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.
well the CAFE standards were never done right, and were often influenced by lobbyists from the industry and from the oil industry. china does much stricter rules on their "fleet" economy standards. and it doesn't allow them to average it out among their entire fleet (like, having some chevy aveos and some chevy suburbans). they have strict standards on each class of vehicle.
you say the foreign nameplates jumped on the SUV wagon...they did so reluctantly and not always very well.
you can't get the honda crx, but you can get the honda civic si.
i don't like this connection between encouraging more efficient cars and the fact that the roads those cars drive on still need to be maintained.
yes, because we're getting more fuel efficient vehicles, that means transportation funds will not be adequate under current policy to maintain the roads. but honestly...the roads should be maintained no matter what type of vehicle is driving on them. if it costs $100M/yr to maintain a states' roads....then they need to collect $100M/yr. i don't really care how they do it, but they need to.
yes, the government's actions haven't been perfect. is that a failure of government? maybe. but it depends on how you look at it. again - conspiracy theorist-esque but....those rules that were discussed weren't done without the influence of the auto industry in america and the oil industry.
we've had numerous opportunities to reduce our consumption over the past 40 years. we don't capitalize on it EVER. personally, right now, i will never purchase a vehicle that gets less than 25mpg AVG. by the time i make my next vehicle purchase, that requirement will be up above 30mpg AVG. my hope is that my next vehicle purchase is somewhere around 50 or 60mpg on the highway. i see no reason why that vehicle wouldn't exist by the time i make my next purchase, and would be grossly disappointed if much better than that hope doesn't exist.
I understand your points and I don't think we really disagree on the fundamentals, maybe some of the details and reasons why, but not the overall picture.
I'm all for becoming more efficient and I can concede that it will take government action to do it, either through mandates or market pressures through taxation. What I don't like to see is the absolute lack of any cohesive plan to address the issue on any level and the issue that started the thread is a clear example of that. Let's hand out incentives and breaks to encourage people to buy efficient cars, just to have an "oh crap" moment and have to come up with more creative ways to replace lost gas tax revenue.
In this case government inaction and indecision is going to end up costing all of us a lot of money, but it doesn't have to be that way.
For starters I would like to know exactly what the current gas tax is being spent on. If it is being used for anything not related to cars that needs to be addressed before we go raising any taxes.
For starters I would like to know exactly what the current gas tax is being spent on. If it is being used for anything not related to cars that needs to be addressed before we go raising any taxes.
According to numbers on the TTFA (Transportation Trust Fund Authority) website, fuel taxes currently generate $553 million in the state. Of that $483 million is dedicated to the TTFA and is going to directly fund road projects (actually debt service on road projects). The remaining ~$70 million is currently dedicated to NJTransit for "rehabilitation and repair" of various mass transit systems.
Overall, the TTFA is given $895 million a year and the money is used on various projects, both road and rail. That funding level will essentially only be able to cover debt service as of 2011.
These are their revenue streams:
Quote:
The revenue equivalent of 10.5 cents on the motor fuels tax, the petroleum products gross receipts tax, a portion of the general sales tax, "good driver" registration surcharge fees, heavy truck fees, and contributions from the New Jersey Turnpike Authority and South Jersey Transportation Authority.
Currently they will need to pretty much double their funding in order for the TTFA to manage the debt load and continue funding projects.
I found it interesting that the TTFA is basically funding mass transit with monies allocated to the roads, but receives no funding from any of the mass transit agencies. So, while everyone in the state funds both roads and mass transit, only road users through their additional taxes fund mass transit. Mass transit users through their expense, do not fund roads.
I understand your points and I don't think we really disagree on the fundamentals, maybe some of the details and reasons why, but not the overall picture.
I'm all for becoming more efficient and I can concede that it will take government action to do it, either through mandates or market pressures through taxation. What I don't like to see is the absolute lack of any cohesive plan to address the issue on any level and the issue that started the thread is a clear example of that. Let's hand out incentives and breaks to encourage people to buy efficient cars, just to have an "oh crap" moment and have to come up with more creative ways to replace lost gas tax revenue.
In this case government inaction and indecision is going to end up costing all of us a lot of money, but it doesn't have to be that way.
yes, i think we're mostly on the same page. arguing over some semantics.
but to the bolded statement - i still see these as two seperate issues. we incentivize more efficient vehicles. we need to pay for road maintenance. it's not dis-incentivizing more efficient vehicles because everyone should be paying for the road maintenance already. so if we all get vehicles that we use the same amount as the less efficient vehicles...we still have to pay for that 15,000 miles of wear and tear on the road we caused. but the reasoning for more efficient vehicles isn't to save money on road maintenance, it's to improve our health (pollution), decrease our spending on foreign energy sources and protection/security of those sources, and other benefits. but this is why it's a hard sell - because it's hard to put those things into cold hard dollars savings to people who don't understand.
but yes - the lack of clear, comprehensive energy policy that links everything together is the biggest issue. it needs to be done. all we can do is individually try and make better choices....but it doesn't appear as though the masses will do that. as i've said in other threads....i'm very anxiously awaiting the relase of the Leaf nationally. depending on my situation, i would seriously consider buying it to use at least for my work commute. i'd have to run the numbers, but right now i use a tank of gas per week, around $54-$60 at today's prices. we'll see how it goes as more people get it and report real world experiences across the country.
I found it interesting that the TTFA is basically funding mass transit with monies allocated to the roads, but receives no funding from any of the mass transit agencies. So, while everyone in the state funds both roads and mass transit, only road users through their additional taxes fund mass transit. Mass transit users through their expense, do not fund roads.
queue Nexis and bus boy in 3...2....1....
i'm ok with this because road users are subsidizing mass transit for a dual benefit. road users benefit from increased mass transit, in theory, because it will reduce the amount of vehicles on the road. mass transit, in theory at least, is subsidized so that direct users of it don't bear the full cost because it provides a benefit to the non-users as well. we can argue about how much that benefit is worth - but it no doubt exists.
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.
