-=(8)=-

In foriegn counties where people are more aware and less selfish than
Americans you do not see inefficiant vehicles. In some areas they are
not allowed in the Proper. If you are possess the need to drive a HUMMER
or SUV despite its wasteful and social-environmental irresponsibility implications
you should pay a sustantially high tax for that. Also, my old little 4 cylinder
Suzuki 32mpg econo-buckboard gets driven.....well, I cant remember the last
time I drove it, but I still have to pay registration, insurance and inspection
fees on it. To me, the disparity on a moral level is too close between people
who are socially aware and responsible to those who arent....If they are NOT
going to tax Mr. Look-at-Me more than give the socially concience person a
huge break. How this would be done or what type of sliding scale one might
use is debateable. An across the board increas in taxes only hurts working people.
In Europe, the high taxes/ cost of gas goes for useful stuff like healthcare and
education. Here, it goes to shareholders and politicains so rasing it for everyone
would be another assault on the poor working prole. Raising it for those who dont
mind squandering money in the face of commonsense would be a better answer.

I-Like-To-Bike

Oh Do Tell!! Where do these less selfish people live? And WTF is the "Proper"?
BTW how many family members are you responsible for providing transportation at the same time with your unused Suzuki?

EricDJ

Hard plan to put into effect, gas stations will not want to foot the expense of retrofitting pumps, and consumers will not pay to add any recognizing chip to their vehicle. This would be too hard to do.

But as some countries do, there is another way, tax the vehicle based on the engine size. Then each state can charge a higher rate each year for registration renewals based on the same criteria.

Sure a motor like an e30 m3 may be small and based on the same platform as an e21 yet produce amazing hp, and sure a vw motor can be tuned. There will be ways to get the power, but the majority of people will think twice about buying that tank of a truck that was meant to be stock.

If you want to read some funny stuff that will make you think large vehicles need to pay higher taxes, google vehicle weigh laws. Afew people have written about how technically these vehicles are illegal to drive in most places. ALL of Beverly hills is an example, yet many people over 6k+ plus vehicles. There is signage all over that say no trucks over 6000 pounds. Yet theres SUV's everywhere. The US allows these vehicles on the roadways in masses where roads aren't made to accept the weight in such frequencies. They ruin the roads while my BMW has a tiny motor that doesn't top 110mph and I have redone the suspension twice, our new Jetta is starting to feel the pain on the drivers side.

If these vehicles are going to be allowed on the roads to destroy, they need to be responsible for higher taxes to compensate for the damage they cause.

Summary:
Tax vehicles by motor sizes and by weight. Increase penalties for vehicles that produce exhaust waste and enforce that law too. I se vehicles all the time smoking that don't get pulled over.

HiYoSilver

Not helpful idea. Where's the gain?

Better idea is to have a equal transportation tax on all modes of transportation and sandbox the receipts so these taxes can ONLY be used for transportation and not for favorite pork barrel project.

There also should be a percentage allotment of transportation taxes accord to transportation mode. Leave 20% floating mode, but if vehicles generate 50% of income, require at least 30% of revenue be spend on road system. The only reason we don't have bike aware signals, wider lanes, and state driven driver education systems is not because of technology. There are cool solutions to those problems, but lack of budgeting has prevented their deployment.

joeprim

Farm diesel is died green and if they find you with green fuel in you road vechicle there is a fine. But sinse my moped is for road use it wouldn't use green gas. How would you detect this?

Besides like several folks have said the big stuff uses more gas so they pay more taxes. Where is the problem? Do we think that roads that can carry those 18 wheeled trucks notice the difference between an H2 and a Honda?

Joe

dobber

Al Gore called, said you probably meant "Lockbox"

slagjumper

Remember when John Denver bought a 2000 gallon gas tank for his backyard? There should be a 1 dollar per gallon alternate engery tax-- with all the money going to develop fuel cell technology. As my teen daughter would say, “fossil fuels are so 20th century.”

I am a family guy with 2 vehicles. I drive the 1996 Ford Exploder that is plastered with pro-bike and anti EXXON stickers. I figure, that if I sold the thing someone else would be burning a gallon of gas at 5300 btus per 12 miles. It gets about the same MPG as the first model t.

So I keep it and use it as a very annoying rolling speed bump. I must piss a lot of people off as I go the speed limit. If I won a new Prius, I'd take the ol Expoder to the next burning man and set it a blaze, so that no one else could use it.

cruentus

The transponders could be installed at the dealer for new vehicles, and at state inspection stations for older vehicles. Pumps could be modified quite easily, most pumps are electronic now anyway. The cost of refitting the pumps could be covered with a one time surcharge on all new vehicles that sell for more than $40K.

Any vehicle with a missing/non-functional transponder would default to the highest tax rate. Deliberate tampering/evasion of the tax would result in very high fines. Snitches who turn in cheats would be eligible to receive half the fine money as a reward.

misteralz

That's what happens here in the UK, it seems to work reasonably well. My first car was registered as an 1100cc so I paid less tax, but the engine was actually a semi-race 1700...

I've seen the exhaust emissions law enforced too - as a way of generating revenue. How, I hear you ask?
Picture the scene, I live in a city wealthy from the oil industry. I passed two Aston Martins on the way home from work yesterday and that's not unusual. The majority of folk here have newish or very well maintained cars. So you can imagine how amused I was when I saw some little council-appointed enviro-nazis flagging down shiny new Audis, BMWs and immaculate classics and not being able to fine them. But the most amusing part? The emission checking gear. Being run off a two-stroke diesel generator.

supcom

This has nothing to do with cycling safety and advocacy. It's basically just anti-car ranting.

flipped4bikes

Fairness? How about H2s currently aren't even included in CAFE manufacturer ratings!

cruentus

No, it's anti-petroleum ranting. If we don't do something about our oil addiction now, it'll only be more difficult to deal with in a few years time. A little pain now, or a lot of pain later.

EricDJ

I'd like to hear your ideas on where the money would come from to pay for transponders for the cars and readers would come from. Gas stations will resist the expense at the pump, car owners will resist it for their current cars. People may cheer this aproach on a ballot until they hear the tax increase needed to do so. On top of all the expenses you will also have installation and monitoring fees.

Your next issue is with privacy advocates. They are going to fight tootha and nail to have this idea stricken down due to potential misuse of the data read and installed on said chips.

In Europe their plan works. You get taxed based on the motor, in our country we need taxes based on vehicle weights also since most areas SUV's are technically illegal since they are over the 6000 pound limits posted on street signs. In Beverly Hills SUV's are technically illegal in the entire city limits due to their weight.The system is called the DMV, and it is already in place with much more minimal costs than this transponder idea. You are forced to pay to get a plate sticker and things like parking permits.

If anyone has ideas on how to do the chip idea still, go for it. Even my way you still cannot put it into effect nationwide. If it could be put into effect by California, it could then spread to the rest of the country like other strict rules like our fuel mixtures and smog specifications.

cruentus

Yup. That's because a vanity ride for rich guys with small weenies, such as an H2, is classified as a truck by the Feds.

The pickup truck owned by a landscaper who nets $30K/year, and a H2 owned by a lawyer who makes $300K/year are considered the same thing as far as the Feds are concerned.

cruentus

Transponders are very cheap to make in large quantities. I have a tiny transponder on my key-chain that's used to pay for gasoline purchases at the pump instead of a credit card. The credit card company sent it to me for free, I doubt it cost more than a dollar to manufacture. I have an electronic toll transponder on the windshield of my car. The New York State Thruway Authority sent it to me for free when I signed up for their electronic toll service.

Most gas pumps have electronic meters that are linked to credit networks, they already have transponder readers installed to read key-chain credit transponders. How hard could it be to modify these pumps to read vehicle registration class information transponders? The modifications could be paid for by a one-time surcharge on new luxury vehicle sales -- passenger vehicles that cost > $40K.

Privacy would not be an issue, the transponder wouldn't ID the car by plate number or VIN, it would only provide vehicle make and model info.

EricDJ

A small transponder would facilitate fraud, too easy to move. And there is still millions of cars. As someone mentioned, what about gas in canisters for lawnmowers, etc other than cars. RFID is an issue now for privacy and has just been used to install viruses.

You have paid to use the toll roads and expenses like the cards are filtered into the price. This is a massive scale forced plan people early people in this thread have expressed with holes in it.

In 2003, The Bureau of Transportation estimated that there was 204 million vehicles in the US. It may be higher due to unregistered vehicles.

in 2004 It was said that 168,000 gas stations were in the US. An average station in Los Angeles has 16 fueling points. This means that there will need to be 2,688,000 Readers to read said chips. Obviously the readers will not cost $1.

Just to pay for a basic card that will have a possibility of fraud is 204 million dollars. If we estimate a single retrofit per gas station which includes all pumps with readers, wiring and a computer with router, etc at a low of 30 grand we have a US total of a low of 5,040,000,000 for gas stations plus the 204 million for the cards you estimate at $1.

Now we have to pay for people to monitor this to investigate fraud and operate the system yearly for more expenses.

So we have to overcome getting the public to approve all this and find funding for it. I can't imagine where to get it at that will not affect all consumers. If its a tax on gas until its paid for then all other items will go up from groceries, clothing, etc since they feel the sting too.

But we can bypass this all entirely and do it through the DMV with little setbacks from the public. It already works in Europe. A form of it with parking tickets already works here, don't pay the fees you can't renew the reg or get parking permits. The fees each year would be including in vehicle registration which if not paid means you cannot have stickers or parking permits.

SO the route the others proposed at the pump, where do we get the funding that makes all the parties involved happy?

So a LOW number to implement this plan would be

EricDJ

Keep in mind that my data I used is from 03 and 04. Thes numbers of cars and pumps have increased quite a bit since then.

misteralz

Cunning. "Vehicle A passed through this checkpoint at this time, then at this one at this time, that's an average of 87mph. I'll send the fine now..."

Two words, one being "that", and the other beginning with "F". I like to drive quickly.

webist

So too is the PT Cruiser considered a truck!

Smiziley

The state of Oregon has instituted a pilot program based upon the initial premise of this thread. Find out more info here; https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/OIPP/mileage.shtml

WalterMitty

I thought this was interesting. Other studies show hydrogen fuel cells, solar and wind have similar problems.

https://www.autospectator.com/modules...p?storyid=3627

I'm not an H1, 2, or 3 owner, nor do I play one on radio, but the emissions of all SUV's combined is a very small drop in the bucket of total emissions. A greater target would be the emissions from coal, gas and oil fired electricity production which could be solved within 10 years if the same people bellyaching about SUV's would quit blocking the construction of new nuclear power plants.

Likewise, the owners of old style oil burning furnaces burn more fuel per year than typical SUVs. Huge numbers of rural households burn all of their household trash in open barrels including plastics, VOC's, etc. Around the world stranded natural gas at crude oil production sites is flared into the atmosphere because we haven't invested in the technology to covert it into useful (and transportable) products economically at the the production site.

There are scores more examples, but some folks insist on obsessing over minor sources and unworkable remedies because they have bought into a political agenda item.

EricDJ

The PT Cruiser is built on a Neon platform. There is a lot of vehicles tha share platforms like this. By doing so it won't be govt classified as a truck and will not be subject to stricter standards.

Monoborracho

Some of you may recall a time back in the Carter administration when it was decided that luxury yachts and luxury cars should pay an additional excise tax. The result; one whole industry and all the jobs were basically wiped out in the yacht/boat business, and Detroit had to cut another upteen thousand jobs.

He really showed the yacht owners who was boss.

I'm a free market guy. If a Hummer owner can afford it, so be it. This country was built upon the idea that if you want to devote your time and money to it, it is your right to do so. I still believe that.

A tax, of any kind, is a drag on productivity and an attempt to redistribute wealth. Specialized and targeted taxes can also be an attempt to regulate and control behavior (i.e., spending on a Hummer instead of a bicycle) and I don't want anyone to do that to me and I don't want to do that to other people. Just let the price get high enough and fewer and fewer people will drive a Hummer. They only started driving them when the gas price was so low (remember 1998 and gas fell below $1). Sales slowed last year when gas got to $3 and it will do it again.

Let things be regulated by the invisible hand of the free market. It does a pretty good job.

Monoborracho

Actually, from a tax credit situation, this is no longer true as the Hummer has an enclosed bed accessible from the cab and doesn't qualify as a "pickup" thereby allowing for an income deduction of the majority of the sales price.

Feature this, go buy a new Ford crewcab on credit, and deduct $20,000 from your income, and save $6,000 in taxes if you are self employed. Now that is my kind of deal. Why was I supposed to be mad?

Roughstuff

Lots of valuable comments. I think the easiest way is to levy a fee/tax based upon engine size/horsepower each year at inspection (for example) or at excise tax time, and leave the rest up to the market. People with fuel efficient engines ALREADY pay less tax, since they buy less fuel; and versa vice.

IN any case lets use carefully thought out, but modest, measures within the tax and spending powers of all levels of government to make sure we get the most out of all the forms of transportation available to use: from shanks mare to jumbo jets.

Can't wait till we can just beam things around, though! Bring on Scotty!

roughstuff