particle filth belched by diesel engines is directly related to their state of tune and the health of their fuel injectors.   You don't need fancy emissions hardware to significantly improve the exhaust from most of the diesels on the road, you just need conscientious maintenance.

A smog-control program aimed at enforcing decent maintenance on diesel engines could do a lot to clean up the air, but... would face a lot of opposition from a politically well-connected industry, not to mention a politically easy-to-inflame population segment.

Diesel emissions limits ARE arriving, in baby steps... but there's a reason that cars have been clean for thirty-plus years while trucks are just now starting to feel the heat.
2013-03-27 11:25:55 AM
2 votes:
My uncle has a country place that no one knows about. He says it used to be a farm, before the Motor Law.
2013-03-27 11:03:38 AM
2 votes:
Just doing the math quickly, this would nearly double the amount of federal tax I pay. Judging on 10 gallons a week average, comes out to about $95 / year in gas tax (Federal. I haven't included NYS gas tax, because even if they eliminate the fed gas tax, you'll never get NYS to give up on collecting a tax) I can safely round this up to $100, because I occasionally take trips where I drive and fill up the tank more often.

I also drive roughly 12,000 miles / year, which with the suggested tax of $0.015 / mile, would end up charging me $180 / year in taxes. So it's at least an 80% increase. Imagine the outrage if they suggested that you pay 80% more taxes in any other area.

If they start charging for distance driven, are they also going to eliminate toll roads on interstates? Because when I take those long roadtrips, I often take roads like the I-90 or the PA Turnpike which charge me for the privilege, which I assumed was supposed to go for maintenance on those roads. (Considering tolls are often higher for larger vehicles like trucks and based on how far you drive along the interstates)
2013-03-27 10:53:50 AM
2 votes:
As electric and hybrid cars steadily take over, the revenues generated by gas taxes will decline. So we have to start thinking about alternatives. I don't think taxing the number of miles driven is the best answer. It may be better for the federal government to levy a transportation payroll tax and use the money to improve public transportation. They could apportion some of the revenue to the states so that state gas taxes could also be eliminated. But they'd have to earmark the funds for infrastructure and public transportation use, lest the states divert the funds to other uses. A payroll tax would take the sting out for citizens, since a smaller sum would be paid each pay period instead of in a lump sum. It would also allow for those who do not drive automobiles to share in the nation's transportation system rather than just pay a train or bus fare that doesn't come near meeting maintenance and development costs.
2013-03-27 10:52:45 AM
2 votes:
Just do what other countries do, tax based on engine displacement.
2013-03-27 10:50:09 AM
2 votes:
That's alright. The US Senate is passing a bill allowing the States to tax us for online purchases. Oh, and CISPA is back.
2013-03-27 10:47:27 AM
2 votes:

Elzar: My family is down to one fuel-efficient vehicle and I run commute. Go pay for your own highways gassholes...


GOOD FOR YEW

3.bp.blogspot.com
2013-03-27 09:34:15 AM
2 votes:
Hurdles being like huge retail companies like Walmart with fleets of trucks on the road constantly and lots and lots of cash to pay for this bill to die quickly and quietly. Right?
2013-03-27 09:31:44 AM
2 votes:
Miles driven could replace gas tax, FARK COCK SHIATE BALLS, LaTourette says.
2013-03-27 07:05:30 PM
1 votes:
And you wonder why there is ROAD RAGE like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlbabcOKU0g
2013-03-27 05:45:00 PM
1 votes:
This is a power grab looking for an excuse.

Simply put there folks in government that would like to better know where we go and when. Some may even want automated speed enforcement everywhere. Eventually perhaps even leading to needing permission to travel. Once the transponders or number plate readers are in place the possibilities are endless for ways to exploit the technology and infrastructure.

thenewspaper.com already caught government in a lie regarding the revenue reasons for going to this tax by mile model. Their revenues suffered because new heavy truck sales cratered, not because of hybrids.

The gasoline tax is anonymous. It scales with use and vehicle weight pretty well. Your '71 pinto with a 428SCJ stuffed in it or equally a '72 Vega with a 454, not withstanding of course. Then there is the cost of collecting the tax. The infrastructure required for tax by the mile is at present still rather expensive compared to fuel taxes. Meanwhile real fleet fuel economy hasn't changed significantly since the early 1990s. However the value of the dollar has gone down a good deal.

So, the solution, if there was a problem,* would be to increase the tax gas or fix the dollar. Maybe find a way to tax plug in electrics. However, government can 'never waste a crisis', or in this case an opportunity to grab a power that can then be exploited for decades to come.

*considering other areas of government always see road funds as something to re-purpose or raid makes it one of the better funded areas and thus if the diversions were stopped perhaps would have any financial issues greatly reduced if not eliminated.
2013-03-27 05:39:00 PM
1 votes:

ZAZ: Maul555: Whoops... My odometer just broke.... OOPS!!! the trip meter broke too... I don't know what happened...

They will ask your car's computer and your car's computer is not programmed to lie. Copying numbers off instrument displays is 20th century technology.


Quite a coincidence, since my truck is also 20th century technology.  No computer to rat me out provide helpful data.
2013-03-27 05:36:25 PM
1 votes:

Tumunga: If you think the government is going to get rid of the gas tax, you must be cracked. They'll keep that tax, and add the mileage tax to it's revenue stream.

All you FarkLibtards should be against the abolishment of the gas tax any way, right? Tax cuts don't work.


Yes, I am against the abolishment of the gas tax.  I think a mileage tax should be added, for infrastructure, and the gas tax should be retained (and increased) as a pollution tax.  I'm tired of subsidizing your pollution.
2013-03-27 05:27:50 PM
1 votes:

Fark_Guy_Rob: It actually makes driving longer distances more tolerable, making it easy to avoid 'real changes' like not living an hour drive away from where you work or cities investing money in public transportation systems because, without them, people won't live there.


Overall usage is declining though.  Some people might be willing to drive farther, but not as much as you would think.  AFAIK, sitting in traffic is a bigger disincentive for long commutes than high cost of gas.
2013-03-27 05:12:08 PM
1 votes:

Fark It: I think this is bullshiat.  The healthcare program I'm applying for only has a handful of clinical sites that are in the county, some are 90 minutes each way.  Mass transit isn't an option for most people.


I am finishing up a healthcare program with similar issues. I was able to take mass transit for the first semester in the program, but after that there was no way to take mass transit and arrive on time at the assigned clinical site. They send us all over a multi-county area for clinical rotations. I actually had to buy a car for the program; even car-pooling wasn't an option as different cohorts are at different sites at different times.
2013-03-27 03:25:50 PM
1 votes:

Terrydatroll: Actually with the current system people who drive more DO pay more for road usage since they have to buy more gasoline thereby paying more taxes for road usage. The gas tax also rewards those who responsibly use more fuel efficient vehicles. If they go with this moronic idea the guy driving the hybrid will pay the same a[mount toward taxes as the neck in the hummer when driving the same number of miles. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want but the whole idea is to be able to track vehicles, not make more tax money.


THIS!!

1) if revenue is down because more people are driving hybrids, increase the gas tax until you meet revenue goals.
2) if you need more dollars for road and bridge repairs, increase the gas tax until you meet revenue goals.

this is not rocket science. this is designed to screw over hybrid, small car drivers and a savings for everyone else. hell taxing by mileage traveled and tracking via GPS are clearly unconstitutional. They directly and indirectly infringe on your right to travel.


The U.S. Supreme Court also dealt with the right to travel in the case of Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999). In that case, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, held that the United States Constitution protected three separate aspects of the right to travel among the states: the right to enter one state and leave another, the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than a hostile stranger (protected by the "privileges and immunities" clause in Article IV, § 2), and (for those who become permanent residents of a state) the right to be treated equally to native born citizens (this is protected by the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause).
2013-03-27 03:20:07 PM
1 votes:

ferretman: Do you even no how many products you use contain petroleum? Just about anything plastic, make-up, lubrication products etc.; all use petroleum derivatives.


But if we weren't burning it as fuel, would we need to import it, or would domestic production be enough?
2013-03-27 03:10:11 PM
1 votes:

MrSteve007: Hollie Maea: So you drive 10 miles a day. Buy a goddamn bike.

But he lives in Southern California. He might get a sunburn in the winter!


If I lived in SoCal, I would find a way to never need to get near a road. I've passed through a few times and... nope.
2013-03-27 03:05:46 PM
1 votes:
The gas tax works quite nicely, thank you very much Congresscritters.

The gas tax also effectively penalizes people who don't know how to drive properly -- the gas-or-brake people who slam on the gas then slam on the brake constantly.  It also encourages people like myself to hack their cars for better efficiency & performance.

Even with a 2nd AC added to my car (it's Florida and I like 45F air blowing from the air vents even if it is 98F outside), I'm getting ~26mpg in normal driving.  Not bad for a 375HP 4.5L V8 9 year old car.   For comparison, my friend with a brand new Lexus RX300h hybrid only gets 21-22mpg.  I thought hybrids were supposed to be fuel efficient.   The hybrid certainly isn't fun to drive by any means.  The engine sounds terrible when you push it.
2013-03-27 03:04:46 PM
1 votes:

slayer199: I'm rather conflicted on this because I think people that drive more should pay more for the road infrastructure they use.

On the flip side, there was a strong incentive to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle to offset rising fuel prices.  So the government disincentivizes fuel-efficiency and indirectly promotes telecommuting.

The bottom line is that this won't have the desired effect because people that have long commutes will adapt.


Actually with the current system people who drive more DO pay more for road usage since they have to buy more gasoline thereby paying more taxes for road usage. The gas tax also rewards those who responsibly use more fuel efficient vehicles. If they go with this moronic idea the guy driving the hybrid will pay the same a[mount toward taxes as the neck in the hummer when driving the same number of miles. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want but the whole idea is to be able to track vehicles, not make more tax money.
2013-03-27 02:51:10 PM
1 votes:

CujoQuarrel: How much of your actual cost is being subsidized by the government and my tax dollars?


How much of the cost of the pollution your car spews out for free is subsidized by my lungs?
2013-03-27 02:50:39 PM
1 votes:
Look, kids ... however they have to word it, Politicians will find a way to dig deeper into your pocket for their money

It's like being raped cartoon style
2013-03-27 02:31:18 PM
1 votes:

CujoQuarrel: How much of your actual cost is being subsidized by the government and my tax dollars?


Oooh, and I forgot one major point. How much of my tax dollars are being spent to militarily protect oil producing countries  that we wouldn't give a shiat about otherwise?
2013-03-27 02:30:24 PM
1 votes:

Donnchadha: OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).

I think the issue derives from the fact that nobody wants to raise the gas tax, and this would be a way to do so while letting your congressman argue "I didn't vote for no tax increases!" during his next reelection campaign.


Plus this dicks over the poor disproportionately more than the wealthy, so of course the GOP likes it and will be able to sell it pretty easily to its base.

Not sure how easy a sell this would be to anyone outside of the GOP base.
2013-03-27 02:28:22 PM
1 votes:

CujoQuarrel: How much of your actual cost is being subsidized by the government and my tax dollars?


In the 2012 model, $7,500 off the top from the Feds, and on the State level, it was sales tax free (about $3,000). Interestingly, just as incentives are designed to do, prices of electric cars are now rapidly coming down. The price of the 2013 Leaf dropped by about $6,000.

What I find most curious, is where were you "Oh noez, subsidies!" people 10-years ago, when we were giving huge tax ride offs to people buying Hummers.
2013-03-27 02:26:42 PM
1 votes:

dready zim: OgreMagi: Donnchadha: NutWrench: They aren't "replacing" shiat. This will be a new tax on top of the existing gasoline tax, no matter what they say.

But if that money gets turned around into improving and updating infrastructure (and also providing jobs in the meantime), I'm all for it.

Do you actually believe that is how the money will be spent?

No, but it is how it SHOULD be spent and quite often given a sheen of a lie that it actually is how it is spent by just not telling us what it really is spent on unless pushed. I too would be all for it if that would happen.


Just making sure you aren't delusional.

Add me to the list of people who don't think they'll be replacing the existing tax.  They'll add the new tax and promise the old tax will be phased out.  Except they'll forget to phase it out.
2013-03-27 02:20:43 PM
1 votes:

IamAwake: The biggest reason I ride a motorcycle is the environmental benefits;


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_pollution

Noise can have a detrimental effect on wild animals, increasing the risk of death by changing the delicate balance in predator or prey detection and avoidance, and interfering the use of the sounds in communication, especially in relation to reproduction and in navigation. Acoustic overexposure can lead to temporary or permanent loss of hearing.


So, will you be buying an electric scooter, or are you in the "loud pipes save lives" crowd?
2013-03-27 02:16:54 PM
1 votes:

Fark It: I think this is bullshiat.  The healthcare program I'm applying for only has a handful of clinical sites that are in the county, some are 90 minutes each way.  Mass transit isn't an option for most people.  Why go after motorists when you could go after the trucking and freight industries?  An empty truck with trailer is at least 30,000 lbs, and they can weigh up to 80,000 lbs when they're loaded up with cargo.  That wears down infrastructure a lot more than my car....


Don't be so quick to bash the trucking industry.  If you've got it, a truck brought it, period.

Trucking already pays more than its fair share of tax:

The average truck gets (if lucky) 7 MPG, so clearly there is more tax paid at the pump.

Licensing (depending upon the state you're in) runs on average $2,000 per truck, per year.

Heavy highway tax to the feds of $575 per year per truck.

Highway use tax varies by state... in some states it's .15/mile.

Federal Excise Tax is 12.5% of all new trucks and tires purchased.  Imagine buying a $20,000 car and paying an additional $2,500 on top of that for FET.

Compliance with EPA, DOT, etc. regulations has increased the average purchase price for a new truck  from $70,000 to $135,000 in the past ten years.

And in order to haul to California, you need a new truck.

And you wonder why the cost of milk ain't what it used to be.  It's expensive to haul it, and trucking companies can't do it for free.
2013-03-27 02:01:56 PM
1 votes:

Donnchadha: NutWrench: They aren't "replacing" shiat. This will be a new tax on top of the existing gasoline tax, no matter what they say.

But if that money gets turned around into improving and updating infrastructure (and also providing jobs in the meantime), I'm all for it.


Do you actually believe that is how the money will be spent?
2013-03-27 02:01:04 PM
1 votes:

People_are_Idiots: JackieRabbit: As electric and hybrid cars steadily take over, the revenues generated by gas taxes will decline. So we have to start thinking about alternatives. I don't think taxing the number of miles driven is the best answer. It may be better for the federal government to levy a transportation payroll tax and use the money to improve public transportation. They could apportion some of the revenue to the states so that state gas taxes could also be eliminated. But they'd have to earmark the funds for infrastructure and public transportation use, lest the states divert the funds to other uses. A payroll tax would take the sting out for citizens, since a smaller sum would be paid each pay period instead of in a lump sum. It would also allow for those who do not drive automobiles to share in the nation's transportation system rather than just pay a train or bus fare that doesn't come near meeting maintenance and development costs.

Problem with that. Hybrids and electrics are no longer "en vogue," due to the reality hitting the people in the face. What reality? They aren't effective alternatives to the standard gas engine, and in some cases more expensive, more polluting (depending who provides the electricity to your car), and a bit more dangerous. Heck, despite the number of hybrid models doubling, hybrid sales have dropped from 2.8% in 2008 to 2.4% in 2012. Matter of fact, in 2012, only 35% of those who bought into the hybrids look at hybrids again for a new vehicle.

If the gas tax goes away and the mile tax hits, even more people will be discouraged to switch, while I'll be busy driving my pickup around.

/still wants my air-powered car.


The hybrids did what they needed to do though, which was kick the industry in the ass a bit. If it wasn't for Prius and co. making fuel efficiency trendy, we wouldn't be seeing all these small 4 cylinder turbos. We'd still be doing, "put a V12 in that commuter car, AMERICA!"
2013-03-27 01:54:18 PM
1 votes:

BGates: OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).

Fuel efficient vehicles are the problem.  They drive more miles per tax they pay.

People who drive fuel efficient vehicles should be the ones who pay the fees since they are not paying their fair share.


Those cars are also heavily subsidized by the federal governments with some estimates at 40% of actual costs. Tripling the gas tax on green vehicles at a minimum is the only way to ensure they pay their fair share.
2013-03-27 01:42:52 PM
1 votes:

fireclown: Doesn't the gas tax already tax you per mile driven?  And at the same time that it encourages efficient vehicles?  If there is a shortfall, the rate can be increased.  I don't like the idea of a GPS dealiewhatsit logging all my travels to the feds.


THIS!!!!

Raise the farking rate... What?  Then more people will buy electric cars to avoid the gas tax?  ISN'T THAT THE FARKING POINT!? We want more people driving electric cars, right?

Ya, I know, if everyone drives an electric car, then no one will pay the gas tax, and then how do you fund road infrastructure?!?  I propose a system where every family sends their first born child at the age of 12 to work in the mandatory road work crews for 2 years as payment.  Job creators exempt of course.

/problem solved
2013-03-27 01:38:26 PM
1 votes:
Switching to a tax on miles driven would:

1. create an incentive for emplyoees to move closer to work, and industry to move closer to workforce, thus creating
2. a tighter living infrastructure which has higher maintenance costs, higher crime, and is a better target for every disaster movie ever made, from infections to insurection to invasion to acts of FSM, which in turn,
3. creates an impetus for surviving younglings to "get outta this craphole and live somwhere I can BREATHE... screw the miles tax", which leads to a congress (small c) that says  "Hey... let's switch the tax to gallons consumed, not miles driven, and that will allow folks to disperse and reduce crime, poverty, and stress on inner city resources!! We've save a butt load of tax dollars!!"

Repeat in 75+ year intervals until stasis is acheived.
2013-03-27 01:31:32 PM
1 votes:

bdub77: Hurdles being like huge retail companies like Walmart with fleets of trucks on the road constantly and lots and lots of cash to pay for this bill to die quickly and quietly. Right?


Actually, I'll bet that Walmart would love to have its fleet of trucks pay the same per-mile tax as ordinary cars, instead of paying tax on each gallon of fuel consumed.
2013-03-27 01:30:34 PM
1 votes:
Federal Odometer Laws and Regulations

49 U.S.C. §§ 32701-32711 (Formerly 15 U.S.C. §§ 1981-1991),

49 C.F.R., Sections 580.1-580.6 - Odometer Requirements
Violations -

Resetting or altering odometer with intent to change mileage.Making false odometer disclosure statement.Failure to provide buyer complete odometer disclosure statement.In acquiring vehicle for resale, failure to obtain complete odometer disclosure statement from seller.Conspiring to violate any of the Federal odometer statutes.
2013-03-27 12:57:06 PM
1 votes:
Skyd1v:
I had a hallucination one day in traffic about giant robot beetle drones, painted black and white with flashing red-blue eyes, enforcing traffic laws by landing on offenders cars.

[img163.imageshack.us image 250x401]


Thank you man!  I remember reading this a billion years ago and couldn't for the life of me remember who wrote it or what the name of the book was.
2013-03-27 12:28:27 PM
1 votes:
This remains stupid.

People who drive more already pay more tax... Because they buy more gas.
2013-03-27 12:20:38 PM
1 votes:

OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).


This says it all. There is never an abolishment of a tax, we'll just get a new tax added for miles driven along with a nice helping of more government surveillance so they can keep track of the number of miles driven.

Just like how the IRS get to know about every dollar you make so they can tax them, you'll end up with a GPS tracker in your car to do the same.
2013-03-27 12:19:18 PM
1 votes:

fireclown: slayer199: Pretty much this. You know the government will find a way to exploit that GPS data if available.

It was the reason for my breakup with Progressive Flo.
[www.curtisinsuranceagency.net image 314x319]

Ya broke my heart, Flo.


www.curtisinsuranceagency.net

No me. I would do nasty, nasty things to Flo. I'd start by gently kissing her mega red lips and groping her more than ample behind. Slowly, I would work my way towards her hair bump which is where I would insert my manhood thrusting repeatedly while she yelled "I'll lower your insurance bill!! !" until I finally climaxed over her head and onto her FLO name tag on her until then, clean white smock.
2013-03-27 12:19:05 PM
1 votes:

wambu: Yes, let's do this. There are so many ways to cheat on this tax, many people will never pay any tax at all.


Pretty much this.  I can disconnect the odometer/speedometer in about 3 minutes on my old pickup.  More in the range of 15 seconds to disconnect the ones on the motorcycles.  Since my state has no IM or safety inspections I could easily see a number of people saying "Yes, that is correct.  I drove 8 miles last year.  Problem?"

NO idea how to disconnect the odometer on my wife's car though...
2013-03-27 12:16:33 PM
1 votes:
This is dumb. The system we have in place now already does this, the more you drive, the more gas you buy. The more gas you buy, the more tax you pay. If you drive an excessively large amount of miles yet insist on driving a low MPG vehicle, then that's your choice and you have no room to complain. High MPG cars are typically lighter weight and cause less wear/tear on roads so it pretty much evens out.
2013-03-27 12:10:11 PM
1 votes:

jaytkay: Fark It: jaytkay: You wrongly claimed there is no mass transit outside the Loop.

I said there are no decent mass transit options outside of the city.  I don't have the luxury of a set schedule that I can plan a bus route around, nor do I have the luxury of being able to live wherever I want.  I don't have the privilege of being able to take into account mass transit when it comes to my employment.  For me, and millions of other people, mass transit is not a feasible, reliable option.  It has nothing to do with bus riders being beneath anyone, and I certainly don't "choose" not to use mass transit.  I would gladly take mass transit if I could, but this smug notion that people who don't use mass transit are a bunch of snobs who think they're above common folk or are somehow too good for public transit is horseshiat.

You have no choice about where you live and work?

Are you in prison?


He has a job. That is not something you readily give up to move to a city (likely more expensive where you're living) where you don't have a job (good luck getting one in this economy).

Are you in your mommy's basement?
2013-03-27 12:09:27 PM
1 votes:
They really need to just increase the gas tax and/or increase plate fees if they need more money. Not only do I not trust the government to track me with a GPS, but it will take a lot of overhead to install/maintain all of the equipment necessary to have a miles-driven tax.
2013-03-27 12:04:58 PM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: slayer199: I'm rather conflicted on this because I think people that drive more should pay more for the road infrastructure they use.

On the flip side, there was a strong incentive to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle to offset rising fuel prices.  So the government disincentivizes fuel-efficiency and indirectly promotes telecommuting.

The bottom line is that this won't have the desired effect because people that have long commutes will adapt.

No reason they can't raise taxes on both. Since when does that stop them?

Bonus? Hurts more rural people, helps more urban. Democrats tend to cluster more in urban environments.


Bingo. Get all the proles into easily-controlled clumps.
2013-03-27 12:01:48 PM
1 votes:

MrSteve007: You know what's rad? Not paying any gas tax!

Or for fuel . . .

This
[carreleasedates.com image 620x391]
plus this
[iowaenvironmentalfocus.files.wordpress.com image 850x637]
= never paying for farking gasoline or gas taxes again! I love living that life.


Where did you get your solar system?  What's the projected payoff time (from savings)?  Are the panels sturdy enough to hold up in an area that sometimes sees somewhat high winds and storms?
2013-03-27 11:59:22 AM
1 votes:

MrSteve007: You know what's rad? Not paying any gas tax!

Or for fuel . . .

This
[carreleasedates.com image 620x391]
plus this
[iowaenvironmentalfocus.files.wordpress.com image 850x637]
= never paying for farking gasoline or gas taxes again! I love living that life.


Enjoy that for the few minutes it lasts.  Sure you wont be paying gas taxes, but the politicians are still working hard to take your money.   http://www.portlandpulp.com/stories/Oregon-lawmakers-propose-to-tax-e l ectric-and-hybrid-cars-per-mile-185579392.html
2013-03-27 11:47:30 AM
1 votes:

Why Would I Read the Article: Hey remember when Democrats were going to use the gas tax money to fix the roads?  Haha, Democrats are liars.


Here in Minneapolis/St Paul they patched and resurfaced damn near all roads just before election day. The commute was smmootthh. Winter happened, still. All the bandaids fell off and you could lose a wheel real easily on any major road.
2013-03-27 11:47:20 AM
1 votes:

markie_farkie: How about a tax on all the assholes who drive in the left lane TEN MILES UNDER the limit, and refuse to yield to faster traffic..

And by 'tax', I mean 'drone strike'.


Followed by one on the people who insist that the right-hand lane also be a fast lane.
2013-03-27 11:47:20 AM
1 votes:
You know what's rad? Not paying any gas tax!

Or for fuel . . .

This
carreleasedates.com
plus this
iowaenvironmentalfocus.files.wordpress.com
= never paying for farking gasoline or gas taxes again! I love living that life.
2013-03-27 11:46:52 AM
1 votes:

papercut: the progressive ODBII device doesn't have a GPS antenna in it, only an accelerometer and stuff to read the odometer, so it guesses how much you drive and also how aggressive. my wife used it and we got a 20+% discount, locked in forever*. and besides, the government already HAS the GPS data, unless you are a luddite without a cellphone. quit being ridiculous.


Plus it is a voluntary program.  If you liked Progressive but not the snapshot program, you didn't need to use it.
2013-03-27 11:45:38 AM
1 votes:

fireclown: slayer199: Pretty much this. You know the government will find a way to exploit that GPS data if available.

It was the reason for my breakup with Progressive Flo.
[www.curtisinsuranceagency.net image 314x319]

Ya broke my heart, Flo.


the progressive ODBII device doesn't have a GPS antenna in it, only an accelerometer and stuff to read the odometer, so it guesses how much you drive and also how aggressive.  my wife used it and we got a 20+% discount, locked in forever*.  and besides, the government already HAS the GPS data, unless you are a luddite without a cellphone.  quit being ridiculous.
2013-03-27 11:39:43 AM
1 votes:

wambu: Yes, let's do this. There are so many ways to cheat on this tax, many people will never pay any tax at all.


We don't abolish income tax just because people cheat on it.  Tax fraud isn't going anywhere, but severe penalties scare most people away from it.
2013-03-27 11:37:44 AM
1 votes:

ZAZ: Who believes the gas tax would vanish?

In my state the government already knows how many miles you drive. Once a year the inspection station plugs into your computer and gets a data dump. It would be easy to combine the mile tax and municipal property tax into one consolidated registration fee.


Yep, how hard would it be to require an odometer reading each year you renew your tags?
2013-03-27 11:36:42 AM
1 votes:
I don't believe for a second that any piece of shiat politician of any stripe would actually REMOVE the gas tax and add the usage tax.  They will add the "miles driven" tax on top of the gas tax.

Mark my words.

Because they are all pieces of shiat.
2013-03-27 11:36:20 AM
1 votes:
And those of us who itemize our taxes will probably be able to write a portion of this off, while all the poor people will get screwed yet again.

Unless owning a car means that you're automatically not poor. I keep forgetting the republican score card on what it takes to be poor in America.
2013-03-27 11:35:30 AM
1 votes:

squegeebooo: Fark It: jaytkay: You wrongly claimed there is no mass transit outside the Loop.

I said there are no decent mass transit options outside of the city.  I don't have the luxury of a set schedule that I can plan a bus route around, nor do I have the luxury of being able to live wherever I want.  I don't have the privilege of being able to take into account mass transit when it comes to my employment.  For me, and millions of other people, mass transit is not a feasible, reliable option.  It has nothing to do with bus riders being beneath anyone, and I certainly don't "choose" not to use mass transit.  I would gladly take mass transit if I could, but this smug notion that people who don't use mass transit are a bunch of snobs who think they're above common folk or are somehow too good for public transit is horseshiat.

Right, we get it. You're above riding the bus. That's what homeless people do. And there's no way you could bike either, because "stuff".


I could bike, but in ideal weather it would probably be a four-hour commute each way on days that I have school and work.  Forget if there's snow.

Also:

www.soul-amen.com
2013-03-27 11:35:29 AM
1 votes:
Infrastructure should be funded with a miles driven tax that is scaled by vehicle weight.  The current gasoline tax should be abolished and replaced by a pollution tax that is at least as big as the current gas tax, and which is used to fund alternative transportation initiatives and/or give incentives to people with very efficient vehicles and electric vehicles.
2013-03-27 11:25:42 AM
1 votes:

jaytkay: You wrongly claimed there is no mass transit outside the Loop.


I said there are no decent mass transit options outside of the city.  I don't have the luxury of a set schedule that I can plan a bus route around, nor do I have the luxury of being able to live wherever I want.  I don't have the privilege of being able to take into account mass transit when it comes to my employment.  For me, and millions of other people, mass transit is not a feasible, reliable option.  It has nothing to do with bus riders being beneath anyone, and I certainly don't "choose" not to use mass transit.  I would gladly take mass transit if I could, but this smug notion that people who don't use mass transit are a bunch of snobs who think they're above common folk or are somehow too good for public transit is horseshiat.
2013-03-27 11:25:36 AM
1 votes:

bdub77: Hurdles being like huge retail companies like Walmart with fleets of trucks on the road constantly and lots and lots of cash to pay for this bill to die quickly and quietly. Right?


They'll get an exception.

//Or ship more via rail.
2013-03-27 11:21:51 AM
1 votes:
Not only do I have to pay tax on my fuel, but to register my vehicle. I have to pay for the infrastructure in way of tax dollars and now I have to pay taxes to drive.

WTF is this shiat.
2013-03-27 11:18:36 AM
1 votes:
Instead of driving 180 miles/week to and from work, I'll drive 20/week and take the train. It will cost me about 4 hours of time, but enjoy that tax money. Just like how your cigarette tax increase got me to quit.
2013-03-27 11:12:52 AM
1 votes:

The_Original_Roxtar: lets see... I drive ~22000 miles per year.
at $0.015/mile, that's $330 under the new tax

under the old version, those miles are split around 19000 miles at 22 mpg and 3000 miles at 60mpg. 864 gallons + 50 gallons = 914 gallons. at $0.184/gallon, that's $168.18 under the old tax

you're punishing truckers more than anything else. increased shipping costs means everything is going to cost more, people will spend less, and the economy starts sucking even more. Looks like you didn't think your cunning plan all the way through.


increase the usage of trains, helps our infrastructure overall.

win!
2013-03-27 11:10:47 AM
1 votes:
The real question is why are gas prices continuing to go up when the U.S. oil production is continuing to rise and we are set to become completely self sufficient in oil production in a few years.
2013-03-27 11:10:35 AM
1 votes:

fireclown: Doesn't the gas tax already tax you per mile driven?  And at the same time that it encourages efficient vehicles?  If there is a shortfall, the rate can be increased.  I don't like the idea of a GPS dealiewhatsit logging all my travels to the feds.


Pretty much this.  You know the government will find a way to exploit that GPS data if available.
2013-03-27 11:10:28 AM
1 votes:
Oh, OK, it "could" happen, according to some daydreaming Republican.

Fark this noise. It's perfectly legit that the gas tax punishes people who drive gas guzzlers and rewards those who drive fuel efficient vehicles. If too many people buy fuel efficient vehicles to properly fund infrastructure, then recalibrate the level of the tax across the board. But those who damage the environment and drive up fuel costs for everyone else should have to pay extra to do so.
2013-03-27 11:09:08 AM
1 votes:

jaytkay: Fark It: I live in the Chicago metro. The only decent mass transit options are if you are commuting to the loop. What is this "adding lanes" that you speak of?

PACE buses in the Chicago suburbs provide 2 million rides every weekday.

Maybe you chose to live somewhere without options, or riding the bus is beneath you, but millions of people use public transit outside the city center.


I've looked into PACE.  It's not feasible for where I work, live, and go to school.

But thanks for making assumptions about people who are stuck in their cars, it's not smug or sanctimonious in the least.
2013-03-27 11:06:37 AM
1 votes:

Fark It: I live in the Chicago metro. The only decent mass transit options are if you are commuting to the loop. What is this "adding lanes" that you speak of?


PACE buses in the Chicago suburbs provide 2 million rides every weekday.

Maybe you chose to live somewhere without options, or riding the bus is beneath you, but millions of people use public transit outside the city center.
2013-03-27 11:03:05 AM
1 votes:

cgraves67: OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).

I was just thinking that. If we had a mileage tax, I'd pay the same in my 4x4 as the guy in the Prius who drives the same distance. With the gas tax, I buy more gas and pay more taxes for the same miles driven. The mileage tax would be far less painful for me than the Prius driver.


I think that is the point. They are losing gas tax money from the people with the fuel efficient cars that they pushed. Now they want that money that they are losing.
2013-03-27 10:53:22 AM
1 votes:

Bendal: Fark It: I think this is bullshiat.  The healthcare program I'm applying for only has a handful of clinical sites that are in the county, some are 90 minutes each way.  Mass transit isn't an option for most people.  Why go after motorists when you could go after the trucking and freight industries?  An empty truck with trailer is at least 30,000 lbs, and they can weigh up to 80,000 lbs when they're loaded up with cargo.  That wears down infrastructure a lot more than my car

That is true, except the # of passenger cars far, far outnumbers the # of trucks on the road, and those cars fill up all the lanes and constantly need new ones added. There's more to what the gas tax pays for than worn out pavement and bridges; it also pays for the new lanes too.


I live in the Chicago metro.  The only decent mass transit options are if you are commuting to the loop.  What is this "adding lanes" that you speak of?
2013-03-27 10:51:02 AM
1 votes:
So, what happens when I drive across the border to Canada?  Who gets those miles?
2013-03-27 10:48:34 AM
1 votes:

OtherBrotherDarryl: How about a tax based on the number of miles driven but where there are incentives/penalties for driving more/less fuel efficient cars (ie, a gas tax).


How about we just cut the bullshiat stop it with these itemized taxes and just use a single income based progressive tax and set the amount at what we farking need to run and pay for shiat.

Sounds crazy I know
2013-03-27 10:48:20 AM
1 votes:

slayer199: I'm rather conflicted on this because I think people that drive more should pay more for the road infrastructure they use.

They do that now by buying more gas than you.

m00
2013-03-27 10:47:03 AM
1 votes:
This would benefit people with cars who have bad gas mileage.
2013-03-27 10:46:47 AM
1 votes:

slayer199: I'm rather conflicted on this because I think people that drive more should pay more for the road infrastructure they use.

On the flip side, there was a strong incentive to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle to offset rising fuel prices.  So the government disincentivizes fuel-efficiency and indirectly promotes telecommuting.

The bottom line is that this won't have the desired effect because people that have long commutes will adapt.


No reason they can't raise taxes on both. Since when does that stop them?

Bonus? Hurts more rural people, helps more urban. Democrats tend to cluster more in urban environments.
2013-03-27 10:45:47 AM
1 votes:

vernonFL: I do know there are exemptions for diesel (shouldn't they be tested MORE?)


The problem with diesels is up until recently with DEF (Diesel Exhaust Fluid) there was no way to "clean" diesel exhaust, so what ever comes out of the engine is what comes out of the exhaust pipe.  Emissions testing just tests all the equipment that cleans the exhaust.
2013-03-27 10:30:56 AM
1 votes:

vernonFL: Donnchadha: /31 states do have emissions testing, but generally only in major metropolitan areas for pollution concerns -- most are not implemented statewide.

My state (Maryland) has emission testing statewide every 2 years, and yes on newer models they just plug into the computer under the dash. On older cars they put a sensor in the tailpipe to actually test the exhaust.


Wikipedia and Maryland's MVA website agree -- only 13 counties (out of 23) plus Baltimore City require testing, and within that there's a fair number of exemptions
2013-03-27 10:24:48 AM
1 votes:

Donnchadha: /31 states do have emissions testing, but generally only in major metropolitan areas for pollution concerns -- most are not implemented statewide.


My state (Maryland) has emission testing statewide every 2 years, and yes on newer models they just plug into the computer under the dash. On older cars they put a sensor in the tailpipe to actually test the exhaust.
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-03-27 09:58:07 AM
1 votes:
Who believes the gas tax would vanish?

In my state the government already knows how many miles you drive. Once a year the inspection station plugs into your computer and gets a data dump. It would be easy to combine the mile tax and municipal property tax into one consolidated registration fee.

Or they could just take 1.5 cents per mile target revenue times typical miles per year and charge $200 per year to register a car.
 
Displayed 97 of 97 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report