http://www.ktvz.com/news/27391390/detail.html
Green cars [electric] don't pay gas tax to pay for road and bridge up keep.
So tax them by the mile.
- Marcus Aurelius
- 04-16-2011, 09:35 AM
- pyramider
- 04-16-2011, 02:34 PM
Wherever they are charging gets charged for electricity usage. Besides, someone needs to figure out what they are really getting per mile. That electricity is created by fossil fuels.
- Marcus Aurelius
- 04-16-2011, 03:05 PM
The point the legislators are trying to make is that the cars tear up the roads but the drivers don't pay direct taxes for repairs.
I remember when CA raised the gas tax because people were using less.
Except the poor people that had to drive gas hogs.
I remember when CA raised the gas tax because people were using less.
Except the poor people that had to drive gas hogs.
- charlestudor2005
- 04-16-2011, 04:16 PM
It's an interesting concept: How do you pay for the erection and maintenance of something of benefit to the whole population?
Right now, we support it (I assume) through a combination of federal funding, gas taxes, and tollways. Under the current system, people tend to pay based on their use of the roads, bridges, etc.
However, when it comes to funding public schools (at least in Texas) only property owners are taxed, whether or not they have kids in school.
Your utilities are based on how much you use.
If you are going to try and tax based on usage, you'll have to find a way to tax those without vehicles, but who still use the highways.
The infrastructure is necessary to the US. I think it should be supported by everyone (which may, in fact, lower the costs associated with gas purchase). Kind of like the taxes we pay to the federal government to support DoD, but for which we realize any DIRECT benefit.
Maybe every citizen should pay an infrastructure tax. That way the cost is apportioned equally.
Right now, we support it (I assume) through a combination of federal funding, gas taxes, and tollways. Under the current system, people tend to pay based on their use of the roads, bridges, etc.
However, when it comes to funding public schools (at least in Texas) only property owners are taxed, whether or not they have kids in school.
Your utilities are based on how much you use.
If you are going to try and tax based on usage, you'll have to find a way to tax those without vehicles, but who still use the highways.
The infrastructure is necessary to the US. I think it should be supported by everyone (which may, in fact, lower the costs associated with gas purchase). Kind of like the taxes we pay to the federal government to support DoD, but for which we realize any DIRECT benefit.
Maybe every citizen should pay an infrastructure tax. That way the cost is apportioned equally.
- pjorourke
- 04-16-2011, 06:59 PM
How about an annual license fee for the car?
- charlestudor2005
- 04-16-2011, 07:09 PM
Leno would pay a lot...but then, he can afford it.
- atlcomedy
- 04-16-2011, 07:23 PM
I was wondering about taxicabs....
With $4/gal gas why haven't more taxicab companies dumped their guzzlers for more fuel efficient vehicles...nothing to do with feel good environmentalism, just economics. At what point would a driver saving $20-30 a day in gas justify updating the fleet?
Is it just short sighted on the part of cab companies, a lack of access of capital (to re-fleet with used but better mileage cars/ still beaters just more fuel efficient beaters), or if you did the financial analysis it really wouldn't pay out?
With $4/gal gas why haven't more taxicab companies dumped their guzzlers for more fuel efficient vehicles...nothing to do with feel good environmentalism, just economics. At what point would a driver saving $20-30 a day in gas justify updating the fleet?
Is it just short sighted on the part of cab companies, a lack of access of capital (to re-fleet with used but better mileage cars/ still beaters just more fuel efficient beaters), or if you did the financial analysis it really wouldn't pay out?