If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Taxing Drivers By The Mile: Part II
BBC News
Sunday, 5 June, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4610755.stm 'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan New charges could be used to tackle road congestion Drivers could pay up to =A31.34 a mile in "pay-as-you go" road charges under new government plans. The transport secretary said the charges, aimed at cutting congestion, would replace road tax and petrol duty. Alistair Darling said change was needed if the UK was to avoid the possibility of "LA-style gridlock" within 20 years. Every vehicle would have a black box to allow a satellite system to track their journey, with prices starting from as little as 2p per mile in rural areas. Mr Darling has outlined his proposals to the BBC - previewing a speech he will give to the Social Market Foundation on Thursday. "The advantage is that you would free up capacity on the roads, you would reduce the congestion that we would otherwise face and you would avoid the gridlock that you see in many American cities today," he said. "This is a prize well worth going for. We've got to ask ourselves: would it work. Could it bring the benefits that I believe it could bring, because it would make a real change to the way we drive in this country." A satellite tracking system would be used to enforce the toll, with prices varying from 2p per mile for driving on a quiet road out of the rush hour to =A31.34 for motorways at peak times. The Department of Transport says the scheme would be fairer because those who travel greater distances would pay the most. "We have got to do everything we can during the course of this parliament to decide whether or not we go with road pricing," Mr Darling said. If public reaction is favourable, a pilot scheme planned for the Leeds area could be rolled out nationwide within the next 10 years. It is more likely to make people think about the cost of a journey before undertaking it The Environment Agency's Nick Rijke warned that shifting money away from fuel duty would take away the incentive for people to use green vehicles. And AA Motoring Trust director Bert Morris said there were a number of issues which needed to be addressed. "Tourism is car-based in this country. Would we have empty hotels on summer days on the coast if people couldn't afford to drive?" It was also important to ensure that drivers with less money were not penalised, Mr Morris added. RAC Foundation spokeswoman Sue Nicholson said the plan could help counter a projected 45% growth in congestion problems by 2030. "Providing this tax was substitutional to fuel tax and road tax and provided we had some other guarantees then I think, for a lot of people, this would be a tempting option," she said. Environmental group Friends of the Earth broadly welcomed road charging but warned the transport crisis could only be tackled if money raised was invested in improving alternatives to car travel. Professor Garel Rhys, director of the Centre for Automotive Industry Research at Cardiff university's business school, believed road pricing would have to be introduced in the UK. But he warned: "The key is trying to introduce those tolls without affecting the flow of traffic, ie. not having to stop and pay at a booth which caused congestion itself. "Governments will upset at their peril society's wish to do what it wants to do and that is to move around." |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Ed Stasiak" > wrote in message oups.com... BBC News Sunday, 5 June, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4610755.stm 'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan New charges could be used to tackle road congestion Drivers could pay up to £1.34 a mile in "pay-as-you go" road charges under new government plans. The transport secretary said the charges, aimed at cutting congestion, would replace road tax and petrol duty. Alistair Darling said change was needed if the UK was to avoid the possibility of "LA-style gridlock" within 20 years. Every vehicle would have a black box to allow a satellite system to track their journey, with prices starting from as little as 2p per mile in rural areas. Mr Darling has outlined his proposals to the BBC - previewing a speech he will give to the Social Market Foundation on Thursday. "The advantage is that you would free up capacity on the roads, you would reduce the congestion that we would otherwise face and you would avoid the gridlock that you see in many American cities today," he said. "This is a prize well worth going for. We've got to ask ourselves: would it work. Could it bring the benefits that I believe it could bring, because it would make a real change to the way we drive in this country." A satellite tracking system would be used to enforce the toll, with prices varying from 2p per mile for driving on a quiet road out of the rush hour to £1.34 for motorways at peak times. The Department of Transport says the scheme would be fairer because those who travel greater distances would pay the most. (snip) In other words, another tax that favors the rich. I don't know how it is in England, but a similar road use taxing scheme in the U.S. would hit the poor and middle-class HARD, while the rich would hardly pay anything at all. In the U.S., most people can't afford to LIVE anywhere near where they WORK. That's because the employers are in areas where housing prices are sky-high. The rich will have condos or houses near enough to work that they can walk or ride a bicycle. Everbody else (the middle class and down) have to commute to work, most driving a half hour or longer one way. Result: Almost all road maintenance paid by the poor and middle class, and almost NOTHING paid by the rich for maintaining the roads. Great ystem. -Dave |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
[snip]
> In other words, another tax that favors the rich. I don't know how it is > in England, but a similar road use taxing scheme in the U.S. would hit the > poor and middle-class HARD, while the rich would hardly pay anything at > all. > > In the U.S., most people can't afford to LIVE anywhere near where they > WORK. That's because the employers are in areas where housing prices are > sky-high. The rich will have condos or houses near enough to work that > they can walk or ride a bicycle. Everbody else (the middle class and > down) have to commute to work, most driving a half hour or longer one way. > > Result: Almost all road maintenance paid by the poor and middle class, > and almost NOTHING paid by the rich for maintaining the roads. Great > ystem. -Dave I don't know if I agree with you; I don't think that it's that clear-cut. Depends on the metro area. Take Holyoke, MA, where most of the poor lives right near the center of the city and take other forms of transportation than cars to work (not necessarily public), but at least a significant percentage of them do own cars; the rich live up the hill from the downtown, and it's doubtful they actually work in Holyoke. What about Albany, NY, where you can pick up a studio apartment for around $400 right by the capital buildings, and the rich actually live out in Loudonville and other surrounding areas mostly? Of course, with Boston and New York, you do have concentrations of the rich near the center. Still, I'm not convinced that the situation is as black and white as you make it, given modern, irrational transportation patterns (i.e. instead of simply commuting in and out of a central city, people head in all sorts of directions from their homes, wherever they may be). I wouldn't be surprised if there was a study out there that supports what you've said; it's just that such a study would provide more data than what you've offered to support the assertion that a tax would fall more heavily on the rich. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Stasiak wrote: > BBC News > Sunday, 5 June, 2005 > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4610755.stm > > 'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan > > New charges could be used to tackle road congestion > Drivers could pay up to =A31.34 a mile in "pay-as-you go" > road charges under new government plans. > > The transport secretary said the charges, aimed at cutting > congestion, would replace road tax and petrol duty. > > Alistair Darling said change was needed if the UK was to > avoid the possibility of "LA-style gridlock" within 20 > years. > > Every vehicle would have a black box to allow a satellite > system to track their journey, with prices starting from > as little as 2p per mile in rural areas. What I don't understand about this is that a basic gas tax already taxes those who use the roads more right? So this plan would tax those that use certain road even more. Is that worth the costs associated with setting up and monitoring this program? Just so you can shift revenue from those travelling in the country to those travelling in the city? Jon |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Result: Almost all road maintenance paid by the poor and middle
class, and almost NOTHING paid by the rich for maintaining the roads." JS> I don't undertstand how the rich pay almost nothing but the poor pay more under that scheme. The fees are based on where you are driving from and not on what you make (or own). If a rich man and a poor man each commute 30 miles to the city center they pay the same amount to use the roadway. I do not understand your math. If you are saying that as a group the rich pay less in total than the middle and lower class, well yes that's true. The sheer numbers of people in the middle and lower classes account for that and not some undefined rightwing conspiracy. The driving toll is a user fee, just like bus fare and bridge tolls. The potential downside of such a tax is that it could redirect so many people to public transportation that more and trains and train right-of-way will have to be acquired. And revenues for road maintenance may decline to a point that other taxes will have to be imposed. Unintended consequences.... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
> 'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan
The morons who think toll booths are a great idea ought to be creaming thier pants over this one. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Jon Enslin wrote: > Ed Stasiak wrote: > > BBC News > > Sunday, 5 June, 2005 > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4610755.stm > > > > 'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan > > > > New charges could be used to tackle road congestion > > Drivers could pay up to =A31.34 a mile in "pay-as-you go" > > road charges under new government plans. > > > > The transport secretary said the charges, aimed at cutting > > congestion, would replace road tax and petrol duty. > > > > Alistair Darling said change was needed if the UK was to > > avoid the possibility of "LA-style gridlock" within 20 > > years. > > > > Every vehicle would have a black box to allow a satellite > > system to track their journey, with prices starting from > > as little as 2p per mile in rural areas. > > > What I don't understand about this is that a basic gas tax already > taxes those who use the roads more right? So this plan would tax those > that use certain road even more. Is that worth the costs associated > with setting up and monitoring this program? Just so you can shift > revenue from those travelling in the country to those travelling in the > city? > > Jon Yes, there is a fuels tax. Presently, governments collect between $0.0111 to $0.061 per mile of travel from each fuel burning vehicle. That is enough to pay for a road with lane mile costs in the $5 million to $10 million range with low peaking and high average daily use. A peaking lane might run $35 million per lane mile and generate only $1 million in gasoline taxes. Key words in this comparison of prices is the cost per mile. Yes, if someone drives more miles, he/she pays more total fuel taxes, but the taxes per mile is the same. And that is my two cents (per mile) on the issue. Not complaining that two cents is too much, but that the two cents goes to buy the wrong thing. Congestion pricing is aimed to get people to drive off peak or find alternate transportation. How much is your time worth? Ten dollars an hour? Would you pay three dollars toll to save twenty minutes travel time? What values of time and pricing balance out to make the road free flowing? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"John S." > wrote in message oups.com... > "Result: Almost all road maintenance paid by the poor and middle > class, and > almost NOTHING paid by the rich for maintaining the roads." > > JS> I don't undertstand how the rich pay almost nothing but the poor > pay more under that scheme. The fees are based on where you are > driving from and not on what you make (or own). If a rich man and a > poor man each commute 30 miles to the city center they pay the same > amount to use the roadway. I do not understand your math. > Simple: The rich can afford to live close to where they work, IF they ork. -Dave |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Simple: The rich can afford to live close to where they work, IF they
ork. -Dave" JS> In that case if the rich man is only driving 2 miles to work why should he pay for 28 more miles of use that he never inflicted on the road. Or said another way why should he subsidize the driving habits of someone else. In many cities the opposite is true. The rich live well away from the inner city and thus would be impacted heavily by a milage-based tax. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:07:55 -0400, "Ted B." > wrote:
> >"Ed Stasiak" > wrote in message roups.com... >BBC News >Sunday, 5 June, 2005 >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4610755.stm > >'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan >(snip) > >In other words, another tax that favors the rich. I don't know how it is in >England, but a similar road use taxing scheme in the U.S. would hit the poor >and middle-class HARD, while the rich would hardly pay anything at all. Yep. There's not nearly as many rich people, and they can only drive 1 car at a time, just like anyone else, so they, as a group, wouldn't be paying much at all. >In the U.S., most people can't afford to LIVE anywhere near where they WORK. >That's because the employers are in areas where housing prices are sky-high. Housing prices are high because they are near the employment! >The rich will have condos or houses near enough to work that they can walk >or ride a bicycle. That too. > Everbody else (the middle class and down) have to >commute to work, most driving a half hour or longer one way. Yep. >Result: Almost all road maintenance paid by the poor and middle class, and >almost NOTHING paid by the rich for maintaining the roads. Great >ystem. -Dave Sure enough. The rich will take their private planes cross country, too, and escape the road tax that way. OTOH, if they get a tax plan so simple that it is just a matter of collecting the money by reading GPS information from passing cars, they'll have travel taxed at $1 a mile or more overnight, no matter what road you're using. If you have a long driveway, it might cost you $1.00 for the round trip just to get the mail! It'll cost $6000 - $9000 for a driving vacation like you might have taken as a kid - and you'll be the last one out there, 'cuz no one else, except the rich will be able to afford it, and they'll be flying anyway... Dave Head > |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.autos.makers.chrysler FAQ, Part 1/6 | Dr. David Zatz | Chrysler | 2 | April 22nd 05 05:32 AM |
rec.autos.makers.chrysler FAQ, Part 4/6 | Dr. David Zatz | Chrysler | 0 | April 22nd 05 05:32 AM |
rec.autos.makers.chrysler FAQ, Part 2/6 | Dr. David Zatz | Chrysler | 0 | February 2nd 05 05:22 AM |
Wed Night N2003 league looking for drivers | [email protected] | Simulators | 0 | November 30th 04 02:46 AM |
2000 Cabrio Driver's Window Weatherstripping Question | Jose R. Perez | VW water cooled | 0 | October 21st 04 03:32 AM |