Lil Red Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 +J.M.J.+ [url="http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-lahood-vehicle-mileage-tax,0,6754105,print.story"]Source here[/url] [quote]WASHINGTON (AP) — Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he wants to consider taxing motorists based on how many miles they drive rather than how much gasoline they burn — an idea that has angered drivers in some states where it has been proposed. Gasoline taxes that for nearly half a century have paid for the federal share of highway and bridge construction can no longer be counted on to raise enough money to keep the nation's transportation system moving, LaHood said in an interview with The Associated Press.[/quote] i gotta tell you, in my state, this will go over like a ton of bricks.
add Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 (edited) long gone are the days of the Sunday drive besides isn't the stimulus bill going to pay for the rehab'ing of highway, bridges and road infrastructures projects now. billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions Edited February 20, 2009 by apparently
eagle_eye222001 Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 What happens when left government comes in. Start figuring out how many ways to tax people.
CatherineM Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 The last time I took a Sunday drive was as a kid. My dad decided he wanted to drive down to see the campus at OU. We realized we were lost when we saw that all the windows on the buildings had bars. Norman is home to OU and the state's big mental hospital. In some places people have to drive a long way to work, so how are they going to figure this stuff out? I guess we could report our odometer reading, but people would just start disconnecting them. I used to know someone who drove a bunch of miles from the country to OKC everyday, and he just popped out the fuse to the speedometer most of the time. Had to guess on how fast he was going, but got better resale on his used cars. I suppose on the new computerized cars you can't do that.
add Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 $787-billion stimulus package signed into law that includes $49.3 billion of TRANSPORTATION spending [$49.3 billion] • Highways: $27.5 billion • Transit: $8.4 billion • New discretionary grant program: $1.5 billion for highways, transit, rail, seaports, other projects. U.S. Dept. of Transportation will choose which projects will be funded. • Airport Improvement Program construction grants: $1.1 billion • Rail: $9.3 billion, including $1.3 billion for Amtrak, $8 billion for high-speed rail • Port, transit, rail security: $300 million • DHS/Transportation Security Administration: $1 billion to procure, install airport explosives-detection, baggage-scanning equipment • Coast Guard, bridge alterations: $142 million • Coast Guard, acquisition, construction, improvements: $98 million
hoosieranna Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 (edited) A perspective from someone who actually works in transportation: VMT tax is a fairly practical long term solution for expanding infrastructure. The stimulus bill for infrastructure has very tight limits on which projects the money can actually be used for. It is also focused more on "green" initiatives than road maintenance. Our current road network can't be maintained using only gas taxes. It's just not workable. Either new funding sources have to be found or the gas tax must be raised. That would be even less popular than VMT. VMT also apportions road costs by use, sort of like House seats are apportioned by population. Those that use the roads more bear a greater percentage of upkeep costs of those same roads. It would be nice to see more incentives for mass transit or alternate modes of freight, but that probably won't happen any time soon. As for the in car devices, I'm as paranoid as the next person. There are already locating devices in all cars sold within the last few years. The actual proposed devices won't take name, rank, and serial number. The only information that is meant to be passed is odometer readings. Granted, there is a real possibility that could change, but civil liberties have already been greatly affected by the USA Patriot Act. There was also the whole wiretapping debacle, neither of which occurred under a left or centrist administration. On a random note, revenues from gas sales eventually pay my salary. I'm actually paying myself when I buy gas. edit after reading previous post: $27.5 bil sounds like a lot of money, but remember that has to be split among all states and cities. One project my employer is currently working on is four bridges, which are projected to cost $10 mil. The money gets used up quickly. Edited February 20, 2009 by Nadezhda
add Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 Isn’t the current gasoline tax essentially the same as a mileage type tax. The burden might be lower for the so called green cars , but the transportation of goods and services depends on non-economical work trucks who by there very nature consume greater fuel moving heavy freight, etc. A mileage tax is inefficient compared to the gallon tax we all now enjoy.
cmotherofpirl Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 If they pass this there is no incentive to get better fuel milage since your all taxed the same. It will also cut out people driving out for leisure activities etc so restaurants, parks etc will suffer. Public transportation isn't equipped to handle more people. I wouldn't mind if it stopped people from using ATVs.
Lil Red Posted February 20, 2009 Author Posted February 20, 2009 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1786559' date='Feb 20 2009, 03:00 PM']It will also cut out people driving out for leisure activities etc so restaurants, parks etc will suffer.[/quote]+J.M.J.+ exactly why it won't go over well in my state. you have to drive at least 50+ miles to get to any recreational park (not city park) - whether it's a state park, ski trip, horseback riding, etc.
CatherineM Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 In Oklahoma City, you have to drive a minimum of 3 hours just to find natural water that isn't brick red.
Barbarus Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 Seems like it is a lot harder to track mileage than gas useage. But as cars get more efficient, even big cars, trying to find a way to do that makes sense. People should pay for the roads they use. And frankly, if you live someplace where you have to drive a lot ... well that's what you chose. There are pros and cons to everyplace.
CatherineM Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 I saw a documentary on suburbiana, at the height of the high oil prices, and he talked about how suburbs not connected by rapid transit would become the new ghost towns. I don't know what I think about that, but I don't think that oil is going to stay where it is for long.
Lil Red Posted February 20, 2009 Author Posted February 20, 2009 [quote name='Barbarus' post='1786568' date='Feb 20 2009, 03:15 PM']Seems like it is a lot harder to track mileage than gas useage. But as cars get more efficient, even big cars, trying to find a way to do that makes sense. People should pay for the roads they use. And frankly, if you live someplace where you have to drive a lot ... well that's what you chose. There are pros and cons to everyplace.[/quote] +J.M.J.+ i don't disagree that people should pay for the roads that they use. that is common sense. and frankly, if you live in a big state (as i do), it's not my fault that God didn't put the mountains closer to me
KnightofChrist Posted February 20, 2009 Posted February 20, 2009 This would hurt us just going to get gas! Which takes about 20 mins in either direction. The Obama Administration is not really caring of "Middle America". This may work, may, in big cities... but not everyone lives in big cities.
Jesus_lol Posted February 21, 2009 Posted February 21, 2009 [quote name='Barbarus' post='1786568' date='Feb 20 2009, 03:15 PM']Seems like it is a lot harder to track mileage than gas useage. But as cars get more efficient, even big cars, trying to find a way to do that makes sense. People should pay for the roads they use. And frankly, if you live someplace where you have to drive a lot ... well that's what you chose. There are pros and cons to everyplace.[/quote] they dont have to track it, they just tax each gallon of gasoline and presto!
Selah Posted February 21, 2009 Posted February 21, 2009 Well, so much for going to Colorado...I think I'll just walk there.
ardillacid Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Driving is a privilege bestowed upon you by the ever generous government. You will be happy to pay more taxes.
T-Bone _ Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 In Oregon, there's talk of this. There is even a pilot program. Guess how they're going to track mileage? GPS! So the government will be able to track where you go and when you go there.
Apotheoun Posted February 27, 2009 Posted February 27, 2009 Proposals for new forms of taxation that will adversely affect voters will eventually lead to a taxpayers revolt at the polls, and that could bring down Obama; so as the old saying goes "in every dark cloud there is a silver lining."
Lil Red Posted February 27, 2009 Author Posted February 27, 2009 [quote name='T-Bone _' post='1792165' date='Feb 26 2009, 08:23 PM']In Oregon, there's talk of this. There is even a pilot program. Guess how they're going to track mileage? GPS! So the government will be able to track where you go and when you go there.[/quote] +J.M.J.+ really, isn't it for our own good?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now