Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, my post was quite clear. The gas tax is an incentive fee. The Federal government needs no revenue source. It spends by issuing orders through the commerical banks to alter the value in your checking account.
I never argued that. They both take money out of the economy. The LIE is that the gas tax somehow is a funding mechanism. In reality, it is just another regressive, Federal tax. All Federal taxes are incentive fees. Hence, just call it a carbon tax and exempt electric vehicles.
No, my post was quite clear. The gas tax is an incentive fee. The Federal government needs no revenue source. It spends by issuing orders through the commerical banks to alter the value in your checking account.
.
Absolutely nonsense, if you really understand ECO 101.
I'm about as fiscally-conservative as they come, but I'd strongly support hiking the gas tax as long as:
-The money goes ONLY towards mobility improvements. Primarily road works, but mass transit, cycle paths, and subsidized parking lots/garages are okay too as long as the density is there to support it. We motorists need to remember that we benefit from money spent on mass transit, better sidewalks, and cycle paths if these measures take more cars off the road, thereby reducing traffic. -No more talk of per-mile taxes. Not only is it much more complicated to collect and enforce than a gas tax, but it reduces the incentive to drive more fuel-efficient vehicles. Low gas prices disincentivize efficient vehicles enough - replacing gas taxes with mileage taxes would only worsen this!
Here in The Netherlands, gas has plunged to the giveaway price of only $6.44/gallon :P. The high gas prices do sting a bit, but at least we see where the money goes - glassy-smooth highways, thoughtfully designed roads, automated parking-information boards to guide you to open spaces when you enter a city, and cycle paths everywhere. Anecdotally-speaking, the high gas prices seem to encourage people to drive more-efficient cars, rather than to drive less. Vast majority of trips are by car.
I agree with your first point, but the problem with your second I see is if you need X amount per year for highways due to the number of cars, if all cars gradually get more efficient, at some point in the future, you will have less than X to pay for roads. That is unless you continually increase the percentage of gas tax, which is politically unpalatable pretty much everywhere. Also, if the purpose of the gas tax is only to fund mobility related improvements, why should a more efficient car get a break? They take the same amount of space and the cause same general amount of wear and tear as a normal, less efficient vehicle. And even if you wanted to create an incentive for efficiency, it would be trivially easy to create an efficiency component of the mileage tax, just as I assume there will be a different overall rate for a truck than a car due to being larger and heavier.
Congress is considering raising federal gas tax. Couldn't keep the price down.
I hope they do.
No, I'm not a big fan of taxes. It's great paying these low gas prices ... although I remember paying 30-some cents per gallon when I got my license.
But our roads, bridges, tunnels, mass transit ..... a lot of these are in dangerous condition. Raise the gas tax, use the money to buy U.S-made materials, hire a bunch of people living in this country, and the country as a whole benefits tremendously.
How about we stop giving away OUR money to foreign countries? (If we need it here at home? Duh!!!)
Actually we are borrowing money to give it away. If I went to the bank and asked to borrow $50,000.00 so I could give it to my neighbor, they would think I was nuts!
It appears once more the answer is to turn roads over to the private sector and get government out of it.
But wait, there's more!
Colorado just did that with the so-called Denver-Boulder turnpike(US HWY 36), now you pay for tolling lanes and the private vendor Plenary Group gets a 50 year sweetheart lease.
Oh, the more?
Yes, you'll still be TAXED state and federal on that road's regular upkeep.
'But since the 1990s, the Highway Trust Fund has come to fund much more than new roads and bridges and highway maintenance, abandoning the original “user pays” principle behind a gas tax. Drivers now see about a quarter of their gas taxes diverted to subsidize mass transit in merely six metro areas and sundry other programs for street cars, ferries, sidewalks, bike lanes, hiking trails, urban planning and even landscaping nationwide. Trolley riders, et al., contribute nothing to the HTF.
Federal spending on such side projects has increased 38% since 2008, while highway spending is flat. Here’s what the politicians won’t say: Simply using the taxes that are supposed to pay for highways to, well, pay for highways makes the HTF 98% solvent for the next decade, no tax increase necessary.'
Part of the problem too is that costs of highway and bridge construction have been allowed to explode. We're in the process of replacing a major bridge here. The old bridge was built in 1963 for 1/18th of the cost (inflation adjusted) of the new bridge. The new bridge project spent more than the entire cost of the old bridge (inflation adjusted), on studies and consultants, before one inch of concrete had even been laid.
Part of the problem too is that costs of highway and bridge construction have been allowed to explode. We're in the process of replacing a major bridge here. The old bridge was built in 1963 for 1/18th of the cost (inflation adjusted) of the new bridge. The new bridge project spent more than the entire cost of the old bridge (inflation adjusted), on studies and consultants, before one inch of concrete had even been laid.
Politics and disagreements over requirements/priorities can be even worse than inflation. The studies/proposals/designs, etc. for the bridge between Washington and Oregon have cost taxpayers $200 MILLION before the whole project was scrapped. (the bridge to be replaced was built in 1917 at the cost of $1.7 million).
Of course you can always look at the Seattle tunnel and floating bridge fiascos in the Puget Sound area for more examples of mismanagement.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
