Posts
966
Joined
2/18/2010
Location
Brandon, MS
US
Homey55
10/28/2014 2:18pm
10/28/2014 2:18pm
Edited Date/Time
12/16/2014 7:22pm
http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/280673822.html
Okay, this one really pisses me off. Charge a tax per mile traveled. The stats show that the less fuel efficient your car is, the less tax you pay compared to fuel tax that we all pay here in the US now. They are trying to sell it to the lower class people who can't afford a fuel efficient car. The proplem is that the break even point for paying the same amount in taxes is a car that gets about 15 miles per gallon.
First, show me exactly how much of my fuel taxes go to road repairs/improvements - as they should.
Second, I drive a $3,000 Ford Focus that gets 30 mpg (a poor person's car) so now all of the sudden I pay more for taxes.
Third, the rich people drive less fuel efficient cars (sports cars, large trucks, luxury cars) and will now pay less taxes.
Fourth, the electric folks, who were incentivised to buy electric, are now punished.
Fifth, we have to carry a mileage tracker that connects to the OBDII module in my car to track everywhere I go.
Sixth, my insurance company now knows exactly how far I drive per year and can raise my rates according to the tracker.
I don't get it, at all. We pay so much in taxes and have no control over how they are spent.
Okay, this one really pisses me off. Charge a tax per mile traveled. The stats show that the less fuel efficient your car is, the less tax you pay compared to fuel tax that we all pay here in the US now. They are trying to sell it to the lower class people who can't afford a fuel efficient car. The proplem is that the break even point for paying the same amount in taxes is a car that gets about 15 miles per gallon.
First, show me exactly how much of my fuel taxes go to road repairs/improvements - as they should.
Second, I drive a $3,000 Ford Focus that gets 30 mpg (a poor person's car) so now all of the sudden I pay more for taxes.
Third, the rich people drive less fuel efficient cars (sports cars, large trucks, luxury cars) and will now pay less taxes.
Fourth, the electric folks, who were incentivised to buy electric, are now punished.
Fifth, we have to carry a mileage tracker that connects to the OBDII module in my car to track everywhere I go.
Sixth, my insurance company now knows exactly how far I drive per year and can raise my rates according to the tracker.
I don't get it, at all. We pay so much in taxes and have no control over how they are spent.
2). How much your car costs isn't directly relevant to how much it contributes to wear and tear on the road system.
3). They may or they may not, depending on how much they drive. If those inefficient cars weren't being driven much before because of the price of fuel, they probably won't be driven a lot more with a usage fee either.
4). Punished or paying for the proportional usage of the road system? If you are being asked to help pay for the building and repair of the road system you are using, it's a bit of a stretch to call that punishment.
5). Definitely not a fan of that from a privacy issue.
6). They can't "raise your rates" off that information, but they can ask you to pay the amount you contractually agreed to. Are you currently lying to your insurance company? Lack of integrity an issue for you?
All that being said, I'm not much of a fan of the scheme but the majority of your issues are just silly/disturbing because of the reasoning involved.
2) The person that is proposing the law specifically argued that poor people who drive cheap cars will pay less tax. You can definitely buy a cheap car that gets better than 15 miles per gallon. Her argument is stupid.
3) The rich will pay less to drive their weekend gas guzzlers due to less MPG.
4) The Government incentivised the hybrid/electric craze to "save the environment" and now they are reverse incentivising. As much as I hate the Prius, they bought them to help the Government use less oil and feel like they were making a difference and now they will have to pay more tax per mile than before.
5) Finally, we agree!
6) I'm not lying to my insurance company. They have my home address and my work address, so the mileage is based on that. But, them having access to the tracker now creates a whole new opportunity for when you decide to take a trip outside your state or the country. It's going to open a can of worms and end up costing you and me more money for insurance.
The Shop
Oh shit! I'm sorry. I just doomed the thread.
But.
Now we have a tax that would require people to pay for what they use in mileage driven and it's unfair because it just might cost YOU money.
I'm so sick and tired of being told that I NEED to pay more, it's kind of nice seeing others get screwed.
Seriously though, a tax on gas IS a usage tax. Nobody's forced to drive anywhere. The more you drive the more you pay. If you want to drive a humungous engined truck, you pay the costs that go with it - your choice.
If you guy's let your government put tracking devices in every one of your vehicles I'll be so dissillusioned and saddened. I'll also never want to hear the word "feeedom" from any of you ever again - unless it's prefixed with "we no longer have any"............
Unless you truly believe, of course, that the vast majority of Americans absolutely MUST drive in order to go about their daily lives, make a living, feed their families, etc.
A mileage tax, based on vehicle weight also, would probably be the most equitable way of split the costs of our transportation infrastructure but there really is no good way to measure and levy these charges. A Prius driving 15K per year probably does just as much damage to the road as a Ford Focus, yet the Prius gets around 15MPG better fuel economy. Their current tax payments don't accurately reflect usage of the highway.
Manually checking mileage monthly or quarterly might sound like a decent idea but that doesn't take into account miles driven in a different jurisdiction, such as drivers from Vancouver WA who commute to Oregon and use their roads. Although we obviously already have that issue at border areas with big gas tax discrepancies anyway.
Any tax scheme is going to have issues and any "solution " should fix more issues than it causes. This idea doesn't do that so far.
This is absolutely not how it works in practice. Most new taxes create more issues. I'm dead opposed to ANY new tax. If they can't make do on the asinine amount they're making now, there's not hope for them.
Pit Row
"I'm dead opposed to ANY new tax. If they can't make do on the asinine amount they're making now, there's not hope for them."
I so agree with you. more people should, time to trim this shit down not add more to it.
I'm not a fan of having to pay more in taxes, but I'd not make such a blanket statement as being opposed to any new tax. An example would be if our local school district finally decided to build a new high school, I'd be very much in favor of that because it's very much needed. That is a tax/levy that would definitely be worthwhile for our community to impose, and I'm sure there are a few others. Unfortunately we aren't able to take the funds needed from another jurisdiction or entity to cover that.
If we're going to be fair and all...
Deisel is less expensive at the pump due to this, but it ends up about the same, just a different way of collecting tax,
it was brought in this way as alot of poeple use deisel for other uses. ie farming and industrial ,
still, our fuel is alot more expensive than in the US,
http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf
Post a reply to: Mileage Tax!