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.
A recent report by a congressional commission recommended that drivers be charged a "per mile" tax for highway funding instead of paying a "gas tax" at the pump. The story can be found at this link and in many other places on the internet:
Report By National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission Urges Mileage Tax - cbs3.com (http://cbs3.com/topstories/mileage.tax.lahood.2.945625.html - broken link)
I have several objections to this plan.
First, there is the cost of implementing the proposed GPS tracking devices. With millions of vehicles on the road in the U.S., this cost would be astronomical.
Second, there is the privacy issue of "the government" (or others) tracking where and when you drive. Would this lead to limitations on where or when you are allowed to travel? "May I see your papers, please?"
Third, there is no incentive provided for driving fuel efficient vehicles, since the per mile tax would not take the vehicle type into account. (At least I didn't see anywhere in the story that mentions they would account for this.) Why should the driver of a 2400 lb. car pay the same amount per mile as the driver of an 11000 lb. pickup truck? The truck is obviously going to cause more wear and tear on the roadway, and obviously, its owner should pay more to maintain the roadway.
The current program of paying a gax tax at the pump takes this into consideration in the form of fuel efficiency. Obviously the driver of the small car will pay less per mile because his vehicle uses less fuel per mile than the truck does. Those who drive more miles, obviously pay more because of increased fuel consumption. If the current gas tax is not keeping up with the demand for funding, then it should probably be modified.
Vehicles that do not run on "pump fuel" (gasoline/diesel) should be taxed separately. This would be the only time I would advocate a mileage tax, since the fuel tax would not apply in this situation.
I have often thought that fuel taxes should be collected at the pump, then divided up in a 40/30/20/10 plan. 40% of the tax revenue collected should go to the locality where the revenue is collected (or put into the county fund in unincorporated areas). 30% should go to the county in which the revenue is collected, 20% to the state, and the remaining 10% to the Federal Government. This would provide for a large portion of the funding to be spent where the purchase was made. In very rural areas, that revenue wouldn't go very far, which is why I advocate dividing the remainder between other jurisdictions, to cover funding of county, state, and U.S. highways where there is little fuel tax revenue generated.
Welcome to the USSR, where Government keeps track of where each person goes. This is exactly what Obama wants, a Communist, nanny state where people have no freedom and the Government dictates every aspect of their lives.
Welcome to the USSR, where Government keeps track of where each person goes. This is exactly what Obama wants, a Communist, nanny state where people have no freedom and the Government dictates every aspect of their lives.
Surprisingly, and to his credit, Mr. Obama is opposed to this proposal, or at least that's what he's saying at the moment. We'll have to wait to see what the final outcome is on the matter.
He's also claimed to be opposed to "big government" but still managed to add nearly $1,000,000,000,000 (That's one trillion dollars) in new spending in just over a month, and just from one bill he signed. This is money that the U.S. does not have to spend.
Getting one's arms wrapped around the huge deficits Obama and his supporters have saddled us with is too much of a job. I can't imagine the cost of placing some sort of GPS devices on the millions of motor vehicles that are not new and the number of computers that would have to be added in some huge building in DC or where ever. No matter how they take in from this mileage tax it would take years and years to pay for all the GPS systems and all the registering computers. Only a left handed progressive would think this would work and raise more money for the government to spend, as in tax and spend.
Even though I would certainly benefit from this "change" this is still an absolutely terrible idea. I would use all of my skills to circumvent and cheat this device if ever forced to use it.
Sorry, but Bush saddled us with the huge deficits, now we're trying to fix the economy.
Almost every country has a road tax; Japan costs about 250,000 yen per year.
I don't mind the tax but to have the government know where I am at any given time looks like Big Brother Government to me. And we thought we were giving up rights under Bush. Boy are we in for it. Obama wants to know where we are at all times, what our medical records contain, control what we listen to on the radio. Sound pretty scary to me, so much for our civil liberties and privacy Where is the ACLU when you need them? Could it be they don't care about our civil liberties when a Democrat is in office?
The American people won't tolerate the government putting GPS trackers in their cars tracking where they drive. People would take up arms. It's more likely this will be used a scare tactic, allowing the feds to push through higher fuel taxes. They'll say "Would you rather we put tracking devices in your vehicles?"
I do not get it, usually conservative Republicans just love tolls, user fees and so forth. What could be more fair than a miles driven tax. It would fall equallly on rich and poor alike. It is extremely fair. As vehicles continue to get better gas mileage we are going to need to adjust the gas tax.
I do not see what the big woop is. Drive a lot, wear out more of the road than the guy that drives a little you pay more. I think weight should be a factor. One qualifer, elimate toll roads, bridges, gas tax and so forth and raise more money and have it extremely protected from use on other things.
I want to see better roads, hi speed train availability, and if we do not get with it the world is going to pass us by. I know conservative Republicans are like the Taliban that want to ignore modernbility, but I do not buy their corn flakes, as the rest of America does not anymore.
Paying taxes is all that separates us from 3rd world, the trick is to get your moneys worth. The rich has more to lose, they should pay more. NOTHING is more fair that a mileage tax, rich does not factor in, the ultimate flat tax.
This poses a big problem in large rural states where people must put in a lot of travel even for the most mundane tasks. Smacks too much of "big brother" too. I wrote a rebuttal to our new Sec. for the Dept. of Transportation but I have yet to receive a response. I suggest all other opposed should do the same.
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.
) in new spending in just over a month, and just from one bill he signed. This is money that the U.S. does not have to spend.
