Slashdot Mirror
Oregon Extends Push To Track, Tax Drivers Per Mile
schwit1 writes "Oregon is moving ahead with a controversial plan to tax motorists based on the number of miles they drive as opposed to the amount of fuel they consume, raising myriad concerns about cost and privacy. The problem for lawmakers is that the existing per-gallon gas tax has hit a point of diminishing returns, as Americans drive less and vehicles become more fuel efficient. Economists and civil libertarians are concerned about the Oregon pilot project in large part because some mileage meters can track and record residents' every vehicular move. Rick Geddes, a Cornell University professor, said the basic device is okay because it is simply attached to a vehicle's computer, which cannot track locations. However, Geddes said privacy concerns could resurface should governments expand the program and use SmartPhone or apps to track movements and reward motorists who avoid congested roads and drive during off-peak hours. Mark Perry, a University of Michigan scholar, says the GPS or 'black box' system is 'particularly untenable.'" Per-car tracking and taxation has been a long time coming in Oregon, and it's not the only state where such an idea's been floated.
why we're trying to over-complicate this? Take the odometer reading at annual inspection and be done with it.
Will there be corner cases where someone gets screwed under this system? Sure.
Is it worth all the trouble, expense, and privacy violations of being 100% perfect when 80% is good enough? No. Not even a little.
"I am hardly a tin foil hat wearing type but, the problem with this is that like every other means to create databases that track/document individuals or groups, they will eventually end up being mined for data that will likely violate your right to privacy. "
The top comment in that link to the California link is spot on. I just wish I could go back in time and tell him how deep the NSA rabbit hole goes.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=139566&cid=11681212
Why not just put a tax on tires? Larger SUV tires pay more and bicycle tires pay the least...
As an Oregon resident, this seems silly and a complete waste of taxpayer $$$
If the intent is that people should pay some amount per mile to cover the cost of road maintenance, just set the per-gallon gas tax equal to $desired_revenue_per_mile / average_mpg. This has the same overall effect as setting a direct per-mile tax, without the tracking nonsense.
This will be "unfair" compared to a mileage-tracking system in that people with more fuel-efficient cars will pay less than their share, and people with less fuel-efficient cars will pay more. But that seems reasonable from the perspective of pricing negative externalities: maybe people who use more gas per mile should be taxed more per mile.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Why not just use the values from that?
Vehicles go in once a year, tack it onto the registration afterwards.
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Use taxes are aboutas fair as you're going to get.
Someone gets screwed in ever model, but you're going to have to break a few eggs.
You could avoid the monitoring if you wanted. Whomever does car inspections up there already knows how many miles the average Oregonian drives - and knows how many miles you drove since your last registrations if you have a history. Bill you your projected taxes based on average or previous driving history, and then fix any overages/underages in your next registration. Set a floor or a cap on the whole tax or on underages/overages if you think it makes for a better tax plan. ....and you can do it all without installing a black box.
just tax electricity. Everyone benefits from roads, and you don't need to track were people are going.
OTOH, Oregon is the bastion of 'We want X! what we have to pay for it? that's an outrage!"
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
the Oregonians who drive into Washington so they don't pay either WA sales tax or OR state taxes. :)
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
I am not from Oregon and maybe the laws differ, but in my state there is required yearly inspections where you get the little sticker on the windshield. I do not understand why one couldn't simply write down the mileage from the odometer once a year during your required state inspection, and that mileage is submitted to the state as the amount to tax you on? (You of course would get a copy of the form for your own records). Why have a device that tracks anything at all when there is already an odometer that does exactly what they want, track mileage! Use the existing services - mandatory state inspection - and bam, done. No tracking, no extra expenses.
Of course, I am not sure why you would want to tax mileage in the first place. I'd rather raise the gas taxes, and if people driving big 4-wheel-drive jeeps 1 hr each way to work can't afford it, then maybe it will finally prompt some rethinking about what cars we buy and how we do this whole jobs and commute thing. I would like to see more telecommuting, etc, for example. (But I would guess there would instead be an uprising from anti-tax people that want their big jeep rather than simply thinking basic economics, so probably wouldn't happen like this anyway).
As an Oregonian I can say right away, this is a partisan biased post. It isn't the big bad Government floating this idea to take yer moneys. Rather, we have lots and lots of more efficient vehicles, and there is a strong cultural push to move away from Big Oil. So we want to have our tax structure set up so that it is ready for that; if everybody bought a hybrid today, next year almost no road repairs would get done, because we wouldn't have the tax revenue. And with the same number of miles driven, there would be the exact same need for revenue. So if we can succeed in tying those related things together, then we'll have a forwards-looking tax code.
As for the meters, that is just for a pilot program the real program will not use that, it will use odometer checks. If you've ever lived in Oregon, the idea that we'd require GPS trackers is really funny. Left, right, center, nobody would support that here. And we have well trained politicians because when they do something weird, we just put it on the ballot and over-rule them. And in the State Legislature, people who pushed bills that got overturned by the voters get primaried out... every single time! That is how you do it, people.
Note to editors: if the story is running on foxnews, you're pushing a biased partisan version that won't have the facts.
How are the numbers read from the device that plugs into the car computer?
If it has a simple numeric display that the inspection agent reads and records every year, that seems to have little potential for abuse or privacy violations. But if they electronically read the device, then who knows what information it's reporting. It could be tracking every time you exceed the highway speed limit. Or might be tracking every panic stop. Or it could be recording how agressively you drive. Or recording what time of day you drive. Or any number of things that may be a privacy invasion.
It's not clear how this basic device handles driving on out of state roads, and if it doesn't have any special handling for this, then it seems that it could easily be replaced with an annual odometer reading.
If nothing else, this device will spur innovation in car computer hacks or OBD passthrough ports that restrict the miles passed through to the device.
I predicted this kind of crap 20 years ago when I saw what the Netherlands did with LPG cars -- they slapped a tax on it such that you had to drive 20km a year to break even.
This supports the theory they just want the money, and environmental concerns are a red herring.
Never forget that parsimonious theory: they just want your money so they can turn around and spend it on you to your, ummm, cheers?
"But...but how are they supposed to pay for roads?". Thus do you fall into their trap. It's about encouraging behaviors to ameliorate the looming end of the world, isn't it?
How's that theory holding up vs. this one?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I wonder how these devices will work on vehicles with positive ground. It looks like it might be time to invest in older British cars.
Time to offend someone
Geddes said privacy concerns could resurface should governments expand the program and use SmartPhone or apps to track movements and reward motorists who avoid congested roads and drive during off-peak hours.
Oregon (the body of people) has a reasonable case for wanting usage taxes to be based, at least in part, on mileage. The economic case makes sense, and there is a simple solution: Each time the data is collected, calculate the amount of money owed, show it to the driver for approval, and give the driver the option to retain the data for appeal. If the driver accepts the amount owed and declines the option for data retention, the data used to generate the amount owed is discarded -- never entered into the database.
If it is only about calculating the fees owed, then that is the only datapoint that needs to be retained once the driver has waived his right to contest the tax. Oregon gets to include mileage in its road use taxation model, and drivers retain the right to keep their travels free from government surveillance. Everybody wins except those with an ulterior motive.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
What you describe is the actual Oregon program, except for step 3 where we combine having traffic engineers that prioritize projects based on need with dividing some of it by County.
The crazy-making in the article falsely conflates the pilot program, which uses GPS because they can collect the data more easily, with the real policy issue that we're debating here, which will use the odometer readings.
The last one is the one I care about.
When did we stop counting the cost of government intrusion into our daily lives? When did people stop dismissing that sort of thing as flatly unacceptable? Is our need to try to force our neighbors to live the way we think in right so strong?
I shudder to think what this newfound love of intrusive government would turn into if the religious right retook the reigns of power. The same power given the government to turn everyone into good little progressives won't suddenly vanish if next the government wants to turn you into good little worshippers.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The OBDII port is there for on-board diagnostics and to facilitate repairs. It is NOT there as a facility for the State to invade peoples' privacy.
I use the OBDII port with Torque Pro to monitor my engine and take data. The only time I am not using it is when my Nissan dealer is using it as a means to facilitate repairing my vehicle. The port in my vehicle is not available to the State, or my Insurance Company, or anyone else to use, and fuck them if they think I am going to allow it.
Or when they pass a law saying you have to put one in.
Its not a contract where you negotiate the terms by which you accept - if they pass the law then that's what you have to do. It sucks, and there's a lot of laws on the books that I don't like nor agree with, but to a large degree you just have to suck it up and accept it.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Again people, this is OREGON, not California, there are NO YEARLY INSPECTIONS. You don't even get inspected when you renew your registration.
Sure, you could spend a fortune to institute them, but the DMV can't keep up with their current workload as it is. Go there for one simple thing when the open, and wait there for hours. If you're lucky, you get out in time for lunch. (Ok, it's not always that bad, but it's still pretty much on target.)
1979 Landcruiser.
Have gnu, will travel.
We're debating the article, which barely mentions odometers (and even then, in the context of being connected to a GPS).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
They can put in a tracking device when they pay for:
- the device
- the power it draws
- the added gas the weight requires
- and a per mile fee for access to my private life
Or when ever they pass a law requiring it. No sense getting up on your hind legs and thumping your chest (while posting as AC),
because as soon as its required you know damn well you will install it.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I remember in my state, when they advertised that the "new" seatbelt laws would not be primary reason for pulling a motorist over, they could only ticket you for not wearing a seatbelt IF they pulled you over for something else, and noticed you didn't have one on.
I think most people see the recent "Click-it-or-Ticket" ads on tv where they definitely say they'll pull you over if they see you not wearing a seatbelt.
Whether you agree with this (I wear my seatbelt)...this is a quick example of saying one thing to worn a law in with the public, and then soon expanding and changing it to allow more intrusion into your life.
Hell, these days the RICO act is being used in new imaginative ways not pictured when it was passed...and that's an old well known law structure.
I can surely see this tracking that is supposedly anonymous now....to be expanded (maybe with help of the Bluetooth article yesterday) to be used for real time tracking, I mean, would that be useful during an Amber Alert???
Golly gee...remember that both child abuse and terrorism are the new keys to the Constitution, and surely we'd be willing to trade a little more privacy for the sake of the children being abducted by terrorists, wouldn't we?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
When did we stop counting the cost of government intrusion into our daily lives?
Somewhere around the McCarthy era. Most definitely during Nixon's reign.
When did people stop dismissing that sort of thing as flatly unacceptable?
See above. Gotta watch out for the commies, dontcha know.
Is our need to try to force our neighbors to live the way we think in right so strong?
Yup. Witness the shunning and other measures of the Puritans and other interlopers to these lands. If you don't live the way they think you should live, you're outta here! Look at what happened to Roger Williams when he dared to suggest religious freedom and equality for all.
So long as people believe they won't be blown up on a plane or that the terrorist next door is stopped before they can commit their next act of violence, they will gladly, and willingly, give up any concept of limited government into their personal lives.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
A good portion of my life I worked construction, specifically building stores in malls around the country. I would drive to one job, stay in a hotel until it was finished, then drive to the next. I would easily drive 50,000 miles a year, with the vast majority of it not being in the state that the car was registered in. So, under this system, if I was an Oregon resident, I would have to pay the mileage tax based on my total miles to Oregon to maintain their roads, which I hardly used, while also paying gas taxes in all of the other states that I am actually driving in to maintain their respective road systems. Gee, it's hard to see how I might think this idea is complete bull shit, even without thinking of the privacy aspect.
Oregon Voter Initiatives are often controversial, but if they try and push this legislation through, It seems likely there will be a voter initiative to ban such tracking based taxation and it will pass easily. People don't like this sort of thing.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
But your idea doesn't involve tracking people or increasing the bureaucracy.
Or when they pass a law saying you have to put one in.
You don't have to put one in. If you don't like tracking, you can pay off the odometer reading. But if you put in the device, you will not be charged for driving on private roads.
This all seems really stupid to me. They should just raise the gas tax. Heavier vehicles use more gas, but they also cause more damage to the roads.
And if I happened to live in, say, Portland OR but routinely did summer road trips of a few thousand miles (say, visiting Portland Maine), I'm paying mileage tax on thousands of miles that I didn't drive in Oregon.
That sucks.
Or they could just do like almost every other state in the Union and just PASS A SALES TAX. This is an example of the kind of shit that happens when you don't have an equitable and sane tax system and put too many eggs in one basket. By relying way too much on the gas tax instead of a more balanced approach, Oregon fucked itself. They encouraged people to use less gas alright (a good thing), but now they have to come up with crazy shit like this law to replace it.
Either cut costs or pass a small sales tax, assholes. Slapping some weird device on everyone's car is NOT the sane approach to the problem.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Yeah, because the (D) would NEVER expand upon (R) ideas of bigger more intrusive government at all (or visa-versa) ..../sarcasm.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Wow, so you're ready to dive in with both feet into the false narrative! Even knowing it is false. Wow. Just wow.
I've always wanted a device that I could use to tell me how many miles my car has gone. Maybe even a way to track individual trips by resetting it. Perhaps, since it's tied to the car's computer system, it can also track fuel usage and display my average fuel economy since the last time I reset it.
Seriously, though. I propose that states that want to implement use tax just read the odometer. For people who do a lot of out-of-state driving, they can buy/lease/rent a widget that plugs into whatever (probably OBDII) and use that in lieu of the odometer reading.
Here in the EU we often envy the enormous economical advantage you residents of the U.S.A. get from having to pay only half (roughly) of what we pay for the same amount of gas. Better mobility means better economy. And now you're about to be taxed for MOVING around? Wow... a couple more things like this or the NSA+FISA fiasco, and the unemplyment figures here will look very different :)
Bluetooth tracking has been used in many different areas. It's not required that a connection be even made. Sure this is just an extra grab by gov't to track everyone. Because it's already done via cell phone or bluetooth (that's in your car stereo) or license plate readers or traffic cameras, etc etc doesn't make it right.
I never knew anybody who drove to Vancouver to buy gas.
True, the excise taxes are different between the two states. But I picture folks from Vancouver (I have two brothers there) coming to Oregon to buy gas just so they don't have to get out and pump it themselves. :-D
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
2 words: electric cars
They would be effectively freeloading. Sure, some might say 'good because carbon something something', but it's not like people who drive expensive EVs need subsidies.
I'm willing to wager that if they tried that tack, the smug little hippies who suggested this little tracking device would quickly want it shut down.
I don't think it's the smug little hippies that are pushing for this -- they are already driving high MPG hybrids or Electric vehicles and enjoy making the gas guzzlers pay higher taxes.
As a smug hippie, I'd rather see gas taxes rise proportional to the average MPG of cars on the road. The higher the average MPG, the higher the gas tax, keeping revenue constant, and making low mileage cars less and less attractive. A weight based tax can be added to car registrations so EV and Hybrid owners aren't off the hook for road maintenance costs. Gasoline powered vehicles aren't going away for decades so maybe in 15 years they'll have to look at a mileage based tax again (and if self-driving cars become commonplace. they can self-report their mileage).
There is no annual inspection in California either. Just smog check based on the age of the car. I'm not sure if smog occurs every year for anybody. You just get a notification for it when the registration renewal comes in. It's a small price to pay for not looking like Beijing when inversions occur.
. This is one of the big changes when you come from back East. In Virginia, I had two stickers on the windshield, one for inspection and another for tax. We also had emissions inspection every other year. In California you just have the registration sticker on your plate and smog.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Since when is it the "religious right" that wants to track people...in OREGON. I was recently told (on Slashdot) that even religious people in Oregon are careful not to identify themselves as religious. I can assure you that if this is coming from Oregon, it's more likely to come from Greenpeacers.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
Works over here (NZ) on diesel vehicles. When I had my last diesel I used to pay up front for kilometers (usually 10,000) for x amount of money. If you are ever stopped and found to not have enough kilometers to cover what is actually on your odometer you are fined. You can read about it here: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/registration-licensing/ruc/index.html I had no problem paying them and thought it was a fair way of taxing. Much better than taxing at the pump like they do with gas. It was depressing when I started driving (I'm originally from WV) and looking at the amount of tax clipped on at the pump.
sigs are like a box of chocolates, they all suck remove the underscores to email me
if they pass the law then that's what you have to do.
Yeah, because it's impossible for people to break the law.
but to a large degree you just have to suck it up and accept it.
I don't think that's a good idea.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
So you are saying that the hippies are in favor of having a 6000 lb SUV paying the same rate as they do for their Prius?
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
"...as Americans drive less" Isn't the fuel tax meant to cover roads and etc, whose maintenance is at least loosely tied to their actual use? Therefore, if Americans drive less, why is more tax money necessary? This is just a grab for general ledger, nothing else.
Seems to make far more sense to me.
Or they could just do like almost every other state in the Union and just PASS A SALES TAX.
I'm sure the more impoverished among us out here would really appreciate your suggestion. I'm doubly certain that all the stores in Portland (esp. those which sell large items, such as furniture) would appreciate seeing a huge drop in business from Washington State shoppers.
But, you know, unintended consequences and all that.
Incidentally, income and property taxes out here more than makes up for the lack of sales tax.
Now your cutting costs idea? I like that.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
because as soon as its required you know damn well you will install it.
You know that's false. How do I know this? I don't know, but it's true. Whatever I say about you is simply true, and you'll just have to accept that.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
This is nonsensical if gas tax does not work then tack the equivalent into vehicle registration fees and or state taxes.
With millions of people you don't need any per person accuracy to arrive at statistically the same financial result there is certainly no reason at all to know how many miles each person individually has driven if your only goal is to collect taxes. Fuel taxes have never been accurate. Even if you assumed the same fuel economy you have no idea on which roads the gas purchased is used. For all you know someone could commute from Washington or California and never spend a dime at the pump in Oregon. The requirement for accuracy is bullshit.
Behind most of these things there is almost always a device company pushing adoption with lobbying/campaign contributions. Find it, publicize it and vote the offenders out of office.
Just get rid of the Tax all together. Collect sales taxes and be done with it. Why do we need a tax on everything? The government should not be in the business of manipulating the people by taxing them at different rates based on their behavior.
So allow people to save gas receipts from other states as an offset. Most people that drove less than 1000 miles out of state wouldn't bother.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
You assume EVs will be expensive forever. And that fuel costs won't rise, making EVs seem cheap even at current prices.
These are assumptions, and are not guaranteed.
2 words: electric cars
Oregon has a $5000 tax credit for electric cars. It is ridiculous to both subsidize and tax the same thing. Instead of trying to tax electric cars, they could just eliminate or reduce the subsidy.
It depends on how it is implemented;
It tracking could be done as an op in where a standard rate would be applied if the data was taken from an odometer reading and discounts could be applied if the owner opted in to tracking.
Recording also makes a difference. For example there could be a running total of the number of miles traveled during off hours with no record of which day or exact time those trips were made. There could also be a system where the device queries a server to see if the vehicle is in a congested area and that mileage added to a running total of "congested area mileage" with no record of the exact location. Server logs may be an issue but that can be handled by proper rules.
Again people, this is OREGON, not California, there are NO YEARLY INSPECTIONS. You don't even get inspected when you renew your registration.
Sure, you could spend a fortune to institute them, but the DMV can't keep up with their current workload as it is. Go there for one simple thing when the open, and wait there for hours. If you're lucky, you get out in time for lunch. (Ok, it's not always that bad, but it's still pretty much on target.)
California inspection stations are privately owned and are no more overwhelmed with workload than any other service station. Do some states have only DMV owned inspections stations?
Actually, if you are working off the premise that gasoline taxes go towards maintenance of the roads, to offset the damage caused by those vehicles, then there should be no taxes on gasoline. Damage done to roadways is typically estimated in terms of axle weight to the fourth power. Your 1500lb/axle sedan is inconsequential compared to that 15000lb/axle semi-trailer, and they're running diesel. A fair tax would tax shipping, which would in turn trickle down to consumers as higher market prices, and serve to motivate improved efficiency in the shipping industry.
I'm doubly certain that all the stores in Portland (esp. those which sell large items, such as furniture) would appreciate seeing a huge drop in business from Washington State shoppers.
Oregon set this up. The fact that its own retailers have exploited a situation, and will be hurt by the fixing of said distortion, is its own fault. The way to deal with that is to implement it over time, e.g. add 0.5% per year until it is at a level commensurate with its neighbors.
or they *could* just have you report the miles driven via your ODOMETER and call it done.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Or when they pass a law saying you have to put one in.
Cool, already have one. It's called an ODOMETER :)
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Fuel consumption typically increases something less than linearly with vehicle weight. Rolling friction is linear, but at highway speeds, but bulk of friction is from aerodynamic drag, and assuming constant density, aerodynamic drag increases at roughly the 2/3 power of weight. On the other hand, heavier vehicles damage the roadway on the order of the fourth power of weight. As a result, fuel taxes result in passenger vehicles paying a disproportionately high percentage of the cost needed for roadway maintenance.
Poorer people have to life further away from major city centers due to housing costs.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Remember: Sales taxes are regressive
please, we still have the vote.
The Revolutionary War was not fought over taxes, it was fought over not having a say in the drafting of the laws to applying the tax. I.e. taxation without representation. Notice they don't care about the taxation itself, that's fine. Just give us the representation in crafting the tax law.
BR And every single citizen in the US (except DC) has that representation.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
That is the OP's point. Today, (some) Greenpeacers will see this as a good thing because it is a means to their ends. The OP is trying to warn them away by pointing out that their beloved leaders may not always be the ones in power. If and when that change happens, the Greenpeacers will be very unhappy with the outcome. It is now, while their beloved leaders are in power that they need to stop this kind of intrusion because if the balance of power does ever shift, it will be too late.
the gas tax is going away as cars get more efficient. Yes yes, raise the tax you say and you can make it up.
What about non-gas cars? Used to be so niche a segment as to not matter but very quickly it's going to be a significant portion.
Plan ahead and make it a 'use' tax (and frankly I had use taxes, terribly regressive). Maybe have a minimum free usage of say 20k miles; tax anything over that.
The gas tax is nothing but a crude tax on miles driven coupled by vehicle weight. Big vehicles usually get lower mileage and do more damage...hence they pay a higher tax than a motorcycle which gets 10x the mileage of a semi.
The odometer combined with vehicle registration is all we need to accomplish this. No privacy implications at all.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
No one is complaining about the taxes. They are complaining about changing the law in a way that could easily lead into tracking the movements of individuals. Perhaps, you see the Slashdot Libertarians as simple-minded because you don't understand what they are saying.
Incidentally, income and property taxes out here more than makes up for the lack of sales tax.
So this gas tax/per-mile tax are just extra unneeded taxes? If so, why not just repeal them?
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
EVs are hardly more expensive than ICE vehicles right now. Yes they're still a bit more, but instead why don't we focus our anger on the fatcats filling their vehicles with hyper-expensive antique dinosaur juice? Such decadence!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Ever heard "optimise for the general case"? How many EVs are on the road? How long before the number of EVs on the road comes close to decreases in number of miles driven or gas milage increases on combustion based cars in terms of "missing" tax revenue?
You can use the roads without paying much tax by riding a bicycle too. Or a moped/scooter in many places...or by walking. Only the last of those is likely to represent a significant loophole in terms of potential revenue. Maybe they should tax sneakers and shoes? Will that make being barefoot a loophole?
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Taxing by Miles Driven is absolute nonsense when discussing 'road wear'. The wear on the road rises exponentially as the weight of the vehicle increases. This must be included or all the light cars are subsidizing the wear caused by the heavy ones. So accounting for the weight of the vehicle, we need to come up with units of (weight * distance) For Example, A Harley that drives a thousand miles would get something like ( 1000 lbs * 1000 miles ) = 1,000,000 lb*miles And, a Semi Truck that drives a thousand miles would get something like ( 50,000 lbs * 1000 miles ) = 50,000,000 lb*miles The tax rate would increase with the weight of the vehicle, accounting for the fact that the wear is exponentially growing with weight... Then you take your 'lb*miles' value and multiply by the tax rate. This is at least not completely moronic... but probably still doesn't reflect the true reality of the situation.
You know you can set those to any value you like right, with a set of tweezers? And there are always new gauge clusters to be had at the auto wreckers.
If the government did that with me, id simply have two gauge clusters and swap them out (takes maybe 20 minutes) every time before I had to go in for my evaluation.
As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
Greenpeacers see this as a good thing?? Surely you mean "big oil"?
No "greenpeacer" would see these sort of tax reliefs on fuel-hungry cars as a Good Thing, surely. Because that is precisely what a milage-based tax is.
The gov already has an answer to privacy concerns like this. They have already implemented it. I do, for the record, dislike and distrust it, but, they have one: Seal the records.
An accountant friend explained to me once why a bookie he knows reports 100% of his income to the IRS, including the illegal cash business. The reasoning was simple, if the police suspect an illegal business but can't fully prove it, they can ask the IRS to check out whether it looks like you evaded taxes.
Now, the police can't access your records, the IRS, by law, must keep those records secret. However, they can, review and audit themselves. So, the police can tip off the IRS that you have an illegal business, but if you reported all the income, all the IRS can do is say "Everything looks in order".
So simple: Seal the records with a traffic tax agency, who is forbidden by law from releasing any personally identifying information, except for the purpose of prosecuting evasion of the taxes which they are charged with collecting.... say until.... 75 years after the death of the identified individual.
Then they will secretly share it all with the NSA, who will use it to send anonymous tips to law enforcement to built parallel evidence chains against people without revealing where the tip came from. No problem!
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Actually, if you are working off the premise that gasoline taxes go towards maintenance of the roads, to offset the damage caused by those vehicles, then there should be no taxes on gasoline.
Leaving aside issues of axle weight and the wear on the road infrastructure, every time I take my car in for its smog check, the mileage is recorded along with the VIN and engine number. That happens every other year, and averaging that distance across the interval since the last smog check would give an average miles per day, which produces an annual miles-driven value for a per-mile tax without any ability to track the location of the vehicle. And for the inevitable 'but this doesn't account for the car being driven out of state' objections, neither does the proposed mileage meters; you can't tell where the car is being driven without being able to track where the car is. And this data is already being collected; there is no additional recordkeeping involved.
the gas tax is going away as cars get more efficient. Yes yes, raise the tax you say and you can make it up. What about non-gas cars? Used to be so niche a segment as to not matter but very quickly it's going to be a significant portion. Plan ahead and make it a 'use' tax (and frankly I had use taxes, terribly regressive). Maybe have a minimum free usage of say 20k miles; tax anything over that. The gas tax is nothing but a crude tax on miles driven coupled by vehicle weight. Big vehicles usually get lower mileage and do more damage...hence they pay a higher tax than a motorcycle which gets 10x the mileage of a semi. The odometer combined with vehicle registration is all we need to accomplish this. No privacy implications at all.
Every time I bring up the "Use the odometer" statement, I get a rash of comments saying "That doesn't properly account for the edge case".
There are many non-intrusive ways to tax. Unless you actually like totalitarianism (and many people do these days), you'd pick the least intrusive way to provide the taxes to pay for the roads (which, frankly, are mostly paid for by the federal government giving money to the states).
Your knee-jerk totalitarian-friendly response actually scares me. Are you really so emotionally invested in giving the government ever more power to track us that you'd fight back against a less intrusive way to pay? Or did you just not think it through?
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You would risk a Federal felony to evade a tax? For something so trivial to be caught at? Sure you would.
Why? Does the milage-based tax somehow imply the tax on the fuel itself would go down?
Don't bet on it. The only thing the government is less likely let go of once they have it in their hands, than power, is money.
Remember that Spanish-American war (1898) telephone tax? They held onto that for over 100 years.
Curious, when those elected just do the bidding of the special interests groups, how do you come to the conclusion that we have representation? Also, let's not discount the 3% tax as being one of the reasons for the revolution. After all, if it were a law that was deemed beneficial to the settlers, the revolution may not have happened (or at least, might have been postponed). In other words, the revolution was fought because lack of representation AND laws that were passed that the colonists didn't like.
I'm guessing this will fail legal tests at the federal level due to interstate commerce laws and privacy, but I could be wrong... from the article:
The state can't tax out-of-state anything, generally, but certainly not an activity (like driving) performed out of state (buying something online and shipping it in-state would be different). It's true that technology could allow them to determine the difference, as ShanghaiBill implied, but the court could rule that since there is no way to do this without infringing privacy (which itself is legally grey where driving is concerned), that the law loses based on the catch-22. At best, it could be forced to allow self-reporting of non-taxable miles (much like many states rely on self-reporting of out-of-state purchases for use-tax purposes).
It's an interesting conflict, however, that will certainly go to the judicial system to sort out, if the law ever passes.
The odometer is meaningless other then car value. It doesnt say WHERE the car was driven. I could have a farm truck that i use to get out to my back forty and occasionally ride into town. Do i need to pay for all those miles, including the ones i put in on my own private 'roads'?
Good-bye
Hybrid cars are heavier and use less gas.
That's the problem, its in TFS.
Electric cars still cause road wear, but use 0 petrol.
Odomoeter based systems assume that all cars are driven on public land at all times and this is NOT THE CASE at all. First of all, to make your plan work, the meter would have to stop every time i enter private property with my car.
Good-bye
How will they maintain these slim margins if they have to oversee vehicle trackers?
The problem for lawmakers is that the existing per-gallon gas tax has hit a point of diminishing returns
Because when you do exactly nothing to get 30-40 cents a gallon for someone elses product and distribution diminishing returns is really meaningful.
You can be sure they will keep their 100% profit tax per gallon and tax the consumer per mile.
Federal and state payroll and income taxes, sales taxes, per-capita taxes, vehicle inspection and registration fees, and capital gains off the top of my head. The immediate thing would be to raise registration fees to offset lower revenues from gas sales rather than a new and highly invasive per-km driven tax.
And every single citizen in the US (except DC) has that representation.
I didn't think anyone beyond an 8th grade civics class actually still believed that.
What's next, a suggestion to fix the economy by using cloning tech to make teeth, and let the tooth fairy pull us out of it?
For everyone who lives next to Oregon.
Cross the border to fill up and pay no petrol tax.
[citation needed]
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Privacy concerns aside, I think this may affect poorer people more than the affluent.
I base my opinion on some of the places I use to work. The offices, which were usually HQ or some other large corporate office, were always in very affluent areas. Great for professionals but not affordable for the laborers who worked in the restaurants and malls and such surrounding the offices. The affordable housing was further away, and if this kind of tax is passed it is going to affect the people who cannot afford to move closer to their job, or do not have the ability to get a job closer to where they live (low income areas usually have much less opportunity for employment).
There are a lot of people who don't really have many good options for living close to their place of employment. This kind of tax would unfairly impact them while sparing those who can afford to uproot and live closer to their place of employment.
I, for one am a long time Apple computer hater. I don't understand their appeal, or the Apple Tax(tm) and would never pay money for one of their laptops or desktops. That being said, I fucking love their mobile hardware. I got an iPhone 3Gs shortly after they were released and got all the non-S versions on launch day since. I bought an iPad 1 shortly before the 2 came out, not being familiar with Apple's release schedule... kicking myself a bit, I still really enjoyed the light form factor for doing webby stuff from bed or the couch. Now that my iPad 1 is showing serious signs of aging, I'm definitely looking forward to buying either a Mini with retina or go all in for an iPad Air.. These tablets are just really well made, and although I love open source and linux, I just can't stand using any version of Android. It just turns me off, I'm not sure if its the UI or.. what, I just don't like the feel of Android on a phone or a tablet.
The closer and closer these tablets come to paper thin the more excited I become. Time to pawn off some household items to drop $500 on just the baseline model of the iPad Air...
640k ought to be enough for anyone.
Not completely thought out yet, this would probably require a bit of additional refinement, but...
Since we pay gas tax at the pump, why not have ev chargers ding you a tax / kwh? Report that back to the electric co and it could show up on your bill.
-- "Oh. This guy again."
Mileage doesn't work because you get taxed when you drive out of state. GPS doesn't work because it's big brother in your car and it's a political nightmare. Refusing to acknowledge that non gas using vehicles cause wear and tear also doesn't work, especially as society shifts towards using more and more of them.
The reality is that every vehicle on the road has a certain impact. The only way to avoid double taxation for fuel with a mileage based tax is to simply charge a large annual fee for the license tab. You then couple this with repealing the gas tax entirely so that you aren't taxing people twice over. You could even make it affordable by putting the price into peoples taxes and letting people take payroll deductions so that they don't get hit with large fees every year.
You can then charge a given amount based on the weight of the vehicle. Using the weight of the vehicle is arguably the fairest way to do this as the vehicles weight is the largest contributing factor to the amount of wear and tear it causes to infrastructure. This way commercial vehicles get charged appropriately for the greater wear and tear they inflict while small vehicles that don't cause a lot of wear and tear get charged less.
Everyone uses the road system and it's only fair that everyone pays for it. Think about, what happens if the dreams of Tesla motors and similar companies are realized and were no longer using gas at all?
It doesn't matter. Whoever has control today is not guaranteed to be the people who have control tomorrow. No matter who is in control, if you agree with this because they are one of 'your guys', you have a problem when the power structure shifts.
Let them claim an exemption and tell them to keep their receipts.
Make them either fix it or pay based on some assumed/average number of miles?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Federal and state payroll and income taxes, sales taxes, per-capita taxes, vehicle inspection and registration fees, and capital gains off the top of my head
Notice I said "fair share" and not "any tax". They don't pay a $0.30/gallon tax on fuel. That is a big tax break for going electric and a lot of revenue lost that would go to road construction.
The immediate thing would be to raise registration fees to offset lower revenues from gas sales rather than a new and highly invasive per-km driven tax.
Different people drive different distances. How would one come up with a fair price for increasing registration fee. People who do not drive much would be overcharged and people who drive a lot would be undercharged.
Then start an annual odo inspection and use existing auto mechanic / dealers as the inspection points with huge penalties for fraud.
I'm not a fan of Virginia's safety inspections because I know they are pointless, but at least they let you do them, along with emissions inspections, at any number of local mechanic shops. So the infrastructure is built in and usually pretty speedy. That is as opposed to NJ inspections which at least in the 80's was a huge state run building with long lines that was dreaded by all.
Or Ohio who decided that the best way to start their emissions program in the late 90's (to avoid EPA sanctions for polluted counties) was to build from scratch an entire government run infrastructure at a huge cost. That was despite MANY studies showing they could do it cheaper, faster AND more effective by deploying mobile sniffers and literally paying people to fix their cars / buying out very old lost cause vehicles. Basically take care of the 10% of the cars making 90% of the pollution and let everyone else go about their day.
Anyway the point is, it does NOT have to be that hard or expensive to do an annual odo check. As to the accounting burden, it doesn't need to be DMV, it would be the treasury since they have to incorporate it into their tax system and all they need to know is one single number; miles driven. You know, EXACTLY like they have to do it using any other method of counting mileage.
Ideally they'ed even let you pre-pay with withholdings and let you adjust those withholdings based on expected miles per year. Don't own a car, don't withhold at all. Own two cars and drive 30k/yr, you might want to let them know that so you don't have sticker-shock when it comes time to pay that gas tax.
If you can't be good, be good at it!
You forgot Biodiesel. There have been stories for years of people being fined for using biodiesel in their vehicle since it isn't taxed. If you are going to run biofuel don't put a bumper sticker telling the man you are sticking it to him or he will stick you back.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Do some states have only DMV owned inspections stations?
Yup. Maryland at least. I think D.C. too.
What's your point? You're already paying the gas tax for those miles now. No difference.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Private roads. You know what? the gas tax still applies to those too. So no difference.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Didn't say it was easy. Things worth keeping are 'hard'. But you clearly HAVE the power to change the system. Now get your ass outside and convince your neighbors likewise. It's how the 'process' works.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Are we looking at a polluted system? Sure, but the fundamentals are still in tact and is inherently fixable with proper participation.
That last bit is probably the hardest though.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
No smog testing here but I still conceed the point of much less intrusive methods.
True since a gas tax on an electric car is basically a subsidy. Though I don't think most owners realize it.
Many good point but the reality is simple. The more efficient vehicles get the less revenue to maintain the roads. How do you deal with out of state driving such as commercial rigs registered here that travel the country? How do you deal with people from other states if there is no similar system. We have lots of people who live in Washington but cross into Oregon. 1) Put up tolls for any Washington registered drivers entering Oregon and make the toll sufficient to cover the bridge and roads. 2) Require a GPS device that only tracks mileage within specific coordinates but does not retain location history on all Oregon vehicles. I would however use RFID to report this information so when you pass certain roads it updates the count and you can be billed monthly. If you don't want to do this or never hit a checkpoint then you can submit estimates and payments and true up when you register your vehicle. This way you don't end up with a 5k bill just to register your vehicle. 3) Remove all state taxes from our gas stations for any vehicle with the installed device. This is the only way to fairly cover it. It levels the ground for the majority and ensures that out of state drivers contribute as well. If these devices were standard and there was reciprocity across state lines you'd simple have the device track by state and pay to each state accordingly. Furthermore i'm sick of Oregon paying the tab for the bridges when they are 95% of the time used by Washington residents. We pay for it out of our fuel taxes and if they only fill up in Washington they flood our roads, cause huge traffic jams, and pay nothing to maintain or upgrade them.
Suppose you, as a government, perceive a need to tax something car-related. From almost any point of view (environmental, privacy, overhead cost, administrative complexity,...), the logical thing to do would be to tax the fuel (or increase that tax). Any point of view but that of the oil industry, that is. This makes the argument pretty compelling that behind closed doors, those in charge in Oregon probably wanted an increased fuel tax, only to see it commuted (pun not intended) to a milage tax under pressure from the oil lobby.
In any other country, such would be labeled "corruption". It's easy to have one of the lower corruption rates in the world if you redefine the term...
You are right, but under this new scheme, that would be highly improper. If they want that high resolution data of of our driving usage they MUST take into account these things. Lets make a smarter future, no?
Good-bye
neither does the proposed mileage meters; you can't tell where the car is being driven without being able to track where the car is.
Did you read the article, or any of the other news about these proposals? Yes, they CAN tell where the car is being driven; that's the whole point. They're going to put a GPS unit in your car so they can record where exactly it's been driven, because they can't legally tax you for mileage out-of-state, or on private roads, so they need GPS to tell when you're actually driving on public roads in-state.
I'm about as religiously conservative as they come, and I think you've got the wrong villain in you sights. Cradle to grave monitoring and control is a collectivist policy, which like much of current liberal thinking, accepts the ceding of privacy to the state as a contemporary norm. I've never talked to a conservative Christian in any of my circles having the point of view that the state should be entrusted with the right to inspect our daily lives. Rather, they tend to strongly advocate personal freedom, responsibility, and privacy. If you blame the religious conservatives for this sort of thing and they all go away, all you'll have left are the government and those who think government is pretty much the equivalent of God. Of course, I'm sure you'll eventually come to terms with this since there isn't a liberal around who, once they find that they can surreptitiously follow the creationists or any other of their selected villains around, wouldn't love to exercise their omnipotence.
You are right that they are not paying, but they aren't damaging the roads either. A light compact electric car does very little damage to the roads compared to a large truck or a super-sized SUV. Additionally, state governments and the US government have been subsidising electric vehicles for a while based on the principle of weaning us off of our petroleum habit. This has been a good thing. Allowing electric cars to dodge the fuel tax a little longer doesn't seem like a bad thing to me. It helps promote electric cars. All of this is probably moot anyway. Oregon has a great voter initiative process. The citizens of Oregon have a long history of not being pushed around by Salem bureaucrats. The second they pass a law tracking cars, an initiative will be filed to repeal it. It will pass by a two to one margin.
No, you're paying the gas tax for your usage of gasoline as a fuel. You're not paying by the mile. Yes, it just so happens that the more miles you drive, the more fuel you consume, but you also use more fuel if you have a bigger/more-guzzling vehicle, and there's no explicit tax on EPA mileage ratings either. For them to institute a per-mile tax inside a state for public roads, they have to track you so they know how many miles you've driven on public roads inside the state.
"They can put in a tracking device when they pay for:
- the device
- the power it draws
- the added gas the weight requires
- and a per mile fee for access to my private life"
They pay exactly as much as they did pay for the photograph on your license, the test you took, the glasses you have to use, the safety-belts you have to wear, the lights that show your position to others, the insurance you have to buy and other things you could do without.
Sometimes they even stop you and have you touch your nose for the fun of it, when you are in a hurry.
Shhhhh. I'm trying to scare progressive here. Could you try growling a little and threaten to outlaw homosexuality? Thanks.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
" When did people stop dismissing that sort of thing as flatly unacceptable? "
They could just raise taxes, but that would be _really_ unacceptable, no?
So this is plan B.
To get your petrol there for your gas tank to hold, they have to push VERY heavy trucks along a lot of public roads. Large oil powered or coal powered stations take it by pipe or rail, avoiding most of that.
So add the tax on to the trucker getting the petrol to where you want it and that tax must remain on the gasoline you use.
If it's really about road maintenance/wear.
(note: you also need to cover the costs of policing and the costs of accidents at least to the cost of the road)
That would seem to reward someone that lives close to a refinery at the expense of those that live farther away regardless of their actual road usage. My gasoline comes in by boat (as crude oil) and is refined around 25 miles from where I live, while someone that lives farther inland might have their gas trucked 100 miles or more.
Some people still use old polluting 20th-century technology that results in a lot of money being given to shady figures in the middle east who are suspected of passing it on to known terrorist organizations (and we're not even talking about climate change yet). You're absolutely right that making the people who use said old technology carry a disproportionate share of the burden of road maintenance is not fair in the absolute sense of the word, but if you're really gonna pick nits, neither are a lot of other taxes. A fuel tax does, however, incentivize people to move to 21st-century technology that doesn't carry the aforementioned disadvantages. And it introduces that incentive in a relatively free-market fashion; you just change one of the boundary conditions (cost of fuel) and allow the market to adapt however it sees fit, which seems less of a heavy-handed regulatory interference than the current administration's plan to gradually outlaw the most fuel-inefficient cars. Incidentally, it's also administratively simpler, easier on people's privacy, and carries less overhead cost to implement. Unless you're a dug-in innovation-averse multibillion-dollar industry, what's not to like?
What's your point? You're already paying the gas tax for those miles now. No difference.
If a vehicle is not used on public roads, the gas is not required to be taxed. Farm vehicles and vehicles used on private roads can buy special purple gas that is not taxed. If you are caught using purple gas on a public road, you can expect to pay some severe penalties.
Color is added so that heating oil and diesel fuel can be taxed differently. Yet I can still put heating fuel in a truck, I just get fined if I get caught.
Require every car with a plug to use a special meter that collects tax on electricity differently, part of the cost of owning an electric car anyway is to be able to plug it in. Maybe even an RFID tag in the plug so the car can report where the 'fuel' was purchased so it can be audited/proven taxes are being collected. Someone can always cheat, but they get fined if they get caught. This way vehicles that get great mileage can continue to pay reduced rates to encourage using cars with low MPG (even though I don't think such a method works). Tax rates can then be set at both the federal and national level as desired.
I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
Everytime I see the regressive aspect as a counterpoint to sales tax it normally follows with discussion of an increase in taxes by the way of the income tax.
Its a big difference when a working person gets taxed a couple thousand more a year, and a fortune 500 company gets a billion dollar refund.
Lets stop stepping on the little guy to close state taxes, when corps are using federal tax rule loopholes to avoid taxes.
I can't be the only one that read the headline as Oregon Extends Push To Track Taxi Drivers Per Mile.
You know you can set those to any value you like right, with a set of tweezers? And there are always new gauge clusters to be had at the auto wreckers.
If the government did that with me, id simply have two gauge clusters and swap them out (takes maybe 20 minutes) every time before I had to go in for my evaluation.
Its already against the law to tamper with odometers if the intent is to defraud. Its also very easy to detect.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I'm doubly certain that all the stores in Portland (esp. those which sell large items, such as furniture) would appreciate seeing a huge drop in business from Washington State shoppers.
Oregon set this up. The fact that its own retailers have exploited a situation, and will be hurt by the fixing of said distortion, is its own fault. The way to deal with that is to implement it over time, e.g. add 0.5% per year until it is at a level commensurate with its neighbors.
And that's how we test new ideas to see which is a better model, and allow other states to make their own choices in how they will deal with their problems!
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Next time I'll vote Demublican!
If the bastards fail me then that proves the Repocrats were right.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Who would think that solons in Oregon have bankrupted the state to such an extent that this would be needed. I thought that this was just a problem in the east.
You just know that there will be lots of exemptions for certain politicians / government agencies and their buddies. Only the poor slobs who do not have political pull will have to put up with this crap.
No. The gas tax is NOT going way.
There's no way in hell, even in a more fuel efficient society, that the government is going to give up even a CENT of possible revenue.
If you think your government, from the goodness of their heart, are going to lighten your financial burdens in any way, shape or form, you're fucking deluded.
Yes, in a more fuel efficient society, the gas tax becomes less of a burden. That's not the same thing as "going away".
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Yes we do have the power to change the system. Voting is not going to get that done, though. The only way to make any real change is through education of the general populace as to *what* the problems are. That's hard to do, but as you said, just because it's hard doesn't mean we shouldn't try. People get the government they deserve and right now, we deserve this government, sad to say.
Btw, nice sig.
The other problem is making it simple lets tax payers see what's going on. No government would want that.
Finally a use for tinfoil other than on my head: a GPS that cannot see the sky won't work. Or I could give it a nice coat of paint that has some aluminum powder mixed in. Or the wire powering the system could "wear out" by "rubbing" against another "moving part". ---- If they want to raise enough funds, all they have to do is eliminate all free curbside parking in the city. They don't even have to charge that much: $.25/hour will do it.
Yeah, right.
If you assume that consumption of gas is independent of price (totally ineslastic demand), then raising the tax will increase revenue. But in the real world, when prices go up consumption goes down, and at current prices it is very well possible that raising the tax rate will lower consumption enought to lower revenue -- at which point lowering the rate would be the way to raise more revenue.
The problem with a gas tax is that as energy-efficient vehicles become more common, the state's expenses (road maintenance) are becoming less and less correlated with fuel consumption. But since tracking drivers to collect actual usage tax is far worse, I agree that gas taxes are better.
Anybody who understood basic high school kinetics should be saying the same thing!
Note: F= ma also is impacted by the speed limit. You could make heavier stuff go slower. Such as those massive farm machines or houses or industrial machines that take up 1.5 lanes of the highway. They are already a problem, moving slower wouldn't hurt.
The reality is that boat and train are BETTER ways to transport heavy items and they would be cheaper if WE didn't significantly subsidize trucking in our unfairly slanted highway taxes.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The neighbor to the north (WA) has a sales tax of almost 10%, but they are one of a handful of states that do NOT have a state income tax. That's why WA and OR are roughly comparable. One has sales tax, one has income tax. If OR added a sales tax, the financial burden on its citizens would be as oppressive as neighboring socialist hellhole to the south, CA. OR simply does not have the population density nor the amount of industry that would enable CA-levels of taxpayer-rape, and they certainly don't have the infrastructure to justify it. (most of OR is uninhabited desert and mountain ranges. Nearly everyone lives along the coast, the Columbia river, or the I-5 corridor)
The proposed vehicle usage increase is probably not about a lack of existing revenue to fix roads anyway. I'm guessing that they just want more money to spend on the kind of hippie, nanny-state bullshit they are famous for.
Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
. . .
Don't bet on it. The only thing the government is less likely let go of once they have it in their hands, than power, is money.
. . .
Let's be very clear on this: Money IS Power.
This is not a figure of speech. Exactly what is money? You can define it by what it looks like and what we use it for but that dances around the simple truth:
Money is numerical denomination of power. If I have two simoleons I can convince someone to give me twice as much of something then if I have just offer just one. That "something" may be physical goods, time, or labor.
Money is a physical representation of power.
Uh, as an Oregonian the reason is because more than most states Oregon is embracing electric cars and the green economy more than any other state. Thre is a rapidly expanding network of electric chargers that would make California jealous. I see mroe and more Nissan Leaf's out there. There is even a Tesla in my parking lot. So, essentially, there has to be another way to pay for the highway maintenance. What is unfair is the fact that all those people travelling through the state are not going to be paying their fair share. So Oregonians areshoulding everything instead of everyone. Re: privacy Liberals are just as paranoid of government tracking them (if not more so) than conservatives. Conservatives don't mind being tracked if it is to protect the homeland. Just look at all the shit with the patriot act and various other stuff Bush has put out there. Now, regardless someone still have to op
Have fun with all the tampering fines they slap on you when the data from your GPS is bad. You don't really think they're going to buy your excuses, do you?
No it doesn't. You can buy untaxed dyed diesel fuel for use only on private property (commonly used in farm equipment) and if you're a regular user of gasoline on private property (commonly construction vehicles that are trucked from site to site) you can get your gas taxes refunded. Since we're talking about Oregon, here's their forms.
Does Apple sell cars in Oregon now?
You are right that they are not paying, but they aren't damaging the roads either.
While vehicle weight is one factor it is not the only factor. While I agree that heavier vehicles should pay more I don't believe electric vehicles should pay nothing. Weather causes damage. Roads need to be expanded to handle more traffic.
Additionally, state governments and the US government have been subsidising electric vehicles for a while based on the principle of weaning us off of our petroleum habit.
When we are weaned off of petroleum and the subsidies go away causing a big jump in transportation costs then what? What about the years of under-funding road repairs due to the decrease in fuel tax revenue?
The problem for lawmakers is that the existing per-gallon gas tax has hit a point of diminishing returns, as Americans drive less ...
If people are driving less, maybe we don't need to spend as much money building and maintaining roads.
So there's an exception to construction vehicles that are never driven on public roads....why pray tell wouldn't that exact same exception exist under the new system?
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
You're missing the point. Yes they want high resolution data, I'm saying specifically they don't NEED that to get what they get now. The odometer can give them everything they need to get accurate *enough* data to properly assign people's reasonable tax.
Smarter future = not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Sure it might make sense to a bean counter that we can place every car on every road and route the appropriate tax revenue to the district that road is in - just like it made sense once upon a time for business travelers to submit receipts for absolutely every expense and get reimbursed. Very detailed and you can prevent unauthorized expenses like strip clubs and such. And a whole lot of overhead for everybody.
Reality? Going to Tampa on a trip? Here's X dollars in Cost-Of-Travel assessment to spend how you like. Simpler and easier for everyone involved.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
You're not paying by the mile.
Yes, it just so happens that the more miles you drive, the more fuel you consume
So, yes you are paying by the mile. With the added benefit that big vehicles pay more because they do more damage to the road. So not only are you paying by the mile 'now', it's also adjusting for vehicle size and weight.
Odometer + type of vehicle covers that exactly.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
The odometer is meaningless other then car value. It doesnt say WHERE the car was driven. I could have a farm truck that i use to get out to my back forty and occasionally ride into town. Do i need to pay for all those miles, including the ones i put in on my own private 'roads'?
If you're driving your farm truck exclusively on private roads or off-road, then it is currently eligible to be registered as a farm vehicle, which could be exempt from a per-mile tax.
If the truck is used to ride into town on a public road, then even under the current system a use tax is supposed to be paid on those miles.
I would be all for a 'per-mile' system, as long as the current 'per-gallon' system went away, (we all know it won't). And for all of the examples of the "what if?" scenarios in this thread, the current per-gallon system is just as broken.
So there's an exception to construction vehicles that are never driven on public roads....why pray tell wouldn't that exact same exception exist under the new system?
It does. That is the whole point of the GPS tracker ... to prove you actually drove on private roads or farmland. If you don't care about that, then you do not need a tracker and can just pay the tax according to your odometer reading. 98% of drivers will not need a tracker because they don't drive on private land enough to matter.
For people not to drive. And Auto business needs less car buyers.
No.
They will simply add this as another tax, and leave the gas tax in to "punish" those who don't drive fuel efficient cars.,
Greenpeacers see this as a good thing?? Surely you mean "big oil"? No "greenpeacer" would see these sort of tax reliefs on fuel-hungry cars as a Good Thing, surely. Because that is precisely what a milage-based tax is.
I don't think they mean this as a substitute for the gas tax, but additional to it. This isn't about policy, but money for the state coffers. Eventually (sooner than we think), it will be about NSA style civilian monitoring. (even if they claim otherwise)
You are right, though. From an environmental perspective, if you want to encourage both less driving, and fuel efficiency, gas tax is the way to go. Mileage tax only encourages less driving. Compared to gas tax, it permits fuel hogs to guzzle to their hearts' content.
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
Every time I hear the phrase "fair share", I get defensive.
Because generally, "fair share" means I get screwed, and someone else pleading poverty/downtroddeness/bad childhood gets my stuff. Often with them being better off than me at the start of all this fair sharing.
Why is it that people get this Pollyanna idea that a meaningful percentage of government spending goes to actually accomplishing meaningful expenditures such as, "building and maintaining roads and bridges"?
... ...] ... ...]
The vast, vast, VAST majority of spending goes to administration. Most of that "administration" is used to administrate other administrators. The quantity of money that is used to accomplish ANYTHING by a government entity is nothing short of astounding.
A simple roadwork example: A public works engineer explained to me the cost of converting a simple 90 degree intersection of two 2-lane roads, from Stop signs to a traffic light. The bill for the studies, planning, engineering, purchasing, and installation?
[... wait for it
Total cost was $250,000
[... wait for it
in 1990 dollars.
People complain that schools don't have enough money. Bull! School districts get plenty of money but the quantity of administration has grown to the point where the majority of money goes to support the disproportionately large percentage of "administrators" who of course, because they are in positions of power, command higher salaries. And at the same time they don't actually educate a single child.
Think I'm exaggerating? Download the 2011-2012 report: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/currentexpense.asp
Column "F" is the dollars that are spent annually per student. The statewide calculation works out to $8382 (cell F962). Figure a small average class size of 20 children and that works out to $167640. For that kind of money don't you think you could hire a well paid teacher, get a great building, fill the classroom with new books each year, buy cheap desks every few years, have a part time assistant, pay the electric bill, and in the end make one hell of a profit? Then to add to it, instead of just doing one room of 20 kids, do 20 rooms of 20 kids. If you couldn't siphon off an astounding quantity of money while vastly improving the service you aren't trying.
Well an astounding quantity of money IS being siphoned off by extraneous administration (which describes most of government). And it isn't providing anything to justify the burden to the taxpayer.
In reality class sizes are more like 30+ children ($251460) so we are really being bilked. BTW - This isn't hard to see if you are looking. I haven't been studying this or working in the industry. I found and calculated ALL of these numbers while I was writing this post so it isn't hard to figure out and see that we are being used.
JUST RAISE THE DAMN GAS TAX!
Seriously, I can't believe that the government is going to setup yet ANOTHER giant bureaucracy that will effectively track our movements, when the obvious solution is to raise the gas tax rate to account for improved fuel efficiency.
If you Oregonians don't vote out every single nimrod that votes to even look into this boondoggle of an idea, you get what you deserve...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the federal government shoulder some of that burden through funding for Interstate repairs and the like? I'm genuinely curious, as I live on the opposite side of the country. If I pay federal taxes haven't I then paid my "fair share" as you call it? It seems to me that this sort of thing would drive down tourism in the long run, as well.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
There is an Oregon gas tax but it's a bit lower than Washington's or California's. Oregon's gas tax proceeds are strictly limited (by voter passed initiative) to only being spent on highway projects. But I have a neighbor who owns a Nissan Leaf and another that owns a Volt and neither of them are paying any gas tax to help cover the cost of the roads they use. A general sales tax would not change that.
BTW, I like that Oregon doesn't have sales tax and have voted against implementing them when it's come up.
Aren't the odometers on most modern vehicles electronic now? If you want to change those you're going to need an app but I think the electronic odometers are built to preclude being reset (and I'm not talking about the trip odometers).
So are gas and mileage taxes.
They're going to put a GPS unit in your car so they can record where exactly it's been driven, because they can't legally tax you for mileage out-of-state, or on private roads, so they need GPS to tell when you're actually driving on public roads in-state.
So, if it is illegal, then how do they reimburse me for my current gas tax when I drive out of state or on private roads, or just run my engine all day in the garage?
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Maybe they should tax sneakers and shoes?
They already do in most jurisdictions.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Since we pay gas tax at the pump, why not have ev chargers ding you a tax / kwh? Report that back to the electric co and it could show up on your bill.
But some lousy tax evader will probably charge off his home electricity!
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
That is the whole point of the GPS tracker ... to prove you actually drove on private roads or farmland.
Read the article. It's expressly to 'replace' the gas tax, so they want everybody to have one.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
How does a mileage meter know that you're on a private road without some way to locate the vehicle?
The same way your gas tank does. ie., it doesn't. And yet you still have to pay the taxes even if you drive on your driveway or on private roads, or out of state, or wherever. The same edge cases that exist today without a GPS could exist in the future without a GPS.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
It's not illegal now because they're taxing the gas, not your mileage. There is no tax currently for mileage, that's what you people don't seem to understand. A gas tax is not the same thing as a mileage tax.
If they tax the mileage, they can't legally tax you on miles driven out-of-state. Only the Federal government is allowed to do that.
Sounds like you should live in WA and shop in OR. Except, of course, you would still have to pay Use Tax in WA on the item.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
As a smug hippie, I'd rather see gas taxes rise proportional to the average MPG of cars on the road. The higher the average MPG, the higher the gas tax, keeping revenue constant, and making low mileage cars less and less attractive.
So basically, no matter good your gas mileage is, you pay the same lump amount? I don't see how that encourages better gas mileage. Or did you mean inversely proportional? If so, that is the way it already works.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
There's an immediate problem with simply recording the mileage and charging a flat 1.5 cents per mile.
For starters, Oregon's major metropolitan area crosses a state line. Unless Washington State enacts a similar tax, you're going to have a situation where people buy gas in Oregon (which will have cheaper fuel as a result of not charging per gallon) and being registered in Washington (therefore not paying the per mile tax). Or, you'll have people who are Oregon residents who purchase fuel in Washington paying a per gallon tax AND a per mile tax EVEN FOR MILES THEY DRIVE IN WASHINGTON. There's a similar problem for people who live on the eastern edge of Oregon with Boise's western suburbs and Ontario, Oregon.
How do you make the system equitable for Oregon drivers who drive a significant amount of miles in neighboring states without some kind of GPS tracking?
So you are saying that the hippies are in favor of having a 6000 lb SUV paying the same rate as they do for their Prius?
6,000 pounds is pretty heavy even for an SUV. Unless you are going to count tanks like the H1, which hardly anybody drives. Most SUVs that are actually on the road today are in the 4,000-5,000 pound range. The Prius is hardly even a lightweight by comparison. Although about 1/4 of the overall cubic dimensions of an average SUV, they way about 2/3 of what an average SUV weighs.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Take total cost of maintaining and expanding motorist infrastructure for the year, divide by the number of registered vehicles, then use GVWR as a factor so heavier vehicles pay more than lighter vehicles. No tracking, and car-free folks aren't subsidizing what's a luxury item in that state. Win/win.
Furries make the internet go.
What I don't understand is why they can't legally tax you for mileage that you use out of state, but it is just fine for them to tax you for gas that you use out of state. Seems like 6 of one half a dozen of the other.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
just legalize weed and tax it.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
If only SUVs used more gas than Priuses who used more gas than motorcycles. Then you could just tax gasoline.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
I thought America still had the concept of felons, a special class of people who have certain rights removed including voting on how they are taxed. With 1% of the adult population in prison the percentage of people prevented from voting on taxes and laws must be non-negligible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
.
I fail to see what the problem is here.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
What we need is an amendments to the US Constitution blocking blanket tracking of "US citizens" unless the court has approved it on suspicion of a felony criminal act by an individual, covering general privacy and something blocking requirements for an individual to purchase health insurance. Also something to reduce the burden of the individual to have to keep records. This isn't the space age or information age, it's the bureaucratic age.
*It's not what you can do for the Dark Side but what the Dark Side can do for you!*
Laws don't always make sense from a big-picture perspective.
As for gas, it doesn't matter where it's used. It's just like sales tax on food or other goods; it doesn't matter if you take that food or other goods out of the state; you're just taxed at the point-of-sale.
And how exactly would you fight it? Go to court, sit there for hours and the judge throws it out? Or maybe hire an attorney to fight the $100 fine? This sounds like the same business model that stoplight cameras use, sure you can fight it, but it costs more to fight the ticket then just pay $100
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
If I live on the end of a gravel road built on iron-rich soil, that coating of mud can hardly be called "tampering." ;)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
No what? What part of my post do you disagree with? What arguments do you have to do so? Your statement does not contradict anything I said.
As a smug hippie, I'd rather see gas taxes rise proportional to the average MPG of cars on the road. The higher the average MPG, the higher the gas tax, keeping revenue constant, and making low mileage cars less and less attractive.
So basically, no matter good your gas mileage is, you pay the same lump amount? I don't see how that encourages better gas mileage. Or did you mean inversely proportional? If so, that is the way it already works.
The overall gas tax rate would rise as the average fleet gas mileage of cars on the road rises. Not on an individual basis -- the tax wouldn't be based on the mileage of my car, but of all cars.
So drivers of more fuel efficient vehicles would still be rewarded because they'd be paying less tax than if they had a less efficient vehicle, yet the state would still get the same amount of revenue even as more people switch to fuel efficient cars.
There's a very simple solution to this. We just tax the electricity you use charging it. Oh...wait. actually I'm pretty sure we already tax electricity.
I'm sorry, but you're spouting nonsense. The notion that "cradle to grave monitoring" is a liberal idea is farcical. You're falling into the trap that many Americans do when discussing the concept, which is to equate liberalism with the concept of a nanny state and invasive government. In actuality, classical liberalism emphasizes liberty, freedom of the press, equality and *less* government intervention. Your understanding of the term more closely reflects a Marxist-Leninist police state.
Good: that means it's not Progressive.
-- Knowledge is power. -- Francis Bacon
But a GPS system could be entirely internal. Crappy pseudocode to illustrate it :
while (true) {
if (GPSsaysPublicRoad()) then TaxedMiles += (CurrentOdometer() - LastSecondsOdometer());
sleep(1);
}
You don't need to communicate the GPS coords to the outside, hell, better have it a sealed system anyway.. And you don't even need to record them. The maps (or rather digested geospatial data) would have to be regularly updated though, maybe yearly when you do a TaxedMiles read out.
That's assuming they don't build hardware/software that stores all GPS data anyway.
Also, I wonder about people who will jam the GPS (default to tax miles if no GPS signal is received?) or even feed it fake GPS info if that's doable.
In all, what a headache.
This is a great blog. The content is quality, keep submitting unique. Click here
Strange enough, in most of Oregon no smog test is required so there would surely be some new cost associated with a per-mile tax strategy.
Complaining about seatbelts? You Americans have hundreds of more intrusive things to worry about, such as getting your testicles twisted by the TSA (or this mile tracking shit from TFA), so why bitch about something that is pure common sense?
Don't blame the powerless hippies. Blame the greedy pig fucking bastards that have power and want more of it and more money - this is a grab for more money and nothing less.
Yes, the American obsession for extraordinarily well paid managers who know nothing about the field they are managing is fucking over many things including your education system. The "run * like a business" mentality is at fault. I wonder which idiot came up with the idea of running publicly funded schools by people with zero understanding of education?
Once again it's not government that is at fault - it's running things badly that is at fault. One size fits all stupidity fails just as spectacularly in both private at public sectors.
If you all got off your arses and voted instead of leaving it all to those who love playing political games then you probably would get that representation. They would be room for minor parties instead of the two fairly similar ones you have now (Nixon would be a far left Democrat today).
I really see this falling to pieces when the 1st person who does the a large proportion of their driving out of state but happens to live inside of the state but is being forced to fit an odometer based device files a lawsuit against the state of Oregon. A GPS device might end up raising all sorts of civil rights questions however I do think a GPS device however could work (if the cost was low enough), If this device was only capable of being a sort of on/off switch while recording mileage i.e. find the users location then simply storing a true value when someone is within the state of Oregon and on a public road and a false value when someone is outside the state of Oregon and then keeping a count of how many miles a person does when that value is true (while only ever storing one location). The devices inability/unwillingness to keep a location history could be verified by independent academic review.
Doesn't all cars have a mile-counter already?
Why do the government need any extra boxes for that?
Sure, but the fundamentals are still in tact and is inherently fixable with proper participation
Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence!
Both you an your sibling post make the same assumption, in spite of decades of evidence and work showing that its *not* simply a matter of participation, as the entrenched in power naturally want to stay there, and to that end, endlessly tweak and corrupt the system to weaken the effect of "proper participation." Overt gaming like "gerrymandering" is just the most overt example, but everything from campaign finance all the way down to the way elections are awarded (FPTP) *all* work against this "within the system" cleanup that the self-righteous "get out and vote" crowd insists is possible.
It's a delusion.
Just like how they got hooked on cigarette taxes.
Everyone has the right to vote. If you do something that expressly removes your right to vote, well that's on you and we're not terribly concerned with it. (and they can get those rights restored in most cases)
The number of people who've had their right to vote removed is massively dwarfed by the people who have it and don't exercise it.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Um, explain 1994 and 2010? Massive shifts in representation. It's possible.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Smug Hippie - - - I like that..... Anyway, back to the little device that tracks your mileage: "Oops I don't understand why it's not working any more. I try to keep the dog/kids/mother in law /whatever from dropping that wrench on it".. Solves that recording /tracking issue. There. Wasn't that easy? Politicians- always an idiotic proposal- kind of like OBAMACARE.
Sir, we noticed that your tracking device is inoperable. "Per Motor Vehicle Code section 802.1.b, it is your responsibility to ensure that the device is operable each time you start your car. Will you be paying your $500 fine by cash, Check or Credit Card?"
Um you mean above and beyond sales tax? Cars generally are subject to sales tax too, this is more about use tax. Car road use tax is implemented as a gas tax. I know of nothing similar for shoes and sneakers.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
What shifts in representation? 1994 was, admittedly, before my time -- too worried about passing HS physics to be following politics. I certainly didn't notice any drastic paradigm shift in 2010.
Anyone who votes in favor of the state attaching a box to your car to "record mileage" needs to immediately check in to the nearest mental facility, as they are clearly psychotic and should not be allowed to walk the streets.
Corruption at every level of government has created massive unfunded liabilities that no city, county, or state will EVER be able to pay. And yet we have people howling about how we need to increase spending!! You can't tax people enough to pay for what the cities, counties, and states have already committed to if you confiscate all of their wealth. Seriously, people, this is where we are whether you like it or not.
Every city and every state is inexorably marching towards the fate of Detroit, Michigan unless they get their act together. I'd like to point out that Detroit was exclusively ruled by Democrats for forty years... This is a fact not some crackpot theory.
Murphy was an optimist
Chevrolet has admitted it looses some $70,000 on every Volt. This is coming out of all of our pockets. This is not sustainable. The same thing is happening with Ethanol. electric cars, wind farms, and many other bright ideas. Just be patient, despite the government dictating the rules of physics by imperial decree sooner or later you simply run out of other people's money, and these things have to stand on their own.
Murphy was an optimist
It swung from strongly Dem to strongly GOP both times. In 2010 the GOP picked up 63 seats out of 427. 15% in one election is pretty significant by any measure.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
That doesn't correspond to a change in representation, massive or otherwise.
Unless one adopts the flawed premise that one party, or the other, "represents" them, which is just more of the "sports franchise" mentality that's let them get away with not representing anyone for so long.
So you are saying that the hippies are in favor of having a 6000 lb SUV paying the same rate as they do for their Prius?
6,000 pounds is pretty heavy even for an SUV. Unless you are going to count tanks like the H1, which hardly anybody drives. Most SUVs that are actually on the road today are in the 4,000-5,000 pound range. The Prius is hardly even a lightweight by comparison. Although about 1/4 of the overall cubic dimensions of an average SUV, they way about 2/3 of what an average SUV weighs.
Ford Expedition curb weight: 5,801 lb (2,631 kg) (standard) 6,071 lb (2,754 kg) (EL)
Cadillac Escalade: Curb weight 5,800 lbs
Chevy Suburban: Curb weight 5820 lbs
All are fairly common large SUV's, so it hardly seems like an exaggeration to refer to "6000 pound SUV's"
Oh, and for comparison, the Toyota Prius weighs 3042 lbs.
This would mostly cause the price of shipping by truck to increase, increasing the costs of consumer goods... when I buy a good that has been shipped by truck, I am benefiting from the damage that truck caused to the highway. It's not actually fair to make truckers pay the majority of the cost.
Now which is it: are truckers going to pass 100% of that cost along to consumers, or are truckers going to eat 100% of that cost themselves? Your post is trying to have it both ways.
In reality, you would see something like this: 70% of the cost passed along to consumers, 30% absorbed by the trucking industry in the form of lower profits.
And you don't appear to realize that when you shift the cost of maintaining infrastructure from everybody to those specifically responsible for damaging infrastructure, other consumer costs will decrease by an equal amount.
It's a good thing when the price of a widget reflects the costs imposed on society by the production and shipment of that widget -- such as damage to infrastructure. And if it turns out some damage to infrastructure can be avoided by shipping things by rail, it would give a well-deserved boost to the rail industry.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
The summary loses all credibility when it says " the existing per-gallon gas tax has hit a point of diminishing returns". Gas can be taxed as much as you want. The Oregon gas tax, currently 49.5 cents per gallon, could be raised to $10 per gallon. That's not "diminishing returns," that's a whopping 1920% increase. There's already an infrastructure in place to collect gas taxes. It works smoothly.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
if everybody bought a hybrid today, next year almost no road repairs would get done, because we wouldn't have the tax revenue
Pure fearmongering. If everybody bought a hybrid today, all it would take is a simple adjustment of Oregon's gas tax, from 49.5 cents per gallon to, say, 63 cents per gallon, to raise the same amount of revenue. (Hybrids get 100% of their energy from gasoline. Plug-in hybrids and EVs, which currently have a far smaller market share than hybrids, are a different matter.)
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
If heavy users of the roads shouldn't have to pay more than occasional users, where does it end? Maybe next you'll propose that people who go to the movies once a year should subsidize those who go twice a week, by making the cost the same for everyone.
It's especially a non-issue because it's easier than ever to bill the heavy users -- for example, with EZ-toll plazas that allow people to zip right through at highway speeds.
(And not everyone agrees that education should be free. Compulsory yes, but a case can be made that those who choose to bring kids into the world should own the cost of doing so. That argument was especially attractive when overpopulation seemed like a big threat. Now that birth rates have fallen drastically, not so much.)
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
However, us Oregonians who have been following this push for years know that GPS tracking of every vehicle is overtly part of the plan. This is not inference, this is consistently represented by politicians as being an essential and non-negotiable part of the whole scheme. It's also the reason people hate the idea. If they got rid of the GPS part, almost nobody would really care.
Laws don't always make sense from a big-picture perspective.
As for gas, it doesn't matter where it's used. It's just like sales tax on food or other goods; it doesn't matter if you take that food or other goods out of the state; you're just taxed at the point-of-sale.
Ah, but it does matter if you take the food or goods out of state. Even if you are taxed at the point of sale, if you take it to a state where the sales tax rate is higher, you owe additional Use Tax on it.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Right, so you don't mind being taxes raised in order to support highways right?
Would you prefer 'equitable' instead? :-)
Yep, you are correct.
I shudder to think what this newfound love of intrusive government would turn into if the religious right retook the reigns of power. The same power given the government to turn everyone into good little progressives won't suddenly vanish if next the government wants to turn you into good little worshippers.
Yep, the wrong villain. Nobody on the religious right is advocating mandatory attendance at worship services. In fact, it would really suck to have a bunch of people show up at church for no other reason than that the government compelled them to.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
If that doesn't, what would you say would be such a change?
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Elected officials actually voting according to the interests of the citizenry might be a good start.
As it is now, the party-line parroting voters represent their party, not vice-versa.
Since Oregon's largest city, Portland, is so far north and close to Washington State, there is a huge amount of traffic between Vancouver Washington and Portland Oregon.
A lot of people live in Washington but work and drive in Portland Oregon. Not knowing where the miles were driven is going to make the tax ineffective at capturing actual use.
In the region where I live, there is an annual inspection required in Washington, D.C. and Virginia requires them. Maryland only requires an inspection when the vehicle is first registered or on transfer of registration, and the inspection is good for the life of the registration. If the vehicle is never sold, never moves to another state and is eventually junked without ever changing registration, in Maryland - and possibly other states - it will never see another inspection. Also, Virginia does not require re-inspection if the vehicle is not in Virginia. As it turned out my brother-in-law, who lived in Virginia, loaned me his car on a more-or-less permanent basis to use it to commute to work. I drove the car and paid for everything. But I could not buy insurance; I had to have him buy it, list me as an authorized user. And even though the vehicle was operated exclusively in and garaged in Maryland by a person with a Maryland license, where was the car required to registered and the tags issued by? Virginia, of course, where the owner resided.
It's the same rule with corporations. I lived in Virginia and started a corporation for my software company. Later I moved back to Maryland, and I had a choice, I could spend $120 to register a new corporation in Maryland or spend $100 to authorize my existing corporation to do business in Maryland. So I chose the latter. If the corporation is ever sued over its operations in Maryland where its only office and headquarters are located, what law will a state court in Maryland use to determine the corporate affairs of the corporation? Virginia, where the corporation is chartered.
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
This Bad Idea has been floating around for a few years. Some idiots built a product and have been aggressively lobbying governments to take them up on it, and even though governments really like being able to do big brother tracking of everywhere everybody drives, they still haven't bought it. They've tried selling them to Oregon and California, they've tried selling them to San Francisco for congestion pricing for drivers in the crowded downtown business district, they've tried selling them for highway toll collection, they've tried selling them to the Feds. They've tried selling it to states as revenue enhancement ("People buy Priuses which use less gas, so you're collecting less gas tax, so buy our thing instead of just raising the tax rate!") There's always at least one legislator or bureaucrat who likes the idea and tries to convince their fellow legislators or bureaucrats, which is enough for the pushers to put out a press release.
But because these guys really want to sell their product, the good guys have to keep squashing it. It's usually not hard, because it's a terribly unworkable idea, but the Big Brotherness of it is really obnoxious, and as far as I can tell, wasn't even the purpose of this system.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Just accept that the gas tax isn't a god-given cash cow and either spend less on roads or look elsewhere for money.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning