Epic fiscal facepalm, State levies tax to make up for loss of tax for electric cars!

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Friend Rabbit, let's take a step back, shall we? Before the discussion turns to another type of tax, I'd first would want to see how the money was originally spent and see the justification for the tax in the first place.

Providing more money to an irresponsible government (be it local, state, or federal) would not improve our conditions and would only enable the government to take more.




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
It is naive to think that this new tax will actually go to repairing our infrastructure. Americas infrastructure is falling apart and they have been raising taxes to pay for those repairs for decades and it just plain does not get done. Like every tax they levy it will be borrowed from for one stupid thing or another, but not used for roads/bridges.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
I'm all with ya on this one Beezer.

Fact is we pay far more in gas taxes then gets spent on the roads, and 99% of the road damage is done by commercial trucks.

We pay far too much in taxes, and get far too little back. I get squat back in comparison to what I pay into the system.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Way to encourage fiscal responsibility, saving, and environmental friendliness. Logic is obviously not the government's strong suite.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

I'm all with ya on this one Beezer.

Fact is we pay far more in gas taxes then gets spent on the roads, and 99% of the road damage is done by commercial trucks.

We pay far too much in taxes, and get far too little back. I get squat back in comparison to what I pay into the system.



From firsthand experience because both Father and oldest Brother are over the road independant truckers who pay tens of thousands each year in road use taxes and permit fees to each state along with fuel taxes they are pissed off everytime they hit an unrepaired pothole or other road hazard due to the governments taking funds from these taxes fees and permits and building such things as biking trails or other non- essential crap while the roads go to hell and ignorant car drivers blame them for the problems. They are the ones who pay the most and recieve squat back in return except grief from stupid idiotic car drivers who have no idea what truckers pay in taxes.

Trust me I grew up in the cab and saw things which makes you believe darwinism really was true theory and that was seen in practice as it developed. It was a good education for a young person in human behavior when those doing it thought there were no consequences and they let ego's free and used autos as lethal weapons or other asinine things like cuting off vehicles weighing ten times their weight - just stupid.

I still stand on the belief that no kind of new tax whether on electric cars or anything else on the road is a solution, cutting spending and using the monies appropiately on already existing taxes is the solution. Fix the interstates rather than fund money losing mass transit in cities.

The fuel taxes as they are go into the general fund to be spent on god knows what - that IS the problem. Your government once again lies to you about a specific tax and its purpose and the kneejerk reaction is to blame others like truckers who deliver everything you depend on for your modern lifestyle - yes everything.

Starve the beast!




edit on 26-12-2012 by Phoenix because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-12-2012 by Phoenix because: sp



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Hell I spend 100 bucks every 3 weeks on gas.
That's a bargain in comparison.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by beezzer
 


Hell I spend 100 bucks every 3 weeks on gas.
That's a bargain in comparison.


The amount is secondary, in my humble. . .

The fact that they saw an oppourtunity to impose yet another tax is was I find so bothersome.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   
What this says to me is that spending will never, ever go down, only up.
that makes me sick, it really reminds me of the improved asphalt that
a, what was it, 9 year old? i think it was, came up with, it was touted in
the news as more resilient and longer lasting, but of course when it
came time to actually put the idea to practical use they said they could
not. why? because it would take jobs away........

here is a question, are we really wanting this to all continue the way it is?
do we want the only outcome to ever be increased spending? i understand
maintenance on roads and the like but where does the reality that we cannot
support unlimited spending come into play? also what about the benefit
these cars provide for the climate? should that not be taken into account?

Often these cars are far more expensive than normal cars, i would also
imagine that maintenance is higher as well, so in reality the only big
benefit to them is the cost of fuel being less, so now they take that away?
im so confused by the way they choose to do things, could you imagine
if henry ford had been told that he could not build the assembly line
because it would destroy jobs?

ugh this just makes me sick, it really
is a no win for anyone, we have to get these career politicians out of
these offices and make room for modern thinkers, those who embrace
change because they know it might harm the job market now but
down the road a bit it could lead to a huge boon........ you have to
be willing to take calculated risks, do your best to ensure that they
are well vetted risks but stagnation only ever leads to failure in the
end.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   
Whatever happened to taxation without representation?


Instead of adding taxes here and there, they should just send everyone with a registered automobile a bill in the mail.


I feel like people hate taxes more than bills, they might just be able to trick them into thinking this is a better method than paying taxes on everything, haha.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

There are other plans to tackle the “problem” of efficient cars paying less taxes.

Oregon Begins Pilot Program to Evaluate Mileage Tax



November 13, 2012 - The VMT tax is especially aimed at vehicles with fuel economy ratings of 55mpg and above, including hybrid, plug-in and pure electric cars. The idea is to calculate miles driven only within the state and charge 1.5 cents as per-mile-tax for a 20mpg vehicle, which compares to 30 cents per gallon in gasoline tax charged in Oregon.

The pilot project includes 47 vehicles, and aims to evaluate methods such as GPS tracking and smartphone applications. Simpler alternatives such as odometer inspection by ODoT officials are also being considered. Drivers would receive mileage tax billed on a monthly or yearly basis, depending on the number of miles logged


Sounds great.


Significance:ODoT is considering a VMT tax in light of a potential wave of fuel-efficient vehicles on Oregon roads in the near future - partly aided by the rising popularity of hybrids and plug-in vehicles. The consequence would be reduced consumption of gasoline (petrol) which, in turn, would curtail revenues generated through gasoline tax. However, critics have condemned the proposal on several grounds, from privacy intrusion inflicted through GPS tracking to VMT being seen as a way to "penalise" drivers of cleaner and greener vehicles. VMT supporters, on the other hand, argue that VMT tax is only fair and is a "natural consequence of going green".

Linky

As long as it's fair, who cares.


edit on 27/12/12 by D.Wolf because: typo



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Friend Rabbit, let's take a step back, shall we? Before the discussion turns to another type of tax, I'd first would want to see how the money was originally spent and see the justification for the tax in the first place.

Providing more money to an irresponsible government (be it local, state, or federal) would not improve our conditions and would only enable the government to take more.

That would be one of the largest problems I'd say. Where it goes and what it does. You'd think gas tax money and other revenue collected with the purpose of funding Highways would go into a Highway fund huh? Now how does that find it's way into the General Fund anyhow? Oh but the Politicians tell us we can trust them to insure the states sending money upstream get it all back in equitable terms for each ..
Yup.

You hit the jackpot on use of funds and a rather poorly funded highway system vs, what is taken in. Then again, we have some highways in this nation that you'd think were paved with bricks of solid gold.... I think I will do that neglected finance board after all for covering the Federal Highway Funding and the way the system works..the more I think about it, the more annoying it gets. As I was starting to say though, one highway had Millions annually in their P.R. booklets for PER-MILE Maintenance. I want to confirm the precise number before saying which I know it is. These little details matter to have right, eh?

Indeed... I'd started a the work for a major thread a few days back before abandoning it for various reasons for the time being. I think this makes my next one... one overdue actually. Ever wanted to know how the whole U.S. Highway system works from toll to pothole being filled and new interstate built?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by D.Wolf
 


I'm sorry but I cannot accept a mileage tax like that. The last thing I want is the government tracking where I go throughout the country. Sure it sounds innocent on the surface, but how long until law enforcement manages to get their grubby hands on this information? The government has no business knowing where I am or go on a daily basis.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Wow! I am really surprised this time. Usually, these days at least, it takes a lot for the Union of States to really surprise me but this one got me pretty good. I did not see this one coming at all. The one and only car on the road which actually is good for the environment, not to mention the long-term problem of pollution, one of the states tries to make profit off of it.

In the long-term it is clearly better to go ahead and give electric car owners a tax break. In the capitalist system one must use money as a way to encourage positive change in society. If there is no money savings in buying and using an electric car then of course very few people are going to buy one.

Taxing electric car owners for simply owning an electric car is clearly the work of big oil lobbyist. There is no doubt in my mind, given the clear advantage of having more electric cars on the freeway, that taxing these car owners is the work of big oil.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
electric cars create wear and tear on the roads just like gasoline powered cars, so why should they not help to pay for roadway maintenance?


 


i have been paying $30 per year 'road tax' ( in SC) since 2010 on my electric car...

but my vehicle only weighs less than 1600 lbs compared to 2 tons for an average midsize
it is a 2 seater and will not load another 4 people @170 lbs each (another 1/4 ton) of wear on the roadway

so my $30 is a very high ratio per lb compared to the baseline ratio - tax X weight

my tax rate for road use should be nearer to $5.00 per year compared to the norm
(i still pay taxes on my electric bill monthly in place of gas pump taxes)


additionally my insurance is comparable to gas powered cars which cause considerable damage in 'accidents' and my plates & tags cost the same as gas powered monsters in the same urban-residential streets
where a light weight, low speed vehicle would be more appropriate....


my interstate vehicle is a seperate issue & i agree bigger costs are warrented
edit on 27-12-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



 


as to freedomwv

Taxing electric car owners for simply owning an electric car is clearly the work of big oil lobbyist.


i think it is more the idea born of bureaucrats seeking to retain the revenue flow into the State treasury

electric cars are one-in-a-hundred & fifty thousand...but thses money grubbers don't want some segment of society not paying their ''fair share'' of taxes

i dont see many panhandlers driving a Prius or a Tesla do you.... well that is all part of the Øbama socialism theme of taxing more... for them that make more than $250K yr
edit on 27-12-2012 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Wait people you all just wait the government never misses an opportunity to tax people

Now its electric cars, before this it was the carbon tax, next up it will be taxing the sunshine to recoup the loss of tax revenue from the switch from fossil fuels.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Krazysh0t
reply to post by D.Wolf
 


I'm sorry but I cannot accept a mileage tax like that. The last thing I want is the government tracking where I go throughout the country. Sure it sounds innocent on the surface, but how long until law enforcement manages to get their grubby hands on this information? The government has no business knowing where I am or go on a daily basis.


I get you don't like it, that doesn't scare governments out of pushing it - big time. True, the first initiative has been deluded into implementing it on fuel efficient cars only - The selling point is that it is a more fair system, pointing the finger at a few electric cars who don't pay to maintain the infrastructure and hybrids who pay less. The same "It's fair" argument I have seen used in this thread.


Minnesota is also evaluating the new proposal, which if successful, might be followed by other states such as Washington and Nevada. Under the current proposal, the bill, if approved, is expected to be signed into a law in 2013, effective only for vehicles purchased after 1 July 2015.
linky

My post seems like I am for this tech. In a way I am. I am testing these kind of devices and they work well. They work more than well. (You are right to not want it.) At least I make some money when this goes big. (Europe is pushing this too.) It is logical to implement it on a small group first. You can produce and install only soanso much units at a given timeframe. The, it's only fair argument will topple to the other side at some point - "It's only fair that older cars get this unit too." On the long run, we all lose, and it might not be only a substantial amount of money.

But as long as it's fair, who cares.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Yeah.
Sucks don't it.

But actually if you look at it. The money is for the same thing you are already paying if it's a gas vehicle.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
electric cars create wear and tear on the roads just like gasoline powered cars, so why should they not help to pay for roadway maintenance?


Property taxes are paid in part, for maintenance of roads. State and local taxes pay for that as well. This is just another reason to levy taxes! (In my humble opinion)

You can't honestly believe that the number of electric cars on the road would have such an effect on the conditions, do you?


Property taxes in Washington go partially to pay for the County & city portions of road maintenance. They don't pay for Federal or State road maintenance at all. So you cannot honestly say that property taxes take care of road maintenance. That's simply not true.

Right now the number of electric cars does not make a difference, but what if we all had electric cars and paid no gasoline taxes at all? Where would the money come from? You know the "Nickel Projects" in Washington, don't you? You've seen the signs. Every one of those projects has come out under budget and on time or sooner. I don't know about you, but I rather enjoy that overpass on SR-16 and Bethel Rd. that erased the "intersection from hell."

Listen, I hate government on principal, and I am particularly upset with the spendthrift ways of the Washington State government. But electric cars should not get a free ride. It's a reasonable response to the issue.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix
 


I have no disagreement with truckers, just pointing out the facts.

Most of the general state funds these days goes to police, judges, jails, and the ever growing laws against vices and safety laws, and more inventive ways of stripping people of their rights and liberties.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


OBAMA IS NOT A SOCIALIST!
I would know because I am a socialist and Obama is NOT a socialist; he is a capitalist of the highest order.

This tax is not about socialism at all. It is more to do with, in my opinion, preventing technology from progressing. In America today, the majority of people are driving cars which are fueled by petroleum. This brings in huge profits for global oil companies. These same companies buy off America leaders left and right on a daily basis. Electric cars offer a clearer, and much cheaper, option for the common person. This cuts into the profits of global oil companies which have a hand in controlling the American system of government. Taxing electric cars has nothing to do with socialism because a socialist would not tax such a thing. In fact, the whole idea of taxes is totally different under a socialist economic system compared to a capitalist system. Electric cars are being taxed in America, most likely, because of a need to protect profits of the capitalist class while at the same time giving the average person the illusion of having a so-called choice.





top topics
 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join