Taxing Drivers By The Mile

> "Paul" > wrote
> > "Ed Stasiak" > wrote
> >
> > I wouldn't be surprised if the legislation for this included
> > yearly and/or random checks
>
> Or just set up "DUI check points," (or "papers checkpoints,"
> if you prefer) under the guise of "safety," and do the compliance
> check then....

A device similar to the 'red light cameras' could probably be
developed with a central computer constantly checking vehicles
stopped at a red lights and if your vehicle's transponder doesn't
send the correct signal, a digital photo is taken of your license
plate and you get a visit from the cops.

> "Scott en Aztlán" > wrote
> > "Ed Stasiak" > wrote
> >
> > This would require tearing up entire urban areas and rebuilding
> > them.
>
> So what? We've done it before, starting approximately 100 years ago.

The U.S. was far less urbanized 100 (even 50) years ago then
it is today, it wasn't a case of tearing up existing urban areas as
much as paving over farm fields.

> > the U.S. has been built around the car and any attempt to
> > switch to a mass transit system is simply going to be too expensive.
>
> Back in 1905, the U.S. had been built around the pedestrian, the steam
> railroad, and the horse & buggy. We tore everything apart and rebuilt
> it to serve the needs of the automobile back then, and we can tear
> (less of) it apart to (re)build our public transit infrastructure if we want
> to. All it will take are the right financial incentives and it will happen faster
> than you can drive to Poughkeepsie.

My neighborhood was a beet field prior to 1959 and the same
more or less applies to all urban/suburban areas in the U.S. It's
one thing to build something new onto an empty rural area, it's
a whole different story to REbuild an existing urban area.

If you eliminate the car (or make it so expensive that it's virtually
eliminated) how am I going to get from my suburban house to
work and back every day in any kind of reasonable manner via
a mass transit system?

I ain't walking a mile at the butt crack of dawn in the dead of
winter to get to a bus/train stop and I refuse to live in a 'hive'
just to make mass transit possible!

Mass transit is a good idea in a heavily urbanized area like London,
Tokyo, NY, ect but with the widely spread out American suburbs,
it's just not going to work.

Any American mass transit system has to deal with the situation as
it currently exists and IMO hybrid/electric cars with mass transit
available in dense urban areas is the way to go, not trying to shoe
horn a conventional mass transit system into the American way of life.

> "Robert Morien" > wrote
> > "Ed Stasiak" > wrote
> >
> > Either way, this idea is _so_ stupid, expensive and intrusive
> > that it's virtually assured of implementation. After all, this is
> > the government we're talking about....
>
> Traffic in london where they charge $10 per day to drive during
> the hours of 7am to 6pm is down 30%

London (like all of Europe) already has an existing mass transit
system that makes a policy like this simply an annoyance, in
addition Europeans already live in more crowded conditions
so the existing infrastructure is already geared to mass transit.

You start charging Americans $10 a day to drive in urban areas
and you're going to have riots on your hands.

> Charge more during rush hour will cause more drivers to demand
> their employers change shift hours

Great, so now I have to start work at 3:00am or 6:00pm?

> more people work from home using intranets

And if one isn't a mouse pusher?

> "Gary E. Ansok" > wrote
>
> And what if all you have in your wallet is $20.00 for gas and no
> credit cards? "Sorry, you don't get any gas, but we reduced your
> mileage bill by $20.00 as soon as you put the bill into the reader."
>
> Or will it become illegal to pay for gas with cash?

As I understand it, gasoline would become another utility
bill you'd get in the mail like electricity, phone, water, ect.
and drivers would get a monthly bill for $X depending on
how many miles they've driven.

Don't pay your bill, and the gas pump doesn't work.

"ameijers" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Ward" > wrote in message
> news
>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:35:08 GMT, "ameijers"
>> > wrote:
>>
> (snip)
>>
>> You don't suppose disabling the transponder would also disable the gas
>> pump, do you?
> Unless they have a mandantory retrofit of old cars, many of which have no
> way to make the mechanical speedometer talk to a transmitter, they would
> not
> be able to take that approach. Or are they gonna make everyone crush their
> old cars and buy new ones?
>
> aem sends...

That's pretty much what they're doing with TVs over the next couple years --
make everyone in the U.S. purchase new televisions or adapters (virtually
all of which are manufactured overseas) so that the government can make
money auctioning off the spectrum.

- B

In article >,
says...

>I've got a proposal that will make people pay per-mile taxes inversely
>proportional to their actual (not estimated) mileage. I call it the
>"gas tax", and it works like this: Whenever someone buys fuel, charge
>them a certain amount per gallon regardless of their mileage. They
>get 30mpg, they pay half the tax per mile as someone who gets 15mpg.
>Pretty cool, huh? Now if only some government would implement such a
thing....

Ths only problem are the stupid politicians who don't like to believe
that some before them had a better idea. Just look at what is being
done to our constitution by the new polititicans.
-------------
Alex

In article >,
"Ed Stasiak" > wrote:

> > "Robert Morien" > wrote
> > > "Ed Stasiak" > wrote
> > >
> > > Either way, this idea is _so_ stupid, expensive and intrusive
> > > that it's virtually assured of implementation. After all, this is
> > > the government we're talking about....
> >
> > Traffic in london where they charge $10 per day to drive during
> > the hours of 7am to 6pm is down 30%
>
> London (like all of Europe) already has an existing mass transit
> system that makes a policy like this simply an annoyance, in
> addition Europeans already live in more crowded conditions
> so the existing infrastructure is already geared to mass transit.
>
> You start charging Americans $10 a day to drive in urban areas
> and you're going to have riots on your hands.

works for me.


>
> > Charge more during rush hour will cause more drivers to demand
> > their employers change shift hours
>
> Great, so now I have to start work at 3:00am or 6:00pm?

You live in an area where no one works these hours?


>
> > more people work from home using intranets
>
> And if one isn't a mouse pusher?
>
>
Get a kiln

In article > ,
"Bill Grunnah" > wrote:

> "ameijers" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Bob Ward" > wrote in message
> > news
> >> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 23:35:08 GMT, "ameijers"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> > (snip)
> >>
> >> You don't suppose disabling the transponder would also disable the gas
> >> pump, do you?
> > Unless they have a mandantory retrofit of old cars, many of which have no
> > way to make the mechanical speedometer talk to a transmitter, they would
> > not
> > be able to take that approach. Or are they gonna make everyone crush their
> > old cars and buy new ones?
> >
> > aem sends...
>
> That's pretty much what they're doing with TVs over the next couple years --
> make everyone in the U.S. purchase new televisions or adapters (virtually
> all of which are manufactured overseas) so that the government can make
> money auctioning off the spectrum.
>
> - B
>
>

Just what in the united states isn't virtually all manufactured overseas?

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:42:28 -0500, "Paul" > wrote:

>
>"Gary V" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>> The argument in favor of GPS tracking is that then they will only
>> charge you for the miles you travel in your state. For example,
>> imagine OR passes this, and then you take a roadtrip from Portland,OR
>> to Portland, ME. 7000 miles later you get back to OR with your
>> transponder. You pull up to the pump, and suddenly they charge you
>> $24.00 for gas and $87.00 for miles. GAAAK!
>
>And I'm sure those states outside of OR in your example will just love
>the fact that you are paying tax to OR for driving on their roads....
>
>
>
No, if it's GPS based, Oregon stops taxing you when you leave the
state. Theoretically the state you entered would immediately start
THEIR taxmeter running, and collect from you when you stop for gas.

In article >,
Ed Stasiak > wrote:
>
>I ain't walking a mile at the butt crack of dawn in the dead of
>winter to get to a bus/train stop and I refuse to live in a 'hive'
>just to make mass transit possible!

The hive is what they want. 400 square feet per person.