Originally Posted by
Mobile 155
You have a valid point. But if there were no gas and user fees collected drivers and non drivers would still pay all of the same fees and taxes that fund roads. Everyone uses the roads to some extent and mass transit uses it as much as anyone else. So if 100 percent of the burden is on the shoulders of the tax payer and the drivers are paying enough to reduce the costs by 50 percent nationally is not that more than non drivers have to contribute? Imagine how much of the transportation could be funded if non drivers were assessed matching fees for their form of transportation? Not going to happen I know but it is no less.
To help stress my point. If 50 percent of the highway transportation and building is funded by taxes and fees, and 50 percent is paid by "everyone", drivers and non drivers at the same time is not the non driver paying less?
Just to show where I am coming from:
Road Spending by State Funded by User Taxes and Fees, Including Federal Gas Tax Revenues | Tax Foundation
Saying we wouldn't need as many roads is a belief that government will only spend what they need to spend to build only what they need to build. Call me skeptical. But that would be a balanced budget I I don't see that in my future.
Add California to the list of state's where fuel and gas taxes plus yearly registration fees more than pay for road maintenance and construction with billions being siphoned off for the general funding of state government. Add sales taxes on vehicle purchases to the state's take and it's easy to see why cities love their autoparks.
It's common for the licensing of businesses and housing tracts to be held up until they agree to pay for the expansion of roads nearby and many homeowner communities are responsible for the maintenance of streets that are open to the public. Then, of course, there are all of the property taxes that pay for the building and maintenance of public infrastructure... not sure about how much the LCF lifestyle correlates with suburban living and home ownership.
I don't think anyone really cares that cyclists freely use roads that car owners pay for because most of us car owners probably feel "they" are "us" -- we ride bikes too: it's not "us" against "them." So, it rankles a bit to see LCF activists make it an "us" versus "them" issue by demonizing business in general and car ownership in particular and call the OP perverted for raising the issue that such activism is "super counter-productive."