It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WA State likely to approve pilot program to charge drivers per mile

page: 2
33
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Pilot program, road useage charge... Call it what you will, it is still a TAX!
This won't be temporary unless those Citizen's vote them out. This tax is most likely here to stay.




posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:11 PM
link   
California is trying to pass this too. Have any of you heard of this American Community Survey? I first saw it in 2010 when the actual Census was going on and was horrified.

I also vaguely remember some of the questions being about travel time for work, entertainment etc. I swear that the only thing that survey doesn't want it how many times you have sex a week.

They say it is mandatory but that's BS the only thing you 'have' to respond to is the actual census and that's the number of people in residence, ages, sex and names. That's it. Don't ever let some census worker tell you different, I was one, and they told us to do whatever we had to to get ALL the info they wanted.

This survey is NOT mandatory is BS.

Check it out, it's pretty horrifying heh, to me anyway.

Lil



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
They already charge by the mile, and it's a graduated tax favoring fuel efficient vehicles. Gas hogs pay more per mile because their mpg is a lot less. Washington State has one of the highest gas taxes in the country. For everyone, the more miles you drive, the more taxes you pay. When you get right down to it, isn't a gas tax really a "charge per mile"?
edit on 12/9/2014 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler




When you get right down to it, isn't a gas tax really a "charge per mile"?


Kinda. It varies a lot on what you drive though, as you said.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Grumble

That's actually not a bad idea. I see problems though. Family of 5 is going to need a larger vehicle than a family of 3. People in Eastern WA or those that live in the mountains have heavier vehicles because they need four wheel drive. Some people need pickups for work.


You have to ask yourself whether this tax should be like a user fee or like a public good we all share in paying. I would argue that roads should be paid for by those who use them. The single greatest determinant of "use" (really degradation of the asset) is weight of the vehicle on it. This is why, on toll roads, vehicles with more axles pay higher tolls. This would have the additional benefit of further encouraging people to drive more fuel efficient vehicles, but it will not mean that more efficient power unit technology will result in funding deficits (like the gas tax does).

I don't expect this to happen any time soon, however, as it will be very unpopular with the right wing (who want more revenue for the oil industry) and the "freedumb" crowd who think the government should not be able to tell them what to drive (even though they already do in a hundred different ways). It will be interesting to see if any states not so prone to pressure from the energy industry will try this.

edit on 9-12-2014 by Grumble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I do not reside in WA. But if I did I would be pissed.

I am a construction worker. I drive 60 miles one way to work a day. That is 120 miles a day.

So what they are saying is that if you work in a profession where you drive, you are getting reamed for trying to make a living.

I do pay more fuel taxes than most. I drive more.

Our whole system and way of life are all jacked up.

It really makes my blood boil.

Screw the working man/woman, reward the ones that don't want to work.



This whole gas/mileage tax thing really makes me upset.
edit on 9-12-2014 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Grumble

You make good points.




I would argue that roads should be paid for by those who use them.


In my mind we all pretty much do. If you get mail, it's delivered via truck. If you have garbage pickup, a truck does it. I think people that benefit should all share in the cost, regardless of whether or not they actually own or operate a motor vehicle.

I do agree that larger vehicles cause more damage, but wouldn't that already be taken into account with the gas tax as they need more fuel (generally) to move?

How do you feel about charging a higher tax for cars over say $50,000 when tabs are renewed or when the vehicle is first purchased? I see downsides there too.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

Thats some BS. They failed to move the carbon tax scheme and are now trying this. Nice

If what they want is to make everyone resort to criminality and identify with enemies of state then keep this up.

They will only breed dissent. I am all for it at this point.

They dont need more taxes. They need basic business management classes. Maybe a course or two in civics. Hell, they could learn from regular people about how to balance a freaking check book.

No more taxes. We will get uncomfortable and then violent.

No.
edit on 12 9 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

edit on 12 9 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

so lemme see if i have this straight....

for years, these politicians scream, and gnash their teeth about the environment, and how we're ruining it, and how we should have better cars, and then when the people get better cars, they decide to to an about face, and say "oh, well f**k the environment, we just want your money"?

these idiots need to piss off..



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: American-philosopher
a reply to: StoutBroux

Oh no don't get me started on the toll Bridges!!!! they said wait they said that eventually the 520 toll bridge would go away and it would just pay for itself right. Tolls are like Trolls they just stay there and metastasize.



Where I live they built a turnpike in the 50's or 60's that was suppose to revert to a non toll road when the road was paid for in 20-30 years. Well when it was paid for they decide to do some improvements so they issued bonds. When those improvements were completed they decided to put those concrete barricades between the two roads to keep people safe if they went off the road and hit an oncoming car. Were talking almost 200 mile of barricades. We have yet to get our road so I would have to agree the taxing of miles driven will be added to the taxes already wasted federally and locally by government that has not shown they can manage money and live within their means.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: American-philosopher

And every time they give us a new tax or increase an old one you get to hear "well, we don't have a state income tax"

It's like BFD when you tax everything else out the A.

IMO this is the Agenda 21 type stuff starting to rear its ugly head. They want to make travel so expensive that they can draw everyone into the urban centers. I'm sure everyone here has seen the maps with all the restricted zones.

Panem coming soon. May the odds be ever in your favor.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: guitarplayer

lol, New Jersey?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 08:33 PM
link   
...and the people who drive in the state who come from other states? Particularly if they have hybrid cars, how do they pay these taxes? Only on the petrol which they also do not use much of. Yes, sounds as if you need some sense driven into the heads of people making the decisions there.

It seems that this is charging those people who live in the state for everyone else who live in other states but use your roads. Just have toll booths at each exit of certain roads which people use most.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: qmantoo




and the people who drive in the state who come from other states?


I didn't even think about that. Excellent point. I wonder how they would address this. I can see it now, "And this is why we need to keep the gas tax."



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: qmantoo




and the people who drive in the state who come from other states?


I didn't even think about that. Excellent point. I wonder how they would address this. I can see it now, "And this is why we need to keep the gas tax."



I have a feeling the other states are in cahoots with this one. They probably worked out a deal that if it works, they will also join in on the money.

Personally, I see this hurting the economy even more.

All I can really say is (Lol).



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: liejunkie01




Personally, I see this hurting the economy even more.


That was something I forgot to add to the OP. If people are forced to pick between going out and spending money or paying additional taxes they're going to make the choice that keeps them employed and fed.

This also made me think of something else. So if we start taxing people for driving, aren't people going to drive less, and therefore pay less, which will require another new tax?



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

I know I won't be driving as much.

If I were to get charged a nickel per mile,

120 miles a day
x.05
=$6
x5 days a week
=$30
x4 weeks
=$120

That would be $120 a month just to get to work and back. Not including family drive time.

I will personally start a protest and picket the officials.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Kansas
a reply to: Daedalus



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Here in Kansas when they raised the tax on cigarettes to 50 cents a pack when Kathleen Sebelius was governor she threaten to put state police on the borders to catch tax cheats as she put it who were going to Kansas city Mo buying cigarettes and bringing them back across the river to KC Kansas. If she is any indication of how governors feel about taxes then they would find one way or another to catch all the tax cheats as she put it.


originally posted by: qmantoo
...and the people who drive in the state who come from other states? Particularly if they have hybrid cars, how do they pay these taxes? Only on the petrol which they also do not use much of. Yes, sounds as if you need some sense driven into the heads of people making the decisions there.

It seems that this is charging those people who live in the state for everyone else who live in other states but use your roads. Just have toll booths at each exit of certain roads which people use most.



posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: Grumble

You make good points.




I would argue that roads should be paid for by those who use them.


In my mind we all pretty much do. If you get mail, it's delivered via truck. If you have garbage pickup, a truck does it. I think people that benefit should all share in the cost, regardless of whether or not they actually own or operate a motor vehicle.

I do agree that larger vehicles cause more damage, but wouldn't that already be taken into account with the gas tax as they need more fuel (generally) to move?

How do you feel about charging a higher tax for cars over say $50,000 when tabs are renewed or when the vehicle is first purchased? I see downsides there too.


I get things delivered via FedEx/UPS/USPS etc... those carriers will make money on this since they will be collecting double/triple/n-times the amount since every package will probably carry a WA mileage surcharge. If 20 packages travel the same route, they have made 19 times more in fees than necessary. How will they resolve this or will the public just eat the expense.

And once we all get back to riding our bikes around, they will tax them, somehow, that is a sure bet.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join