My comment must be read with the post I was responding to. That original post made the clever sarcastic remark that government should force non-road users to pay a shoe/sock/sandal tax to pay for highways. I was pointing out that our government has already done something similar. Specifically forcing taxpayers to buy insurance even if that taxpayer has a better way of financing their medical needs.
Better how ? Ignoring the bill ? Dumping on the general taxpayer ? Or are you thinking of one of the billionaires who prefer to self-insure ? Are your really going to keep trying to defend your poor example ? Let it go.
But yea.... a 50 dollar tax cause my car burns less gas than a hillbilly in a 13mpg truck in dumb. I am ok with taxing plug in because they don't pay road tax when they pay their electric bill.
Here is VA Delegate Scott Surovell recent speech against the VA hybrid tax. It's hard to believe any other state hybrid tax proposal could be as ill-conceived as Virginia's "quadruple taxation of hybrids", but some of our arguments apply to all states.
Here is VA Delegate Scott Surovell's recent speech against the VA hybrid tax. It's hard to imagine that any other state's hybrid tax proposal could be as ill-conceived as VA, but some of the same arguments apply.
"The hybrid tax as it stands is flawed policy, not withstanding that I intend to vote for the amendments". Didn't have to watch any more that 40 seconds of that. It can't be that flawed if you voted for it.
I agree that part sounds a little lame in the clip, but I believe you are taking it out of context. Delegate Surovell voted against the transport bill. In this clip he is apparently being a good loser, adopting the final edits on a bill he actually voted against. Surovell paid a heavy price for his "no" vote: Washington Post made an editorial saying even though the VA hybrid tax was "nonsensical", the Post said overall the VA transportation bill was a bi-partisan triumph that only a bad person would have opposed. The Post went so far as to list all the names who voted against the bill, and basically said these folks should be voted out of office. Of course, the Wash Post lost me on that; I am still mystified at their editorial position. All I can say is the VA democrat party was, it turns out, highly in favor of the bill, so apparently the Post was on their side. I am also still mystified why the democrat party so strongly supported a repub bill to whack NoVa, but suffice it to say their need for tax $$$ (out of my pocket) was apparently urgent. Don't forget the dems are trying to win back the governors seat this year.
Nova has an insatiable lust for tax dollars and multi billion dollar public works projects. As far as a dem retake of the governors mansion; with DC turning into scandal city I don't think that's likely.
Hey see this: North Colorado is thinking about seceding, so it can be done ( I spelled it wrong last time, I know): Northern Colorado Looks To Secede From Colorado - YouTube
I remember living in New York and the lower half wanting to separate from the Upper half. There have been riffs about Northern California separating from Southern California. LA almost separated the West side separate from the Valley. It went to a vote but was defeated.
Seems like the wrong thing to do. States look to tax hybrid and electric car owners to recoup road funding | Fox News iPhone ?
Ironic choice of photo since in New York at least, the v isn't even eligible for a "Clean Pass", not that the CP option was a reason to purchase it...
Bad analogy as they use the hospital because they are sick from lack of health ins and the using the very expensive hospital which sends them a very big bill for very expensive emergency care bankrupts the poor without health insurance. They are still sick and now bankrupt. Irrelevant though to the anti-American right wing legislators who tax the solutions to the $14T oil war, the $400B oil trade deficit, the things that are bankrupting the nation, killing out service people in foreign wars, killing all of us by financing terrorism, killing our environment. A vote for a tax on fuel efficiency in any form is a vote for war, terrorism, pollution and economic ruin.
