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.
Who in their right mind would allow the government to install a gps tracker on their car? Well many use OnStar so I guess they don't mind anyway. Ya know just in case you lock your keys in the car and all or need to find the local medical weed outlet store.
But, that does nothing to collect from those who drive hybrid or electric cars. They still use the roads and their vehicles don't cause less wear and tear than cars that use gas. How do states close this gap?
I think we should be subsidizing those technologies anyway.
This is an interesting idea being floated by some local officials. It is currently in the larval stage, but I can envision the day when roads are partially paid for this way, with advancements in technology. There are both economic and social ramifications, of course.
"Under a proposal still in its early stages, drivers could be required to install GPS-like odometers or other devices in their vehicles and pay from less than a penny to as much as a dime for every mile driven. The idea could take a decade or more to be launched. Commission spokesman Randy Rentschler acknowledged such a concept ultimately could prove a hard sell with Bay Area residents, who would likely resist both the travel tax and the government-mandated tracking devices. "The last thing we're interested in is where you go and what you do," Rentschler said Thursday, after the vote. "What we're trying to do is get people to figure out a way to raise revenue that they could support."
1-Expensive to implement and maintain.
2-Additional govt. overhead needed to collect taxes instead of using an exisiting mechanism like gas tax.
3-Regressive tax hitting the middle class especially the hardest.
So, people are going to likely have to pay $500 in tax to put maybe $300 after expenses in the pocket of the state with already some of the highest taxes in the nation?
Hey, I have an idea....why don't you roll back prop 103 or whatever it was that is capping property taxes.
The gal that lives in the 50million mansion in the uber ritzy area is paying 8k a year in property taxes due to the freeze.
What happened to tax the rich more? SF have people with a net worth in the hundreds of millions if not billions paying virtually no property taxes on their mansions....and they are talking about tracking devices and new taxes? WTH is wrong with their leadership?
I feel like using GPS transponders is the wrong approach to the problem. It might make more sense to turn all highways in California in to tollways using wireless transponders. At least then, the data can be anonymized to only charge for how far you go without recording where you go.
And I'd only be in favor in such a scheme if it replaced the gas tax entirely.
Yeah but the state is hemorraghing money so what do you do?
Prop 103, the biggest fat-cat boondoggle in the history of the state and the "tax the rich" hypocrites stand silently.
Spending less to a California politician never seems to come up. They found the money for their hi speed train so why do they even need their little global warming vehicles anymore? Let em walk or ride the train. Tear the roads up and plant weed. All will be happy in la la land.
They have free train day occasionally. It actually does get people on the train. And lowers gas tax receipts. When gas went to $5 the first time in 2008 gas tax receipts went way down. They started talking about per-mile charges back then also.
The irony is they want everyone to use public transportation to save the planet, but when people use the system it cuts the funding that helps pay for the public transportation. That wouldn't be a problem if the costs weren't fixed. They never factor the calculus into the equation, and end up with shortfalls.
Same thing happens with cig taxes. Some guy decides that an extra 50 cents in cigarette tax will raise X billion dollars, and promptly spends the money. A certain percentage of smokers actually quit, and the revenue never fully materializes. I guess they don't look at the elasticity, or simply choose to ignore it.
I doubt the per-mile scheme will ever pass. They will just raise registration fees even more. They don't like that approach because it's regressive. And as one guy stated, "isn't fair to the old people who only drive a few thousand miles a year."
From a Freudian perspective, what exactly where you thinking when you wrote that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0421
... but I can envision the day when roads are partially paid for this way, with advancements in technology. There are both economic and social ramifications, of course.
We all knew this was coming. The State excise taxes on gasoline generates a lot of revenues...until people start operating more fuel-efficient vehicles, cutting down on gasoline consumption, and using public mass transit.
That reduces the revenues. States have to find a way to make that up somehow.
Still, having a GPS in your car? I can see that being open to all kinds of abuses.
Tickled...
I feel like using GPS transponders is the wrong approach to the problem. It might make more sense to turn all highways in California in to tollways using wireless transponders. At least then, the data can be anonymized to only charge for how far you go without recording where you go.
And I'd only be in favor in such a scheme if it replaced the gas tax entirely.
Ah yes ... death by lethal injection is much better than hanging.
They have free train day occasionally. It actually does get people on the train. And lowers gas tax receipts. When gas went to $5 the first time in 2008 gas tax receipts went way down. They started talking about per-mile charges back then also.
The irony is they want everyone to use public transportation to save the planet, but when people use the system it cuts the funding that helps pay for the public transportation. That wouldn't be a problem if the costs weren't fixed. They never factor the calculus into the equation, and end up with shortfalls.
Same thing happens with cig taxes. Some guy decides that an extra 50 cents in cigarette tax will raise X billion dollars, and promptly spends the money. A certain percentage of smokers actually quit, and the revenue never fully materializes. I guess they don't look at the elasticity, or simply choose to ignore it.
I doubt the per-mile scheme will ever pass. They will just raise registration fees even more. They don't like that approach because it's regressive. And as one guy stated, "isn't fair to the old people who only drive a few thousand miles a year."
You and everyone else needs to get your heads out of the sand. This is just the next logical step up from toll roads. Put GPS in everyone's cars, monitor their travel in real time, and charge them by the mile. How is that any different than a toll road and a "smart tag" ? It's just a more intrusive method of controlling you. By the same token, it sets the stage for the next measure that is surely on the back burner. What prey tell could that be? Well, how about tracking you every where you go ... and every time that speedometer goes over the the posted speed limit ... you have a bill in your mailbox that will make that 10 cent a mile tax seem like chump change. And it is ... CHUMP change. But they wouldn't do that would they? Nooooo of course not. And they wouldn't ever think of having Gestapo Goons squeezing your testicles at the airport either .. right?
This level of denial is going to be the death of us all.
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.