Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Paying per mile may replace taxes at gas pump

Expand Messages
  • flyboy472@juno.com
    To me it makes much more sense to stick to the current system of charging taxes on gasoline. What they need to do is up the gas tax but they know that all the
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 9 4:25 PM
      To me it makes much more sense to stick to the current system of
      charging taxes on gasoline. What they need to do is up the gas tax
      but they know that all the SUV drivers will cry fowl if they do.

      Things to consider with the current gas tax:
      1) Easy to implement...like someone else said, it's tied in with a
      transaction that is already occuring...the purchase of gas.
      2) The amount of tax is almost directly based on how many miles you
      drive because a certain car will average a certain gas consumption
      per mile...this can vary though...
      3) As I said in #2, this can vary, but this variable is an ADVANTAGE
      because vehicles that use excessive gas, like SUVs, will have to pay
      more in taxes. Cars stuck in traffic will also consume more gas, and
      likewise pay more tax, so people are encouraged to drive during
      offpeak hours and use more efficient vehicles.

      Things to consider with the proposed mileage tax:
      1) Difficult to implement. Like someone said in an earlier post, it
      would either require building many toll stations, or equipping each
      vehicle with a GPS system to measure how many miles they drove. If
      the GPS system is used, there also needs to be an entire government
      (or privately contracted) entity whose purpose is to figure out how
      many miles you drove, how much you owe in taxes, and then make sure
      that you actually pay the government. Can we say inefficency?
      2) As someone said earlier, people who drive super gasoline efficient
      vehicles, like hybrid cars, are taxed just the same as people who
      drive super-inefficient vehicles like SUVs. This makes no sense as
      it does not encourage people to use less gas.

      What we need to do is first raise the gas tax by a small amount,
      maybe 10 cents per gallon (I know some people already think that's a
      HUGE amount...just wait). The extra money can be used to build a
      public transit network nation-wide...something on the scale of the
      Eisenhower Interstate System...perhaps even a network of trains along
      the same right of way as the interstates. Once there is an
      alternative form of transportation available to people, the gas tax
      should be raised by a large amount (perhaps in the vicinity of 50
      cents to a dollar per gallon). This tax would more realistically
      reflect the actual costs involved in driving a vehicle.

      This is a radical approach but it would (a) encourage the majority of
      people to use public transit, (b) solve our gasoline/foreign affairs
      problem, and (c) help us to begin healing the environment. Thoughts

      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Chris Radcliff <chris@g...>
      > Lloyd has a good point. It all depends on which costs you're
      trying to
      > internalize. Charging tolls spreads the cost of emissions
      > just as charging gas taxes spreads the cost of road infrastructure
      > unevenly.
      > Additionally, charging a toll by mileage sounds like a bigger
      > than they may imagine. Taxes at the pump are easy to implement
      > there's already a measured monetary transaction involved. Tolls
      > notorious for creating bottlenecks unless there's a high-tech (and
      > difficult-to-implement) automated system in place. It's hard to
      > imagine the embedded GPS receiver approach the article mentions
      > wide adoption very quickly, and partial adoption would make the
      > even more unequal.
      > At the core, something tells me this is less an issue of fair
      > and more a response to the difficult time governments have
      > taxes. Shifting to a new system gives them the opportunity to set
      > higher price without having anything to compare against.
      > Cheers,
      > ~chris
      > Lloyd Wright wrote:
      > > It seems like this tax policy will benefit SUVs and other
      > > with poor
      > > fuel efficiency. Essentially, a small, efficient hybrid vehicle
      > > 70 mpg)
      > > will pay the same tax as a Hummer (at 7 mpg) when travelling the
      > > distance.
      > >
      > > I agree that electronic tolling of this sort is appropriate for
      > > congestion and road construction since these costs are borne by
      > > distance
      > > travelled and the time of the travel. However, it does nothing
      > > account for
      > > air emissions which are related to fuel usage. I would suggest
      > > it would
      > > be better to charge both a petrol tax and a road usage tax. Of
      > > course, even
      > > these only begin to account for the true societal costs of
      > > vehicles.
      > >
      > > Lloyd
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.