Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

American drivers may be taxed by the mile? Options · View
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2013 7:31:52 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
An unintended consequence of hybrid cars that use little to no gas and cars with much higher MPG, is that less gasoline is purchased. Less gasoline purchased means less tax money collected on gasoline purchased, leaving greater and greater shortfall to maintain highways and roads. Would you want a GPS mileage tracking device put into your car? How long before that tracking system is used to track your whereabouts?

Possible tax of 0.9 - 2.2 cents per mile





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Guest
Posted: Friday, January 25, 2013 10:41:46 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
This is a prime example of people not thinking it through. Or looking at the big picture.
Rembacher
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2013 5:24:44 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,101
I'm not familiar with the licensing process in the US, but here in Canada we pay a little over $70 a year for a sticker on our license plate. Increasing the annual fee would be a good way to generate more revenue. Yes, it might not be fair for the people who only drive a little, but only driving once a week is just as impossible as driving every day if there are no roads to drive on.

There are other ways you can generate revenue too. Making the main roads toll roads is one way. We have the technology available that you wouldn't even have to stop to pay the toll. Just drive by, and the sensors would register your vehicle through a pre-arranged membership card, track how far you traveled, and bill you accordingly at the end of every month.

A third option, which would tax drivers on a usage basis without tracking their movements would be to tax the sale of tires. People who drive more would burn through their tires faster, and therefor pay more taxes than the 80 year old lady who drives 4 blocks to church every Sunday. Any of these options level the same amount of "usage tax" regardless of the fuel used to propel the vehicle, which would eliminate the risk of punishing someone for buying a more environmentally friendly vehicle.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 4:34:48 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
We have that here in Florida Jebru. It's called Sunpass and it's a sticker on the windshield that you can go online and load money into an account for. The bar code is read when you go through the toll booths. They've been talking about raising toll prices here to help as well as building more extensions onto the roads already here. Thus increasing the amount of tolls for exits and entrances.
Buz
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:32:37 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,189
Location: Atlanta, United States
In Georgia we also have tag taxes. The states and federal government already add their taxes into every gallon of gasoline we purchase, so this idea of taxing by the mile is just another big government infringement.

Government needs to cut wasteful spending not tax everyday working Americans into poverty!

And if you notice each year the middle class in America shrinks a little more while government spending goes up.

In 1960s the government debt was around 43% of the US Gross Domestic Product, in 2012 it was 108% of the GDP.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

elitfromnorth
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:37:53 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
How about putting tax on the petrol? Then you take those that actually spend a lot of fuel, and those spending a lot of fuel will also be the ones driving a lot. It will also be an initiative to get people to drive more environmental friendly cars. You pretty much get a win win situation. Sure, you'll piss off people that drive around in their 60's and 70's models, but those are show off cars. They're loud, they pollute and they are pretty much just old penis enhancers.

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
Buz
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:43:41 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,189
Location: Atlanta, United States
Like I said above here in the USA both the state and the federal government each already tax the hell out of every gallon of gasoline we purchase. I guess I figured most other countries did that too. I mean damn, gasoline is really expensive in Europe!

Elit I do like those penis enhancer 60's automobiles. I plan to get one someday. I'd love an early 60s Corvette Stingray. But I also love those 2 toned chrome monsters from the 1950s. Many of those cars are classic works of art!

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

DLizze
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 6:30:38 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 4/23/2011
Posts: 2,520
Most of us who drive older "gas guzzlers" do so because they are all we can afford to purchase. If I had to buy a new "fuel efficient" vehicle, I'd be, as the expression goes, "shit out of luck". As it is, I pay more in fuel taxes than most people anyway, becasue my vehicle is a diesel. As to taxing tires, that is already done. In Maryland, when you buy tires, you pay a Federal excise tax, a Maryland sales tax, and a tire recycling fee. Tag fees in Maryland are already $72.00 per year for a standard sized vehicle. MOst interstate tool roadws in teh UNited States already have what is known as "easy pass" which is a prepaid monthly fee. I have no heartache with making more roads toll road, but I know that it isn't going to happen, becasue any elected official who suggests that is killing his or chances for reelection. (I know, I know... term limits and reduced salaries for representatives would solve that problem, but that is fodder for a different discussion thread.) So, in all fairness, I think requireing a mileage-based fee, depending on the mileage shown on a car's "black box" is quite reasonable. Most new cars are already equipped with t technology, so there would be no excuse for using that as a reason to change the initial purchase price of the car, and it would make those who are saving at the gas pump pay the same amount to drive as the rest of us, who cannot afford that luxury.

Of course, I have long maintained that high gas mileage, high pollution vehicles, like the old VW beetle were never vehicles that should have been subjected to emmission controls, but that too is another discussion. (It is, of course, the reason emmission standards are set at pollutant per gallon of fuel burned, instead of pollutant emitted per mile driven. That was the only way American automobile manufacturers of the sixties through nineties could compete with high gass mileage imported cars.)

"There's only three tempos: slow, medium and fast. When you get between in the cracks, ain't nuthin' happenin'." Ben Webster
pj2012
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2013 8:25:17 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 12/28/2012
Posts: 164
Location: Canada
all commercial trucks already pay a tax per mile, it goes into a pool and is distributed among the states based on mileage driven. It's collected from the federal tax on diesel purchased at the pump. if you overpurchase in one state and under purchase in another it is distributed accordingly. It's actually a rather fair way of taxation (if there is such a thing as fair taxation) It's called IFTA International Fuel Tax Agreement. Theoretically, the tax is to be used for road maintenance and upkeep but most often it's just put in the state's tax pot and spent wherever it is needed, like vacations for politicians, etc.
Guest
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:14:27 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
Liberalism and Socialism are both mental disorders. First they tell us during the 1970's that we have hit PEAK OIL production, now we have more know reserves in the USA then ever. Newsweek warned of the coming ICE AGE, now we have global warming. Really, does it ever get old being so wrong so often about so much. In the USA we have food stamps, first started to keep the bottom feeders too stupid and lazy from starving, now we have 47.1 million Americans on foodstamps. This is an all time high.
LadyX
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:02:51 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
Buc wrote:
Liberalism and Socialism are both mental disorders. First they tell us during the 1970's that we have hit PEAK OIL production, now we have more know reserves in the USA then ever. Newsweek warned of the coming ICE AGE, now we have global warming. Really, does it ever get old being so wrong so often about so much. In the USA we have food stamps, first started to keep the bottom feeders too stupid and lazy from starving, now we have 47.1 million Americans on foodstamps. This is an all time high.


Good speech. What does this have to do with proposed "by-the-mile" taxation to maintain and make necessary repairs to our highway system?
lafayettemister
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:23:19 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
Rembacher wrote:
I'm not familiar with the licensing process in the US, but here in Canada we pay a little over $70 a year for a sticker on our license plate. Increasing the annual fee would be a good way to generate more revenue. Yes, it might not be fair for the people who only drive a little, but only driving once a week is just as impossible as driving every day if there are no roads to drive on.

There are other ways you can generate revenue too. Making the main roads toll roads is one way. We have the technology available that you wouldn't even have to stop to pay the toll. Just drive by, and the sensors would register your vehicle through a pre-arranged membership card, track how far you traveled, and bill you accordingly at the end of every month.

A third option, which would tax drivers on a usage basis without tracking their movements would be to tax the sale of tires. People who drive more would burn through their tires faster, and therefor pay more taxes than the 80 year old lady who drives 4 blocks to church every Sunday. Any of these options level the same amount of "usage tax" regardless of the fuel used to propel the vehicle, which would eliminate the risk of punishing someone for buying a more environmentally friendly vehicle.


It varies from state to state, but most have some form of licensing, I pay something like $80 every two years. But we also have a yearly vehicle inspection that must be done. In my state, depending on which parish you live, it's either $10 or $18 per year.

Toll roads would be a possibility. But if a state has never had any or had very few toll roads, it's very difficult to get them in place. Voters will be unlikely to approve of that. Some tolls could be a good idea, that's a decent plan.

The tire tax I think would not live up to potential. A decent set of 50k miles tires will run about $700 and will last 4-5 years. The tax would have to be pretty hefty to only be collected so infrequently and would really hit the lower and middle income families too hard.

The way I see it, drivers are paying by the mile already. The federal government puts 18.4 cents of tax for ever gallon of gas. States also tax gas by the gallon, I think I read the state average is .30 cents. The more a person drives, the more gas he buys, the more tax he pays.






When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
lafayettemister
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:27:59 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
Of course, lowering the cost of maintenence would be helpful too. Longer lasting roads that are better, smoother, and easier on cars/tires...

Not to mention the reduction of piles and piles of old flammable tires laying around in dumps across the country.







When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
LadyX
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 4:26:26 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
Sounds to me like they just need to raise the gas tax. If I read that correctly, it was last raised 20 years ago? LOL. There's your problem. A lot of inflation has racked up since then. The fact that better gas mileage is reducing the tax revenue seems like a secondary issue. Combine the tax hike with a flat tax on hybrid or electric vehicles, and we have a solution.
elitfromnorth
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 6:20:07 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,589
Location: Burrowed, Norway
Buc wrote:
Liberalism and Socialism are both mental disorders. First they tell us during the 1970's that we have hit PEAK OIL production, now we have more know reserves in the USA then ever. Newsweek warned of the coming ICE AGE, now we have global warming. Really, does it ever get old being so wrong so often about so much. In the USA we have food stamps, first started to keep the bottom feeders too stupid and lazy from starving, now we have 47.1 million Americans on foodstamps. This is an all time high.


Are you saying that the founding principles of the US is indeed a mental disorder?

Quote:
Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles[Liberty and Equality], but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.


Apart from the free trade, then at least the rest of these things are essential in the American Philosphy, no?

And Socialism that have bread to amongst others Social Democracy is now the governing political view in Germany(which is the only country in the EU that actually generates a + budget) as well as Norway(by many indexes rated as the best country in the world to live in, based on education, health, democracy and many other things). I guess a political platform where the result isn't that you're being run down in the gutter must clearly be a mental disorder...

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
MrNudiePants
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 7:35:28 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,081
Location: United States
LadyX wrote:
Sounds to me like they just need to raise the gas tax. If I read that correctly, it was last raised 20 years ago? LOL. There's your problem. A lot of inflation has racked up since then. The fact that better gas mileage is reducing the tax revenue seems like a secondary issue. Combine the tax hike with a flat tax on hybrid or electric vehicles, and we have a solution.


Back then, gas cost a quarter what it does now. Since the cost of fuel has quadrupled, and the tax is a percentage of the sales price, the tax income has also quadrupled.

Sounds to me like legislators are so used to having a relatively limitless well of cash to dip a bucket into, they have no idea how to live on a budget. I'm all for charging hybrid users a per-mile usage fee so they pay their share for road maintenance, but the last thing we need to do is raise the percentage of taxes paid. Finance new road construction by selling bonds, like we've always done, and tell the pork-belly legislators to tighten their belts.

MrNudiePants
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 7:37:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,081
Location: United States
elitfromnorth wrote:
How about putting tax on the petrol? Then you take those that actually spend a lot of fuel, and those spending a lot of fuel will also be the ones driving a lot. It will also be an initiative to get people to drive more environmental friendly cars. You pretty much get a win win situation. Sure, you'll piss off people that drive around in their 60's and 70's models, but those are show off cars. They're loud, they pollute and they are pretty much just old penis enhancers.


That's the issue - more efficient cars means less gasoline purchased, which in turn means less revenue to the government.

Buz
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 7:52:34 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,189
Location: Atlanta, United States
The wealthy can afford hybrid and electric cars and in fact they have become ststus symbols. Gas mileage is improving each year on new gasoline powered cars, but we still need to find a viable mass produced clean alternative to gasoline. An even higher tax per mile would mostly hurt the poor and the lower middle class. I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of the proposed new tax, other than burdeniing the less fortunate.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

MrNudiePants
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 7:55:01 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,081
Location: United States
Buz wrote:
The wealthy can afford hybrid and electric cars and in fact they have become ststus symbols. Gas mileage is improving each year on new gasoline powered cars, but we still need to find a viable mass produced clean alternative to gasoline. An even higher tax per mile would mostly hurt the poor and the lower middle class. I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of the proposed new tax, other than burdeniing the less fortunate.


If the tax only affects the hybrid vehicles, how are poor people going to be hurt? Or is there something I'm not seeing?

Buz
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:32:41 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,189
Location: Atlanta, United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


If the tax only affects the hybrid vehicles, how are poor people going to be hurt? Or is there something I'm not seeing?


I thought it was a mileage tax for everyone, all cars. It would make no sense at all to tax mileage on hybrid cars only. What moronic legislator or senator dreamed that up?

Hybrid auto owners are doing their part to help the environment, plus there aren't enough of those cars on the road to have any substantial revenue raising potential.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

LadyX
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 8:45:44 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


Back then, gas cost a quarter what it does now. Since the cost of fuel has quadrupled, and the tax is a percentage of the sales price, the tax income has also quadrupled.



Actually, according to the article, the taxes are a constant number per gallon, not a percentage of fuel cost:

Quote:
But the tax side of that equation hasn't kept pace with those needs. The federal tax of 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline was last raised in 1993. State taxes add on an average of 22 cents a gallon, and many of those haven't been raised in several years as well; Georgia charges the same 7.5 cents a gallon in taxes it did in 1971. (In Europe and Japan, fuel taxes for roads are 10 times higher.)
Magical_felix
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:36:33 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,574
Location: California
MrNudiePants wrote:
is there something I'm not seeing?


LOL

lafayettemister wrote:
An unintended consequence of hybrid cars that use little to no gas and cars with much higher MPG, is that less gasoline is purchased. Less gasoline purchased means less tax money collected on gasoline purchased, leaving greater and greater shortfall to maintain highways and roads. Would you want a GPS mileage tracking device put into your car? How long before that tracking system is used to track your whereabouts?

Possible tax of 0.9 - 2.2 cents per mile


Yeah... I got a few problems with this tax. Is there really that many Hybrid cars out there that we now are short on money to maintain our roads? I find that really hard to believe and it reeks of the government grasping for straws in their little "how can we pull more money from the population think tanks". Major bullshit. How about we reduce or spending oversees on bullshit we don't need to be spending money on and use that saved money on our roads.

LM wrote:
Would you want a GPS mileage tracking device put into your car?


No... My driving stimulates the economy and creates tax dollars. In more ways than "I bought gas I already paid taxes."

LM wrote:
How long before that tracking system is used to track your whereabouts?


Not trying to pick on you specifically.. But This kind of thinking has always made me laugh. By any citizen.

Like, why the hell would the government care about you or any other basic ass citizens whereabouts? You the new pablo escobar? I don't think so. That's what always makes me laugh about this slippery slope paranoia fueled thinking. No one (in the government) cares about you or some regular citizen's whereabouts. "Holy shit, LM left his house at 8 am and has been at work for eight hours. Now he stopped at CVS pharmacy and picked up a pack of gatorade, some tampons and a lottery ticket. Picked up a movie at redbox too... He is now pulling into his driveway... Alert the FBI."

Please.







Rembacher
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:37:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,101
Buz wrote:


I thought it was a mileage tax for everyone, all cars. It would make no sense at all to tax mileage on hybrid cars only. What moronic legislator or senator dreamed that up?

Hybrid auto owners are doing their part to help the environment, plus there aren't enough of those cars on the road to have any substantial revenue raising potential.


That's the way I understood it too. Though your first comment and your second comment kind of contradict each other, since the reason this tax is being considered is because the overall fuel efficiency of vehicles, combined with the increasing prevalence of hybrids, has decreased the revenue earned from a tax on fuel. Taxing cars based on fuel efficiency would be messy, with too many different tax brackets to track. Some form of across the board usage/mileage tax on top of the gas tax would allow for fair taxation, while also encouraging people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.
Magical_felix
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:41:43 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,574
Location: California
Rembacher wrote:

since the reason this tax is being considered is because the overall fuel efficiency of vehicles, combined with the increasing prevalence of hybrids


You're good at this stuff Jebs. Do you know a place where you can find the actual percentage of hybrid cars in America? Like, how many hybrids there are per thousand cars on the roads? i think Info like that would give us all insight on the validity of a tax like this.



LadyX
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:54:02 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
Magical_felix wrote:

how many hybrids there are per thousand cars on the roads? i think Info like that would give us all insight on the validity of a tax like this.


According to the GSA, 10 percent of American vehicles sold in 2009 and 2010 were hybrids. Not sure about more recent stats, but with the economy picking up, I'd like to think that percentage has crept up a bit since then.
Magical_felix
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:08:30 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,574
Location: California
LadyX wrote:
According to the GSA, 10 percent of American vehicles sold in 2009 and 2010 were hybrids. Not sure about more recent stats, but with the economy picking up, I'd like to think that percentage has crept up a bit since then.


So I guess we can safely assume that in 2011 and 2012 the numbers were similar if not slightly higher. Like maybe 12% of cars sold in the last four years were Hybrids. What do they get? 50-60 miles a gallon? A friend of mine just bought a diesel beamer that gets 35 MPG. That is an SUV Beamer... This is some complex math that I really don't want to do but 12% hybrids is high if it was 12% of all cars not just the newer years.... if they are only 12% of new cars, its safe to assume that since say, 1970 they are a fraction of a percent of the cars on the road. I believe the loss of tax revenue is way way way less than charging us 2.2 cents a mile. That seems like an outrageous money grab.



LadyX
Posted: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:15:07 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
I tend to agree with that assessment, and that's aside from the questionable idea of putting trackers in our cars to keep record of miles driven.
ByronLord
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 5:43:12 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 721
Location: Massachusetts, United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


Back then, gas cost a quarter what it does now. Since the cost of fuel has quadrupled, and the tax is a percentage of the sales price, the tax income has also quadrupled.

Sounds to me like legislators are so used to having a relatively limitless well of cash to dip a bucket into, they have no idea how to live on a budget. I'm all for charging hybrid users a per-mile usage fee so they pay their share for road maintenance, but the last thing we need to do is raise the percentage of taxes paid. Finance new road construction by selling bonds, like we've always done, and tell the pork-belly legislators to tighten their belts.


The federal gas tax is a flat rate, not a percentage. Any shortfall in the gas tax could be covered in a whole range of ways. Most likely would be a general carbon tax.

Or they might not need to cover it at all. The dire predictions of the US federal deficit come from CBO numbers that are obliged to assume that the current recession will continue into the future. The deficits will end when the recessions end. Clinton left a surplus. If people don't elect Republicans to squander the surplus on unfunded wars and tax cuts for their friends the deficit will be erased by growth.

If the US would reduce its military spending to a sane level, the budget looks even healthier. Right now the US is spending a greater proportion of its GDP on militarism than during the cold war when we were facing the Soviet Union. It is not 'defense' by any stretch of the imagination when you continue to arm against an enemy that hasn't existed in twenty years.

Regardless, the gas tax is just not a major source of revenue. Worrying about tax losses due to declining gas use is like worrying about losing cigarette taxes because people stop smoking.

lafayettemister
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:15:58 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
lafayettemister wrote:
An unintended consequence of hybrid cars that use little to no gas and cars with much higher MPG, is that less gasoline is purchased. Less gasoline purchased means less tax money collected on gasoline purchased, leaving greater and greater shortfall to maintain highways and roads. Would you want a GPS mileage tracking device put into your car? How long before that tracking system is used to track your whereabouts?



Magical_felix wrote:


You're good at this stuff Jebs. Do you know a place where you can find the actual percentage of hybrid cars in America? Like, how many hybrids there are per thousand cars on the roads? i think Info like that would give us all insight on the validity of a tax like this.


It's not "just" hybrid cars. Most cars have become a lot more fuel efficient in the last decade. Even if the average car gets an extra 10 MPG now than the average car did ten or twenty years ago, that's still less gas consumption. Ten extra miles driven per gallon of gas on a fifteen gallon tank, that 150 extra miles is pretty considerable. Multiply that by millions of cars and I can see how there COULD be a shortfall.

On the other hand, the population has probably grown so there are probably more cars on the roads these days that have to buy gas. But then again, that means more cars out there to wear out the roads. My brain hurts.

Magical_felix wrote:


Not trying to pick on you specifically.. But This kind of thinking has always made me laugh. By any citizen.

Like, why the hell would the government care about you or any other basic ass citizens whereabouts? You the new pablo escobar? I don't think so. That's what always makes me laugh about this slippery slope paranoia fueled thinking. No one (in the government) cares about you or some regular citizen's whereabouts. "Holy shit, LM left his house at 8 am and has been at work for eight hours. Now he stopped at CVS pharmacy and picked up a pack of gatorade, some tampons and a lottery ticket. Picked up a movie at redbox too... He is now pulling into his driveway... Alert the FBI."

Please.



I should have verbalized that out a little better. Part of it is a possibility of government tracking people. It's unlikely that Uncle Sam will be worried about me, the Cajun Pablo Escobar, but I could envision instances where it could be used for governmental intrusion. But that's a whole other discussion.


Progressive insurance already has something like this that their drivers can opt for. It's called Snapshot. According to Progressive, the device plugs into your ODBII port (usually beneath the steering wheel) and tracks how often you slam on the brakes (why would it need to know that? to calculate how often you tailgate? or not pay attention?), how many miles you drive, and how often you drive between midnight and 4am.

I wonder if a person drives between midnight and 4am frequently, does that make him a higher risk? Rates go up?

Just a couple months ago, a woman that lives here was in an accident. She was hurt pretty badly and the other driver was found to be "more" at fault. Her Snapshot recorded everything. It recorded when the accident happened, where it happened, what time the engine shut off, when she hit her brakes, and how fast she was going. A little after the accident she got a letter from Progressive saying her rates were going up because at the time of the accident she was travelling above the posted speed limit.

To be fair though, it also helped her. Someone else tried to claim they'd been the victim of a hit and run by the same driver listed above. But the Snapshot proved that she wasn't anywhere near the vicinity of that accident.

Also around here there are numerous industrial plants. And in those plants are hundreds of contractor companies. Many of them have fleets of trucks for employees to drive. Some of those trucks are GPS enabled. Fleet managers always know the whereabouts of drivers and if a driver goes more than 4 MPH over the speed limit, the GPS automatically sends an email to the driver and the fleet manager. Fines are given to drivers who force too many emails.

My bigger concern is something like those examples. Those little Chips or GPS inserts or whatever, can know everything that's going on inside your car's engine and computer. I'm more worried about government using it to track speed and things like that. Imagine getting a speeding ticked because your government installed GPS registered you doing 50 MPH in a 30 MPH zone. Or if your GPS indicated you were in the area of a crime, they could come to you as a potential witness. Or perp.

I know there's a big difference between a private corporation and government, but it's not as big of a leap of faith that government could employ some of the same tactics. Just my opinion.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
mercianknight
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 7:24:00 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/11/2009
Posts: 2,029
Location: whispering conspiratorially in your ear, Bermuda
Governments, at both local & national levels, will always find a way to pick your pocket of any loose change.

The idea of taxing fuel to fund the maintenance of highways is entirely sensible and the spin doctors will always present a credible case when in fact the truth is more insidious. Take the time to compare the revenues generated from the varied taxes applied to using your private motor vehicle and then compare it to the budget for maintaining said highways. If it is anything like I saw in the UK or here on my idyllic isles, then you will see that much of the monies raised are diverted for other uses - and I still have to dodge pot-holes!

cussing

Anyway, I'm sure the monies that 'should' be used to maintain our roads are being used frugally and ethically by our trusted elected officials, and that we will inevitably allow them to apply more stealth taxes on our quality of life. binky

"Whoa, lady, I only speak two languages, English and bad English." - Korben Dallas, from The Fifth Element

"If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must man be of learning from experience?" - George Bernard Shaw
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.