Mileage tax proposed for state's drivers

daniel
An annual fee based on ODO reading and vehicle weight, to account for actual wear and tear on the roads, along with a hefty gas tax increase so the more you burn the more you pay. States that already do emissions testing might add in an emission factor to the annual fee.

This California/Oregon proposal is only about the gas tax and how some cars are using less gas so paying less tax. So any fee based upon mileage is what we are upset about because it penalizes Prius drivers for being frugal and lets Hummer drivers of the hook.

This thread is about NOT using the ODO reading and instead using the hoggish appetite of the massive SUVs and their pollution to work against them when it comes time to be taxed.

Ken Cooper had a formula to do that and since this is a gas tax that is collected when you pump your gas, it had to be calculated at that time. And having people drive someplace to get their ODO read means hiring more bureuacrats. So this is the advantage of a formula that is calculated at the pump.




DaveinOlyWA
ok then also provide proof of all your out of state visits and the mileage that was driven on city streets that dont come under state highway supervison or budget.

Right now we pay gas taxes on the basis of how much gas we buy. It’s built into the price per gallon. It makes no difference where you drive, in state or out, city or back woods. So why would you want to change that now?




DaveinOlyWA
as i said, there shouldn’t even be a disscussion on how to go about the BS legislation. shoot it down before it has a chance to get up!!

The best way to shoot down this proposal is to offer a better one.

When Kennedy became President, the top income tax rate was 90%. He lowered it to 70% but he also lowered the middle class rates substantially as well.
When Reagan became President, the top tax rate was 75% and he lowered it to 35% then later raised it to about 50% but he lowered middle class tax rates only a smidgeon.
When Shrub became President, he lowered the top tax rate from about 55% to 38% (or is it 43?) and he wants to lower it again. Again, his middle class tax rate cuts were tiny compared to Kennedy's.

The result of these tax decreases, primarily for rich people, has resulted in large tax increases for the rest of us in local fees, property taxes, gas taxes and the withdrawal of services. This is just a fact and is easily obtainable from Government web sites. (You won’t hear much about this in the Corporate owned media since the corporations were the biggest beneficiaries of the burden shift. Sometimes the story leaks out, but then it disappears.)

But things still have to get done and they have to get paid for. And if the rich are going to get away with a phenomenal decrease in their tax burden, someone else has to step in. That’s where this gas tax proposal comes in. Personally, I think a progressive federal income tax is the fairest for common people. And I think the phenomenal and massive progress of the USA 20th century proves that to be true. But for some reason, common American people don’t agree and continue to vote in those that want to move taxation to the common American people and off the backs of the rich. So be it. But there are consequences and this proposal in California/Oregon is just another example of one. When revenue falls in one area, it has to be made up in another.

By the way, my wife and I make a lot of money so we are among the people who have benefited by moving taxation away from us and onto common people. But I feel that even though this is good for my pocketbook, it is wrong for the future of this country. And because I love this country very much, I will probably never vote Republican again. And certainly not while the neocons are running that party.

 

Nothing simple about that solution either. What official would be reading the ODO on a yearly basis? The better made fools out there would just disconnect their ODO for all but 52 miles. "Why yes mister state inspector sir, I only drove my Hummer to church on Sundays - one mile round trip."

Please don't say "we can use GPS to confirm miles and location."

I can just imagine the black market in GPS mod chips - "Why pay state milage tax . . .Throw off the accuracy of your GPS Milage Recorder by several states . . . only $14.95"

If everyone pays the same tax per gallon - no way to cheat except for syphoning it ~ but that’s a different subject.

DaveinOly: I agree . . .These ideas must be squashed like the full time status of the California State Legislature.

 

imprezza:

the post you quoted me on was written in sarcasm in response to the previous post.

 

Sorry about that.

 

noo problem...

we all do it at one time or another and it happens much more often on longer threads.

but that is what the forums are for, to discuss, dissect, debate.

your posts nearly always bring fresh points of views and insight to the discussion and i welcome your input. keep up the good work.

 

I suppose there must be more offensive things they could do to my car, but I can't think of them offhand. Maybe they'll issue mandatory ankle bracelets and bill you for a sidewalk usage tax too?

I predict that within days of this feature becoming mandatory there will be kits available so you can pull the locator, reinstall it in a little suitcase, and after that it will work exactly as intended - measuring exactly how far that suitcase moves around.

 

Impreza:

I agree that the best thing would be a progressive federal income tax to replace all the regressive taxes. But I fear the average voter is so manipulated by political propaganda that votes are seldom based on the actual programs of the candidates. Ronald Reagan was one of the most popular presidents of recent times, yet the majority of voters disagreed with nearly everything he stood for. They liked his personal style and his outward affability, and that mattered more than his politics. It's the down side of democracy.

 

To Daniel,

You are exactly right. It is great to hear from someone who can see beyond the manipulations of the corporate media.

Did you ever see the Billy Crystal character on SNL where the guy always said it was better to "loooook maaarvelous" then to BE marvelous?

It was a great character/skit and little did I realize back then how true (sadly) it really was.

Mark

 

i wouldnt encourage em any... next thing you know, just to keep the Priuses idling at stop lights, they will require us to use the Prius to power up the traffic lights while we wait.

 

Impreza:

No, I never saw SNL. I don't have a TV. But there was another incident from the Reagan years: some reporter took a bunch of clips of Reagan, and after each clip he debunked everything Reagan had said and showed how dangerous his ideas were. He expected a lot of flak from the White House, but Reagan's people loved it! It showed him looking affable and presidential and the impact on the public was just the opposite of what the reporter had intended. It was the image that mattered. The words made no difference at all. I suspect it's the same with the shrub: he talks tough and people are afraid. Nobody cares about the lies. The words don't matter. Image is everything.

Oops. I've gotten way off topic there. Well, I'll try to rescue myself: I kind of like the idea of a black box in every car. It could issue traffic tickets automatically. Of course, the Big Brother thing is a problem. So, instead of sending info back to the government, it could just charge the speeding fine to your credit card, and all the government would get is the money and the explaination, "Speeding fine, anonymous driver."

 

Bush lowered the top federal taxes from 39.6% to 35%. Look at page 74 of your 2003 1040 long form for the tax rates.

They had been 36% until Clinton put a "millionaires" tax on them of 10% and it went to 39.6%.

Reagan lowered tax rates but they also closed all kinds of loopholes the rich were using to avoid paying taxes at all. Tax receipts went up throughout the 80s even though the marginal rates went down. They never declined.

The top 10% of taxpayers in the US pay 65% of all income taxes. So much for the rich not paying taxes. The top 5% pay 50%.

When you have 5% of the people paying 50% of the tax bill....well you can argue I guess that they should pay even more, but you can't say they aren't paying anything.

 

Let's see:
Reagan years - growing deficits and growing national debt
Bush years - bigger deficits and bigger national debt
Clinton years - Whoa - budget surplus!
Dubya years - Blow the surplus, HUGE deficit and HUGE national debt

Ok, I see your point. ;-) Granted it isn't all linked to the tax rate.
No one wants to see what they make get taxed because we can all find somewhere to spend OUR money. But let's face a fact. People like Bill Gates and all those overpaid pro sports figures and CEOs could still buy groceries even if they had a marginal rate of 95%. While the top 5-10% pay 50-65% of the total tax bill, they still have a LOT more spendable income than the other 90-95% of taxpayers.