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.
One of the issues is the amount of tax and the fact that you dbe paying it all at once on an annual basis, leading to a possibly HUGE bill that's much harder to pay than a couple dollars every week. I can budget my weekly fuel costs easily out of each paycheck, but budgeting for a potentially uknown large amount annually is a bit harder. And I'm sure it would cause more issues for already sour DMV employees when they have to look up how much your annual or bi-annual registration costs are calculated.
It's not that the bill would be insanely high, it's the administration of it that would be a nightmare. Currently we pay about .50 cents per gallon in gasoline taxes. If you drive 15,000 miles a year and get an average of 25 MPG, you will have paid about $300 in gasoline tax. So, not a huge amount of money in one shot, but for the majority who live paycheck to paycheck it would be a big one time hit.
I'm glad to hear that you have a small garden, which I believe is a start on a healthier lifestyle that many can enjoy.
While you may have had excellent intentions about your post, the problem I see is that you ... and so many others on these forums ... use language that makes your position absolute and confers superior enlightened thinking mantle upon yourself compared to those with other priorities. There is nothing else but the superiority of moving close to your job, using public transportation, etc etc etc ... and there's no exceptions in your lecture to the rest of us. No doubt, you have a lot of people who hear your position and agree with it ... but you folk still need to eat, and many still need to leave the city for various reasons or for recreation, too.
I wish that I could assert to you that farmers do pass on their price increases, but if you'd take the time to research the various foodstuffs that you consume, you'd find that the profits are in the processing, distribution, and retailing of these goods. The farmer's percentage of the retail price has been low for many years, and has been in a steady decline for decades.
OH, you think all the money comes like manna from heaven ... all those subsidies that I'm getting? Those subsidies come through as frequently as my checks from Publisher's Clearing House ... which is to say, not at all. The guys collecting subsidies are the big corporations that can afford to game the system, not the little guys who make up most of the family farms/ranches in this country.
The only way that I survive on this farm/ranch is to raise value added products in my greenhouses, and sell natural free-ranged poultry and lamb at our local Farmer's Market. Which again ... takes time, equipment, fuel, and an investment in product to be able to have product available for sale and then to get it to the retail point of purchase. Overall, the farm doesn't yield much more than a minimum wage; my wife and I both work off the farm to make this place a success. I've yet to see a ROI on my investment in the real estate, farm equipment, or machinery ... and my house would be considered a tear-down if anywhere near a 'burb.
Great post and a great read. I see where you are coming from and again my thoughts were not aimed at farmers or the minority of people. It was about the majority of people that do live in cities and in the surrounding suburbs who simply refuse to change habits and feel they are entitled to good roads, cheap gas while mostly ignoring mass transit. America is blessed with a great amount of land and we are blessed to have the freedom of the road and to drive as we please. However people cannot continue to expect low gas prices, it simply is not going to happen again unless some giant reserve is found and demand worldwide tapers off.
High gas prices simply hurt disposable income for city folks that buy food. We are duped into thinking inflation is flat (it sure is not) since CPI does not include gas and food prices So the government tells people "oh inflation fine" but people everyday note that food/gas has shot up in price. Grocery store margins are already 1-2%, pretty low for a business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tijlover
This dilemma is no different that dealing with the Power Company in my state.
They're forever sending out literature in the mail on how to reduce your electric bill, and every year, there they are raising our rates, because we're not using enough electricity.
If we all go out and buy cars that get 40MPG, how long will it be and we'll be right back to where we started?
Being that we're supposedly running out of water here in Las Vegas, the water company gives you cash for converting your yard to xeroscape. And how long will it be before we hear the same tune? Not using enough water, raise the rates! For now and ever, I'll enjoy my green lawn!
Great post. Power companies make me sick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
Thank you for bringing focus back to the original topic. It's obvious that maintaining our roads and other infrastructure requires a certain amount of money. That money is mainly derived from gas taxes whose revenue will decrease as efficiency increases. This is both a state and federal issue as both receive their funding in this manner.
Economically you could argue we would reach an equillibrium, the tax will increase and other taxes like electric car fees and high efficiency fees, where it is a net zero cost to the consumer to drive a more efficient vehicle, so no harm, no foul.
However, simply raising the tax will fall disproportionately harder on the poor and working class who may not be able to afford to continue to upgrade to more efficient vehicles to balance out the cost they are paying at the pump. Let's say they peg the tax to the current CAFE standards for that year. While some people will be fine, the majority will be paying more than they are paying now. Even people who can afford new cars every few years may be stuck paying more without the efficient car to make up the increased cost.
The problem I see is that almost any other method of taxation is so messy it is almost impossible to implement. The one thing I could conceive of on an electric car would be to tax a certain rate per KwH based on a dedicated meter for charging the car. However, that doesn't address any other vehicle class.
And again I feel the money raised TODAY is wasted. GA for example has among the lowest gas tax in the nation and the roads are fabulous and always being kept in great condition.
Compare this to say D.C or the Miami area where the roads are horrible yet gas tax is higher and they have tons of TOLLS that supposedly are there to pay/up keep the roads. Where is the money going?
The American people need to hold their elected officials ACCOUNTABLE for where the money is being spent!!!
The gov't is telling people buy smaller cars, go with efficiency, buy hybrids, buy electric cars. There are $7500 credits (tax) if you buy a Leaf or Volt. The gov't is encouraging this behavior( they used to have big credits for hybrids).
If they turn around and then tax the hell out of people for changing and buying a more fuel efficient car, SHAME ON THEM.
There is a story here about a developer that bought some land for 2 million for a huge neighborhood but went broke b/c of the real estate crash. Guess what their buddies at the local board did, they purchased the land for 6 million even though the land isn't worth the 2 million he paid for. CROOKED.
Could a solution be to charge tax based on % of every dollar spent rather than per gallon? If the price of gas goes up, so does tax revenue. It wouldn't matter how efficient your car is. That would be your choice. I'd rather pay at the pump than pay tolls. Just wondering.
Could a solution be to charge tax based on % of every dollar spent rather than per gallon? If the price of gas goes up, so does tax revenue. It wouldn't matter how efficient your car is. That would be your choice. I'd rather pay at the pump than pay tolls. Just wondering.
Some state gas taxes are pegged as a percentage, others are a flat per gallon fee. Regardless of how the tax is rigged though, if everyone drives more efficient vehicles, there will be less gas used and hence less revenue. Also, if the idea that increasing effeciency will lower demand for oil, hence lowering the price of gas, the percentage can work out poorly.
Better gas efficiency means less oil to be imported. This means more money stays in the US, boosting the economy and increasing tax revenues. My analysis may be a bit naive but I really can't see how better fuel efficiency requirements will hurt the government, considering how they offer tax incentives for buying hybrid vehicles!
A tax on electric vehicles makes sense but not for hybrids (if not enough gas tax is being collected, just simply repeal the tax incentives.)
LOL. Easy solution: Raise tax on gasoline and diesel fuel. This will increase tax revenues AND support fuel efficiency.
It will also force freight off the roads and onto railroads and encourage more people to take mass transit.
Of course, the down side of that is that even LESS gas and diesel revenue might actually come in! There is a point at which higher fuel taxes results in minus revenues. It's called "The Law of Diminishing Returns" and we're nearly there now. Not only that, but those higher fuel taxes are passed on to the consumer and you pay it again, in the form of higher prices at the store. In reality, it's a double taxation.
In short, that's not the solution. Not only does it tend to excerabate the problem, it's patently unfair to require fossil fuel users to pay the full expense of maintaining the roadways, while "green" drivers get a free pass.
^^^ Well they need to stop overpaying for those projects. Another solution is move closer to your job/school/whatever or live in a live/work/play area.
Your first suggestion is a good one. State highway departments waste an inordinate amount of money through contracting procedures, how the improvements are scheduled and by whom, etc. It really could be done less expensively and more efficiently. For instance, are those fancy looking, artistic overpasses and shrubbery really necessary? Do we REALLY need to spend billions putting cable-stay or concrete barriers in the median strip of every interstate?
The second is just a pie-in-the-sky fantasy with no basis in reality.
It's one of those "not an easy answer" thing, really.
Mandated mileage reporting ... if with electronics, how is that going to work for older cars without computers? Mechanical ... what's stopping someone from disconnecting the said connection, like how folks used to do it with rentals so the miles don't show up on the odometer? GPS/wireless? ... awwww, it feels unprotected - here's a tinfoil blankie, ok?
Nearly every state has been collecting road use taxes from big trucks for years and it's based upon mileage. The bureaucratic infrastructure is already there to enforce compliance and the idea has already passed legal challenges many times.
The problem for cars would be the same as it is for trucks...it's not uniform. The rate changes when you cross state lines. Of course, a federal use tax would correct that, but it's about guaranteed that it would be on top of whatever taxes you're paying now. If Congress decides to go this route, they need to also totally repeal the tax on fossil fuels in the interest of fairness.
The problem with our current automobile/highway-centered transportation system is the fact the most of the costs are socialized upon the taxpayers--be it with fuel taxes or other "hidden" taxes used to support the road system--property taxes used to support local road maintenance, as an example of the latter. A first step toward fixing the problem would be to force motorists to pay the real costs of automobiles and highways by raising fuel taxes to cover those costs and reducing the "hidden" taxes by a corresponding amount. At that point, people would begin making decisions about where they live and about driving costs based on the true cost--not based upon costs that are significantly subsidized by others.
The second step would be to level the playing field among the various modes of transportation--air, auto/truck, and rail--by either subsidizing all of them in an equivalent manner (which is the way Europe tends to do), or--probably even better yet--removing subsidies over time from all of them. In either case, the likely result would be a massive shift back to passenger rail transportation and increased use of rail for freight transportation because, put simply, rail is the most efficient transportation mode--both in terms of construction and maintenance costs, and in fuel efficiency. Of course, that would infuriate the entrenched highway/automobile/suburban real estate development lobby that has been busy wrecking the United States with their little socialist experiment for the past 50-75 years. Maybe someday the brainwashed American public will figure out how that bunch has rooked them for decades on end--and sent this country on the road to poverty with their little "experiment." To understand that latter point, this book is a great read: Getting There: The Epic Struggle between Road and Rail in the American Century, Goddard
Railroads, even urban area light rail, is not a panacea. They come with their own set of problems, not the least of which is obtaining right of way for new tracks. Property rights issues are involved and it can literally take decades to get a project off the ground because of it.
In addition, trains can't possibly go everywhere people want to go. They can't deliver you from home to work, door to door, nor can they take you to Walmart in most cases. They can't take you to the bank or to the dentist or to Mom's house for Sunday dinner. They work well enough to survive (usually with subsidies, a form of hidden taxation) only in concentrated urban areas, which most urban areas are not. Even those cities with good light rail have not seen a substantial reduction in the amount of highway and street traffic because of these considerations. There's no reason to suppose they will in the future either.
Interstate trains, of course, can't compete with airplanes because of their limited speed and that's not going to change within our lifetimes. And, today's economy simply won't allow 5 or 6 days to cross the continent for either people or high priority goods.
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.
So the government tells people "oh inflation fine" but people everyday note that food/gas has shot up in price. Grocery store margins are already 1-2%, pretty low for a business. 
