It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Double Taxation!!!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 06:35 AM
meh it all just sounds too hard....beezer can i bum i ride ?...i will pay with a carrot and a lump of sugar

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 06:46 AM
This is a stupid idea. The whole point of the gas tax is to pay to maintain roads, correct? What puts the most wear and tear on the roads, a small lightweight car, or a heavy truck? Which uses more fuel? This seems like a way to get those who drive the vehicles that cause the least amount of damage to the roads to pay more than their fair share of the upkeep.
It seems like a socialist system to fix a problem that wouldn't exist if they managed the funds properly to begin with.

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 06:51 AM
Yeah, same old same old....
Like income tax supposedly made up for lost revenue from alcohol sales during prohibition, then when prohibition ended, income taxes and alcohol taxes were both taken.
If anyone actually thinks fuel taxes will be dropped when driving mileage is taxed.....
Please, gimme some of that stuff you're smoking, please!.
And if you think this is going to somehow fix anyone's economy besides those who do basically nothing for their money, you got another thing comin.
All I see is a very devious way to further collapse an economy for the majority of the little people here.
I have NEVER seen technology actually used to really actually help anyone but those who produce and fob it off on anyone who can actually, really afford the added expense.
It'll even make the vehicles themselves more expensive.
edit on 28-10-2013 by MyHappyDogShiner because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 07:02 AM
Check out this study, there are many out there if you google something like heavy vehicle road wear...

The need for road surface maintenance is greatly attributable to the heaviest vehicles. Based on the findings of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) road test, damage caused by heavy trucks was long thought to increase with approximately the fourth power of the axle load. This means that one axle of 10 tons on a heavy truck was 160,000 times more damaging to a road surface than an axle of 0.5 tons (car scale).

In recent years, however, it was determined that the relationship between axle weights and pavement damage is complex and varies based on numerous variables, including environmental factors, type of terrain and roadway design. The National Pavement Cost Model (NAPCOM), which is the pavement model currently used by FHWA, estimates that for some types of pavement deterioration, doubling the axle load causes 15 to 20 times as much damage; for other types of deterioration, doubling the load only doubles the damage.

The U.S. Department of Transportation in its most recent Highway Cost Allocation Study estimated that light single-unit trucks, operating at less than 25,000 pounds, pay 150 percent of their road costs while the heaviest tractor-trailer combination trucks, weighing over 100,000 pounds, pay only 50 percent of their road costs.3

The volume of truck freight has grown significantly over the past few decades. Between 1975 and 1995, domestic intercity tonnage carried by trucks grew 52 percent over a fairly static system of highways. Looking forward, the freight tonnage carried by trucks is expected to increase 50 percent between 2002 and 2035.4

The HVUT levels the playing field by ensuring that operators of heavy trucks pay a little more for the highway network relative to the motorists and light trucks who meet their responsibility through other forms of taxes (e.g., registration fees, motor fuel taxes) but do less damage to the system.

In, other words, they introduced a tax already because the heaviest vehicles where by far underpaying for their caused wear on the roads vs lighter trucks. Now project that down to your average fuel efficient hybrid vehicles on the road(which are a small percentage of overall vehicles to begin with) and you will see that people driving fuel efficient cars are still paying MORE not LESS than their fair share.

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 07:03 AM

reply to post by phantomjack

Actually this is quite logical. I believe the gasoline tax would go away in lieu of this type of system. It's true that the GPS system is less than ideal, but they already know where you are at all times because of your cell phone so that's not such a big issue.

It helps allocate funds to the roads and areas you drive on the most and ensure that people that are driving more are paying more regardless of MPG.

Now, will they find some way to screw it up? Probably….

Just as a side FYI…the gasoline tax hasn't gone up in about 20 years even as costs have skyrocketed. The trust that funds road repairs and projects is also nearly (or possibly now) insolvent.
edit on 27-10-2013 by Esotarious because: (no reason given)

logical??...people that cannot afford to live in a big city, due to a lower wage paid to them, and need to commute will be unfairly taxed...while people that make enough money to be able to afford to live in the city, will pay less.
the working poor will try and get as close to where they work, putting undue strain on infrastructure in certain pockets of the cities. also the tourist industries, including restaurants, parks, getaway destinations, etc. will lose billions, which will result in lost jobs, and less tax revenue for local, state, and federal governments.....the repercussions need to be taken into account, to say the least.

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in