Tax per gallon, or per mile?

Indeed, that's the idea behind Cloward-Piven, resulting in only the commiecrats at the top ultimately benefiting with the level of corruption that we currently have (as if somehow they're going to restrain themselves when they reach their vision of utopia). They tend to forget how well armed the American populace is...and would require damn near a holocaust to bring about their warped vision.

Interesting comment from the former Senator of IL:

Somebody had a change of heart since taking office...I blame the NWO, the FED, Wall Street, Bilderberg, et al (yes, even the American people for behaving so sheepishly).

 

Glenn Beck? Is that you?

Anyway, enough with the politics. :focus:

 

Sorry, just responding to a previous post. Discussions here have the tendency to take detours now and again. I just don't want to be a slave...Bushie and Soetoro are cut from the same globalist cloth. It feels like we're in hyperdrive now. Reading between the lines and removing one's head from the sand shouldn't be met with hollow accusations of "Glenn Beck!"

 

This thread is about one post from being moved to Fred's House of Politics.

Tom

 

They are not going to learn to live within our means until the voters who hire and fire them learn to to so.

Most voters are unwilling to pay their full share of the services they demand. And as this thread shows, the same unwillingness applies to many drivers as well.

Our road system needs both a tax related to road damage (weight and/or fuel use covers this) and to congestion (mileage covers this).

 

Part of the problem is that taxes get raided to fund other programs, then the original program fails. Social Security is a good example of this. Our politicians can't leave a pot of money unspent.

Tom

 

^On your first point, Fuzzy, voters *have* been learning to do so according to the household debt trends over the last 9 or 10 reporting periods: CHART OF THE DAY: American Households Just Slashed Their Debt At A Record Pace ;-)

I agree this has to extend to include services performed by municipalities and the feds (not to mention, the allowance of some programs to come to an end). I don't think any cars that consume gas should be subject to a mileage tax. I *might* succumb to one for vehicles that run solely on electricity or other energy, but if the costs exceed that of owning a fossil fuel burner, it creates another barrier to switching.

 

I'm not so sure it was learned. Looking at the timing, much of it was likely imposed involuntarily when lenders slashed their lending. Homeowners could no longer treat the homes as ATMs, and credit cards users had their credit limits slashed to near the amounts already owed.

 

Perhaps so...I didn't see any of my credit card limits slashed, however (it may have been on those with credit scores that were under a certain threshold).

 

Mine weren't cut either, but I hardly use them and had no balance. But overall, credit requirements are very sharply tightened, and huge numbers of heavy borrowers found their credit nearly cut off.

 

It makes no sense to me that the federal gas tax has been stuck at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993 (back when gas averaged $1.07 per gallon). Why not use a percentage rather than a flat rate? That way when oil gets more expensive, the taxes go up too.

 

unfortunately you are right... so they probably dont care about solving issues with mass transit but rather get construction money to the hands of their lobbyist friends (big corps that will get billions for the construction).

in the ends, it is all about money.

 

I would rather see it stay a fixed to a per gallon rate that gets adjusted for inflation.

The problem with setting it as a percentage of gasoline price is that government funding from a tax based strictly on price would vary widely as the price of gasoline varies. Gas price jumps all over, gasoline consumption on a national level varies slowly over a period of time.

 

I agree, but it hasn't been "adjusted for inflation" since 1993.

 

This original proposed idea would be easy enough to implement. Just have manufacturers put a bar code inside the fuel filler cap that allowed the pump handle to scan the combined EPA mileage of the vehicle (then perhaps an off-set for the GVWR), then pro-rate the tax based on the number of gallons purchased times the EPA figure, and roll that into the rotating counter as you fill the tank. No surprises.

The heavy guzzlers who actually get lower than the EPA estimate get spanked, and the light Prii who mostly get higher than EPA (on this board anyway) get a break. I like this idea. Easy to implement and retrofit, and the criminal penalties for tampering with the bar code are already in place.

You're welcome. =)

 

Having read all the post, there are some interesting comments.

I tend to look at the matter from a slightly different POV.

Tax/gal is easily administered .... no special equipment required .... the tax is paid incrementally as the fuel is pumped, and collected from the provider .... and, driver cheating is difficult. Conservation is encouraged and certainly gives great emphasis to fuel efficient vehicles.

Tax/mile is difficult to administer ... cheaters will find ways to disable the special recording/reporting equipment. Accurate mileage measuring devices will be costly, and errors will occur when tires are changed .... the tax burden would be due as a lump sum payment, and paid by the consumer ..... A new Bureau of Miles and Standards would be required in each state and at the federal level, all of which will cost considerably more than the revenue generated. The poor, that must use their own cars to get to work, wouldl bear the greater burden, whereas, executives, that drive company cars, will not share the burden. That will generate tax write-offs, further complicating our tax laws. Conservation is not considered in the tax computation.

As Jay Leno says .... "What could possibly go wrong here?"

Many of us could see this debate coming when more fuel efficient cars started becoming available.

 

I forgot to mention an added benefit: the people who always scream about the government gathering the number of miles they actually travel from their vehicle black boxes etc, have no cause for alarm. A guesstimate based on an EPA figure stamped on one's car is not probative evidence. There is no GPS record kept of where you dumped the liberal radio commentator's body. See, a win-win!

</literary license>

 

Here is you pseudo code:

The State MVA could retrofit all cars with these stickers when tags were issued. Just sayin'

 

gas prices will cause the double dip recession that is heading our way.

one thing that bothers me is when we talk about "addiction" to oil. Saying we are addicted to oil is like saying cancer patient is addicted to chemotherapy. I don't put gas in my car because i have to have it....i put it in because it's the only way i can get to work. i'm all for alternative energies, but i get offended when claims of addiction are made.

sorry, back to topic.

Keeping the tax at a flat rate is the only way to keep the government in check. if it were a flexible percentage, then they would overspend when gas prices are high and then have nothing left when prices drop. They can't really balance the checkbook as it is, so the more steady the paycheck to the government, the better.

 

So the real question is how to keep from getting cancer. It may be too late for you, but perhaps not for the next generation.

Tom