Charge me by the ton mile

[Challeco]

...and one picture shows a street only 20% of vehicle traffic and the other has 90% to vehicle traffic - which do you think adequately compares sq footage to actual road users?

This is where your argument fails. You basically said 'oh, but the poor people' and then argued for the road that actually privileged the non-poor over the poor.

More people actually climb the subway stairs each day than travel that pavement reserved for cars.

-Crissa

No. I didn't. I poked a hole in the hyper-focus of an if/then example when the processes that created that change challenges Doctors of Economics to explain simply. It is born of the drive of business for profit. We keep going around in further widening circles away from the challenge I made about the cruelty of regressive taxation.

I do not care if someone has a car or not. I used to enjoy driving just for the sake of exploring during my youth. Now, a vehicle is just a tool. Give me a better tool. But don't take my tool away because other people are abusing theirs. Robotaxis are a great concept that I wager Tesla will succeed with. But, I know better than to think for a second that their offerings are altruistic. The bargain will be a fine line between a for profit service that is beyond the customer's control, and a tool that could possibly provide the owner more utility than just an efficient commute. Further, lest we forget, the urban centers will be the only place any profiteer will offer these services. Because rural settings are inherently more difficult with less profit.
If you truly want to bring about the end of the carbon economy, as I do, please adopt an all of the above approach. Weed out the excess after the foothold is established.

Sponsored

 

[Tinker71]

No. I didn't. I poked a hole in the hyper-focus of an if/then example when the processes that created that change challenges Doctors of Economics to explain simply. It is born of the drive of business for profit. We keep going around in further widening circles away from the challenge I made about the cruelty of regressive taxation.

I do not care if someone has a car or not. I used to enjoy driving just for the sake of exploring during my youth. Now, a vehicle is just a tool. Give me a better tool. But don't take my tool away because other people are abusing theirs. Robotaxis are a great concept that I wager Tesla will succeed with. But, I know better than to think for a second that their offerings are altruistic. The bargain will be a fine line between a for profit service that is beyond the customer's control, and a tool that could possibly provide the owner more utility than just an efficient commute. Further, lest we forget, the urban centers will be the only place any profiteer will offer these services. Because rural settings are inherently more difficult with less profit.
If you truly want to bring about the end of the carbon economy, as I do, please adopt an all of the above approach. Weed out the excess after the foothold is established.

I prefer my to call a ton mile tax an incentive tax. It may have "regressive" qualities but that can't be helped. It can be mitigated with other incentives. In the instance of cigarettes if people actually quit they save a ton of money. If a 2 car family can go down to 1 car because they adjusted their lifestyle they save money.

Driving 15,000 miles per year per capita is not healthy or sustainable (ICE or EV). Make people pay the true cost of road maintenance/expansion and the situation will improve slowly over time. This is an opportunity to STOP the SUBSIDY.

For the record I would fully support a zero tax on unprocessed food. While the rich that shop at Whole Foods might accidentally benefit from lower taxes, hopefully society as a whole gets a little healthier with less health care cost and lost work etc...

Do I support progressive taxes on income?....hell yeah.

 

[Ogre]

What happens when a poor person cannot afford fuel? What happens when an addict cannot afford their substance? What happens when a rich person is taxed more at the pump? What happens when a rich addict is faced with a price increase for their substance?

The economy of cars is just bad for the poor. Needing to own, maintain, and insure a $5,000+ vehicle is just onerous for people who are struggling financially.

We either need cheap transportation which doesn’t involve owning an expensive asset, or we need affordable housing near where jobs are (or jobs near where the people are).

A tax by the mile program isn’t going to affect any of that.

 

[Deleted member 11233]

STATE-BY-STATE FEES
Here's a rundown of the states that currently charge electric-vehicle owners added fees, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures:
/snip/

Plug-In Electric Vehicle and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Fees in Kansas

Beginning January 1, 2020, the annual registration fee for all-electric vehicles is $100 and $50 for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and HEVs. (Reference Kansas Statutes 8-143)

FYI: Kansas taxes gasoline at 24 cents/gallon and diesel at 26 cents/gallon so if you drive your gas hog ICE pickup truck (6500 miles per year at 15 mpg) you are still way ahead paying the EV tax when you get your license plates and drive as many miles as you want.

 

[Tinker71]

Plug-In Electric Vehicle and Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Fees in Kansas

Beginning January 1, 2020, the annual registration fee for all-electric vehicles is $100 and $50 for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and HEVs. (Reference Kansas Statutes 8-143)

FYI: Kansas taxes gasoline at 24 cents/gallon and diesel at 26 cents/gallon so if you drive your gas hog ICE pickup truck (6500 miles per year at 15 mpg) you are still way ahead paying the EV tax when you get your license plates and drive as many miles as you want.

You would hope the clean air means something. At least it is not punitive like some states have proposed.

 

[Quicksilver]

Alabama wasn't on that list but we have a 200 fee for BEV's.
I don't have a problem paying that since I won't be paying fuel tax on the CT.
Some comments were made about public transportation.
Public transportation is heavily subsidized by state and Federal taxes now. Some of this money is from fuel tax......it is just moved from building and maintaining roads to building and maintaining mass transit.
In my town we have a bus system that uses smaller busses than big cities do.
We also have a rural public transportation system that you call and have them pick you up at your address. I think this is mostly for medical appointments but they may take people other places or to a trolley stop.
Since busses, subways and commuter railroads are subsidized by various taxes why not use some of that money to allow qualifying individuals to use robo taxies.
The "poor" are already getting subsidized housing, medical care, food, phones and child care.
They would get another pre-loaded card that would allow them to use robo-taxies. They would have to budget that subsidy to fit their needs. This would encourage them to be thrifty with the money given to them.
There would not need to be additional money allocated........just move some money around and put it into another form of transportation.

 

[Challeco]

The economy of cars is just bad for the poor. Needing to own, maintain, and insure a $5,000+ vehicle is just onerous for people who are struggling financially.

We either need cheap transportation which doesn’t involve owning an expensive asset, or we need affordable housing near where jobs are (or jobs near where the people are).

A tax by the mile program isn’t going to affect any of that.

This goes directly to my point. Are we on this site so disconnected with the reality of the working poor that my words sound insane? Cheap transportation is everywhere. Cars are sold that no insurance company worth their license would insure. Salvage titles, leaking valve guides, bald tires, crumpled fenders hammered out to resemble a body line. These vehicles aren't on the road because someone is proud to own them. They have to own them. They need the "what the hell it runs" asset in order to get to their job.
I am one of those people on the success side of the struggle.
Regressive taxation does affect all of it. It is a death by a thousand shallow cuts. A penny tax on a dollar item to a person who counts by the thousands is an invisible tax. That same penny tax on a dollar item to a person who counts by the penny is the difference between a $0.01 bank balance the day before payday and a $25 overdraft fee on that same zero balance bank account.
I am not offering any examples that have not happened to me. Which is why Tinker's statement is a cruelty.

 

[Crissa]

They have to own them because we've made infrastructure and social pressure.

How about instead of subsidizing these cars, we put that much money into busses and trains?

-Crissa

 

[android04]

I'm in Nebraska and calculated where my break-even would be in miles driven per year between my Model 3 (flat $75 tax per year) and a fuel efficient sedan that pays tax per gallon of gas. IIRC, the break-even was around 12,000 miles per year. I drive about 20,000 miles per year. Therefore I still save money.

 

[Tinker71]

I'm in Nebraska and calculated where my break-even would be in miles driven per year between my Model 3 (flat $75 tax per year) and a fuel efficient sedan that pays tax per gallon of gas. IIRC, the break-even was around 12,000 miles per year. I drive about 20,000 miles per year. Therefore I still save money.

It is obvious most state legislators just put a temporary patch on the system and took the average miles per year for an average car X the tax rate per gallon and made it a flat fee. Actually Kudos to Nebraska, their fee favors EVs.

The 4200# M3 is 700# heavier than the 3500# BMW 355. So if weight is proportional to wear it will do 20% more wear on the road. The JA driving the HummerE will do 257% more wear.

While I am happy that you save money the other 3rd of Nebraskans will loose money. Nebraska will eventually have to make an adjustment if the road tax collected doesn't = the road maintenance budget.

Actually with all this napkin math I am surprised how insignificant road wear is in the total cost per mile. The IRS reimbursement rate for 2022 is $.58 per mile. So $.01 per mile on the low side for most people as a part of gas tax. Per snip below, use tax only pays for 27% of actual road maintenance nationally. Even if we added $.05 to account for the subsidy and heavier vehicles it is still only ~ 10% of the mileage reimbursement rate.

(snip)
(In 2018, state and local motor fuel tax revenue accounted for 27 percent of highway and road spending. Toll facilities and other street construction and repair fees provided another 12 percent, and the remaining 61 percent came from other sources.)

 

[Ogre]

This goes directly to my point. Are we on this site so disconnected with the reality of the working poor that my words sound insane? Cheap transportation is everywhere. Cars are sold that no insurance company worth their license would insure. Salvage titles, leaking valve guides, bald tires, crumpled fenders hammered out to resemble a body line. These vehicles aren't on the road because someone is proud to own them. They have to own them. They need the "what the hell it runs" asset in order to get to their job.
I am one of those people on the success side of the struggle.
Regressive taxation does affect all of it. It is a death by a thousand shallow cuts. A penny tax on a dollar item to a person who counts by the thousands is an invisible tax. That same penny tax on a dollar item to a person who counts by the penny is the difference between a $0.01 bank balance the day before payday and a $25 overdraft fee on that same zero balance bank account.
I am not offering any examples that have not happened to me. Which is why Tinker's statement is a cruelty.

I’ve watched poor relatives sink piles of money into keeping their crappy cars running because they “Need” cars. They “Need” it because there is no other viable way for them to get to work.

The only way to fix this is to fix housing. The disaster we call our healthcare system is the result of subsidizing a fundamentally broken system. You are suggesting something similar, putting a band-aid on the bleeding instead of fixing the underlying problem which is the lack of affordable housing near enough to jobs.

 

[Challeco]

I’ve watched poor relatives sink piles of money into keeping their crappy cars running because they “Need” cars. They “Need” it because there is no other viable way for them to get to work.

The only way to fix this is to fix housing. The disaster we call our healthcare system is the result of subsidizing a fundamentally broken system. You are suggesting something similar, putting a band-aid on the bleeding instead of fixing the underlying problem which is the lack of affordable housing near enough to jobs.

How is what I said proposing anything? I agree with you, housing sucks because it is generally an unregulated profit free for all. Healthcare sucks, I know because I have worked in medical laboratories for near 30 years in Oregon, Washington, and Texas, because it is a cash cow for insurance corporations, pharmaceutical corporations, and lawyers, and the automotive economies are an addiction that the corporations profit from.
Where I disagree with each of you is I chose not to punish those on the poor side of the spectrum. Elon started marketing to the wealthy because that is where the money is hiding. His promise to build an affordable car teased us all that maybe we could have cheap transportation that wouldn't ruin us with toxic fuels, and expensive reoccurring maintenance. While possibly providing a fun ride with a range that would allow us to go where we wanted without "borrowing" a rental or a robotaxi. His promise has gone to die in the same pit of profiteering. The "affordable" Tesla is postponed because it won't generate billions of revenue for the corporation. As for regressive taxation, it is just one more wealthy jerk's way to foist their responsibility onto people who cannot fight back.

 

[Crissa]

Not subsidizing things which exacerbate problems isn't 'punishing' people.

-Crissa

 

[tkal]

Y'all make this too hard. The only thing that matters is local policy, city laws make no sense for rural residents and the inverse applies as well.

Where is auto fuel taxed? At the pump. So tax ev at the charger per kWh for road maintenance. For home charging again, put a meter on it. If someone wants to charge via 115v to avoid the tax then just make EVs unable to plug in 115v. Anything else will be too authoritarian.

 

[Ogre]

Y'all make this too hard. The only thing that matters is local policy, city laws make no sense for rural residents and the inverse applies as well.

Where is auto fuel taxed? At the pump. So tax ev at the charger per kWh for road maintenance. For home charging again, put a meter on it. If someone wants to charge via 115v to avoid the tax then just make EVs unable to plug in 115v. Anything else will be too authoritarian.

You are talking about forcing people to charge their vehicles in a very specific way to track their usage. Then end your post with “Anything else will be too authoritarian”.

There are lots of much less intrusive/ authoritarian ways to fund roads than this.

Sponsored