Tax Hybrids! What's next bikes?

Hey Washington's concerned these fuel efficient vehicles are costing us tax revenue. What'll they do when they realize that my commuting daily to work by bike generates zero tax dollars?

"Industry group says highway funds scarce
By Jim Abrams, Associated Press Writer | November 25, 2005
WASHINGTON --Taxing hybrids and other fuel-efficient cars and billing drivers for miles driven are among the approaches being suggested to avert a shortfall in money to maintain the nation's highways...
Proposals for the longer term could be more controversial. One is that owners of hybrids and other alternative fuel vehicles pay a vehicle fee, the argument being that drivers should bear their fair share to fill the potholes and fix the bridges, regardless of how much or what kind of fuel they use."

For the complete article go to: Boston Globe

 

That story lends more credence to the hypothesis that there are a bunch of psychopaths trying to run America into the ground at the moment. That said I think most of the people who have that idea think it's foreigners trying to do that, when in fact it appears to be their own leadership.

The horrible irony is that they're planning on doing that because they're afraid to raise fuel-tax which would accomplish that objective pretty tidily. It would have the further benefit of avoiding all that extra expense of implementing and enforicing yet another new Tax.

As for the idea of taxing a bike... Sure I would actually go for that if they provided a purpose built high-quality *cycle only* road network. If they don't do that they can simply fuck off because using the so-called cycle paths here in London is a joke. They are used by pedestrians, cars, buses, taxis, you still end up having to continually stop and start, and cars continue to wipe you out when they turn left. In otherwords, bugger all improvement.

The morons who lay out these cycle lanes & paths out clearly don't ride bikes and have absolutely no clue what cyclists need. They don't offer any improvement in safety, comfort, convenience or speed to the Cyclist. Quite the reverse in fact. By and large I can say that London's Cycling measures have been a horrible waste of tax-money, they would have been better off simply giving out free helmets and building those bike locker things (so your bike doesn't get stripped/stolen while it's locked up) all over the town.

 

The thing thats so idiotic about taxing those hybrids (with an extra tax beyond the sales, TTL, emissions, tax on gas, yearly registration etc etc) is that almost nobody % owns them. The reason there not collecting their 70 cents on the dollar per gallon of gas is that the prices have increased so Johnny Dipstick getting 8 MPG cant go mudding in his monster truck after work everyday and your average commuter has cut back on unneccesary trips. These idiots know nothing about cause and effect.

 

The USA has a huge problem with pollution and rapidly declining resources (hence Iraq). What the US should be doing is giving incentives to people to get them to use fuel efficient cars instead of letting compainies offer credit to low income groups in order to buy SUVs. The car pool system is a good one but i have actually seen people in LA driving with feeking dummies (inflatables) in thier passenger seats so that they can use faster lanes without being charged.

What about raising money to pay for highway maintenance?

One solution would be to tax every car and motorcycle using the road. The larger and heavier your car (and more damage it does to the road) the more tax you'll pay. You can call it 'road tax', a catchy name and see what happens.

See if any other countries have adopted a similar scheme and check it out.

 

My head hurts.

 

Yeah, this is about one of the most stupid tax ideas I've heard recently. Drivers of Hybrids should get a tax BREAK because of the benefit to the environment. Yes, a tax should be dependent upon vehicle weight, the more your vehicle weighs, the more damage it does to the roads, therefore the more fault is placed upon them for the damage, thus the more they should pay in taxes to FIX THEIR DAMAGE.

But, of course, common sense doesn't always rest in the minds of the government agencies.

 

thats exactly what happens here, tax breaks for alternative fuels and penalties for high C02 emissions...
http://www.dvla.gov.uk/vehicles/taxation.htm#Private

 

This exact same idea got floated about 6 months ago and wound up nowhere. I think it's a ruse to trick people into arguing about something else besides the war.

 

Yet another example of a government hopelessly out of touch with the people. Amazing that this nation, which touts itself as a model of democratic representation, can be so far removed from our real needs and offering real solutions.

Perhaps the reason is that we've lost so much respect for those who govern that no respectable people want to govern. It's a horrible Catch-22 and we all pay the price for it no matter what our personal politics.

US Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunnigham's admission of graft today is but the tip of the iceberg. He's probably one of the few congressman with enough of a shred of intergrity and conscience to actually admit to how corrupt he has become.

 

Ummm, correct me if I'm mistaken but this was all just a proposal by some less than logical person or group. This is not anything that has been implemented. People are getting all uptight here as if someone is actually paying a tax like this. It's not the case. Take a couple deeeeeep breeeaatthhss.

 

Isn't the fun of this part of the forum that it gives us an opportunity to vent and rant and rave if even about a proposal that at least some of us find ridiculous if not strongly indicative of something askew in our national priorities?

I appreciate your concern for my breathing but I get plenty of deep breaths on my bike rides and would prefer to live in a world where each inhalation takes in a little less toxicity.

Admittedly, I did get some good deep breaths from laughing at the idea of someone feeling the need to get everyone in a sub-forum called "Your Bloody Soap Box" to chill out and calm down.

 

Glad to offer you some laughs. By all means, rant all you want. I just get annoyed when a presumption is made by posters that don't seem to be based on facts. In fact, my response did not stem from your individual post at all. The proposal is certainly worth some disgusted comments in response. There are plenty of things to be pissed at our gov't about. So far this is not one of them. The proposal didn't even come from the gov't, but instead from a business lobby group, Associated General Contractors of America. As far as I can tell, the gov't (DOT) simply said something like "hey, our balance sheet isn't working out! Maybe we should solicit ways to fix this!" If only Congress had the ability to apply this sort of analysis to all budget issues...

But your point is well taken. I should no more try to inject any level-headed logic into any conversation here. It's not the first time I've had that lesson here. I guess I learn through repetition.

 

Nothing at all surprises me anymore....even if they put a tax on my legs; make me mail in pedometer reading.

Nothing would suprise me these days.

 

Roadhog,

#1 I'm not in here to make enemies. I'm here because I'm looking for like minded people who care about some of the things that matter to me- like good government that serves the genuine needs of it's people over the interests of groups like the Associated General Contractors.

#2 You missed my point if you think I'm saying a good rant precludes facts and/or logic. Please take note that I simply referred to an article and included a link to the full text of the article. I chose it as a thread because it was a legislative proposal that I felt defied logic.

You want facts? Please indulge:

#3 Go to the link about the AGC of America. One of the most powerful and effective PAC's in America. Look at some of politicians they helped get elected- if they're the kind of people you want in Washington then great. But when they propose something it is taken very seriously. They have a hell of a lot more lobbying power than a bunch of bike riding eco-freaks.

#4 The time to rant and rave against this kind of idiocy is when it is in the proposal stage before it gets momentum to become legislation. And it's not like I even think this proposal actually would fly it's just how out of touch they must be to actually propose it.

#5 The Associated General Contractors are the very same people who will be building the roads, the bike and multi-use trails you ride your bike on that will be built and designed under the Transportation and Safety Act. There is over one billion dollars earmarked for bicycle facility improvements. Do you want people who think like this to be responsible for something that could so directly affect you- or do you want your voice to be heard when they propose something stupid?

#6. I live in Boston where we have been witness to more than ten years of wasteful spending, graft and incompetency in a huge federal project called "The Big Dig". A project that has cost every tax payer in America billions of dollars in cost overruns. Do companies like Bechtel ring a bell to you? They currently have billions of dollars of contracts to rebuild Iraq. They're the same people that were responsible for the "Big Dig". That's the kind of business we're talking about when we talk about the AGC.

So, it's the facts and the complete lack of logic that make me want to rant when I read something like the article that started this thread.

If the Big Dig is unfamiliar to you here's one link to explore- though it's gotten worse since this was written: The Black Hole of Boston

 

you catch on fast, no one said it was law.