Jump to content

new tax law on driving


2doorcoupeman

Recommended Posts

Did anyone catch the "great idea" proposed by our new head of transportation?Paying by how much you drive plus at least the state tax on gas.It was shot down by the chief of staff but still you wonder how much money they supposedly need.They just got billions in the stimulus package and still hungry for more.There already has been tests done in a couple of states. mad.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bonnyman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did anyone catch the "great idea" proposed by our new head of transportation?Paying by how much you drive plus at least the state tax on gas.It was shot down by the chief of staff but still you wonder how much money they supposedly need.They just got billions in the stimulus package and still hungry for more.There already has been tests done in a couple of states. mad.gif </div></div>

And Obama has already said he does not support that idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how they try to implement this nonsense. Since my daily driving is split between VA/NC, wonder how either state proposes to levy my tax? And yes, they're making noise about it in Raleigh.

Some people have said they can use GPS units.

Yup. I'm gonna buy a damn GPS for each of my cars, so they can tell where I am, how many miles I've driven, and more to the point <span style="font-weight: bold">how fast I'm traveling</span>.

The logical next step for revenue-hungry states is remote speeding tickets based on what the black box tells them. mad.gif

Big Brother and 1984 are here, just about 25 years late. Yet there were people who said Orwell was a paranoid nut case. More like a visionary...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I don't think any of these have any reasonable hope of passing the legislature in NC (or hopefully anywhere). There is an easy low tech way to gauge annual mileage. The mileage is recorded once per year at annual vehicle safety inspection. It would not take any high tech hardware to track vehicle mileage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, NC does require a working speedometer, also NC sort of requires a working odometer.

§ 20‑344. Operation of vehicle with intent to defraud.

It is unlawful for any person with the intent to defraud to operate a motor vehicle on any street or highway knowing that the odometer of such vehicle is disconnected or nonfunctional. (1973, c. 679, s. 1.)

As long as you never intend to sell a vehicle, or you disclose how long the odometer has been inoperative, you could probably avoid the "intent to defraud" section of that statute, which means you could probably get away with that operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad news about all this is the technology is already there and installed in many vehicles - Onstar and other systems are obvious, but just like your cell phones, the ability to track your car and how many miles you drive (and where) is already contained within automotive computer systems. Think about it- eventually when someone in Washington DC decides you've driven enough this month, they would love to have the capabiliy to actually disable your car!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Julian

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: joe_padavano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bonnyman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Did anyone catch the "great idea" proposed by our new head of transportation?Paying by how much you drive plus at least the state tax on gas.It was shot down by the chief of staff but still you wonder how much money they supposedly need.They just got billions in the stimulus package and still hungry for more.There already has been tests done in a couple of states. mad.gif </div></div>

And Obama has already said he does not support that idea. </div></div>

I hear ya!!..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good reason to keep our old cars running Terry, even as daily drivers.

I wonder when they are going to pass a law to require older cars to have that "yellow light" reset before getting an inspection? You know the one, the "check engine" that stays on forever, now that you threw the throttle bodies away in lieu of a big Holly on an aluminum intake. eek.gifsmile.gif

Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In NC, cars over 35 years old are exempt from inspection, but modern cars now have to be connected to the DMV computer remotely for the "safety" inspection which requires all trouble codes to be clear before the car will pass the inspection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest windjamer

Welcome to the club Matt. NY. has had that system for a few years now. Its a pita. You can turn it off but codes are stored and the vech still wont pass until its driven long enough to self clear codes and run all monators. Guess what, if you spend I am not sure I think its $500. to make repairs (emmision) and the light is still on you can get a one year examption. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why Florida did away with inspections years ago and I was one for it 100%. I too was a law enforcement officer but still saw so much nonsense it was ridiculous. People would take tires off the car, put a set of borrowed ones on and then pass inspection and put the old back on. Or they would go to the inspection station that was known to be more lenient or busy to get their car through. Some would get failed by one, go down the highway about 30 miles and pass at another. I also saw that many of the states that had the gas stations do the inspection like West Virginia did at one time, were subject to a lot of under the table payments etc. If you had a company with a fleet you could slip the guy some money and he'd pass all your vehicles. Now we only have inspection in some heavily populated counties like Dade, Broward, Hillsborough etc for emissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest windjamer

Mike at one time NY had one of the best safty inspections of all.Then they started to think like Calif., and we all know what comes from Calif. Damm few with horns. The first thing they done was elimanate the inspection of ball joints. What the heck all they do is hold the wheels on. I love it when I see the flat bed draging one in,esp. after we told the owner a mo. previosly the ball joint needed replacement.Next we done away with headlight adj. WHO needs to see?? But by God that fuel tank better have a air tight cap!! That stuf stinks. Go Figure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: joe_padavano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And Obama has already said he does not support that idea. </div></div>

So much for the 'death' of the mileage tax idea!! Read em and.........

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=1002

An excerpt from the document:........

However, a "special commission" created by Congress is still pursuing the idea. And, of course, they are painting a dire situation in order to justify another government intrusion into our private lives.

Its report Thursday warns that if government fails to find a new way to raise money, "we will suffer grim consequences in the future: unimaginable levels of congestion, reduced safety, costlier goods and services, an eroded quality of life, and diminished economic competitiveness as a nation."

"We should look at the vehicular miles program where people are actually clocked on the number of miles that they traveled," LaHood said last week.

.........unquote

We are at the mercy of the 'inventive' geniuses inside the beltway around DC!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest windjamer

If the powers that be took the gas tax we pay right now and spent it on our roads and highways as it was ment when created,our roads would be paved wiyh gold. Instead it gets put in the local general fund where its easer to steal.

OH Please, hide my soap box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldohioan</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: joe_padavano</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And Obama has already said he does not support that idea. </div></div>

So much for the 'death' of the mileage tax idea!! Read em and.........

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=1002

An excerpt from the document:........

However, a "special commission" created by Congress is still pursuing the idea. And, of course, they are painting a dire situation in order to justify another government intrusion into our private lives.

Its report Thursday warns that if government fails to find a new way to raise money, "we will suffer grim consequences in the future: unimaginable levels of congestion, reduced safety, costlier goods and services, an eroded quality of life, and diminished economic competitiveness as a nation."

"We should look at the vehicular miles program where people are actually clocked on the number of miles that they traveled," LaHood said last week.

.........unquote

We are at the mercy of the 'inventive' geniuses inside the beltway around DC!!

</div></div>

This "article" was written by one Bobby Eberle, a sometime self-styled "journalist" and full-time conservative GOP fundraiser whose best known organization was the Talon News service. This was the "news organization" (probably never more than 4 or 5 people) known for serving up softball questions staight out of the morning "talking points" memos at afternoon White House news briefings in 2003-2005, and for hiring a full-time gay escort/prostitute, James Dale Guckert (a.k.a. James Gannon), as their White House correspondant.

To say that this is a questionably accurate source of information would be one he!! of an understatement.

This is political muckraking designed to scare people into giving money to the conservative organizations that benefit author of the article (financially).

If you believe anything on web sites or in newpapers that come from sources like this, you deserve what you get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldohioan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So you are claiming that LaHood didnt say those things as quoted???</div></div>

It's pretty easy to tell when these kinds of beliefs are coming from a religious-like devotion to a political school of thought instead of a serious analytical approach. Those discussions all go the same way here, eventually to the "poof pile". There's no need to pretend differently.

Suffice as to say there is some very serious concern about how roads are going to be maintained as fuel consumption declines in the coming years. (I mentioned the coming increases in C.A.F.E. standards beginning in 2011 on another thread and just the mention of them was deamed too political, so I won't here.)

As alternative fuel vehicles, electric vehicles, and high-mileage hybrid vehicles take over as the norm there is going to be a <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">GIANT</span></span> drop in the funds available to build and maintain roads. That drop has already begun, and is in fact about 2 years along on a steep curve right now. You can bet that <span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-weight: bold">SOME</span></span> form of tax is going to be raised to make up the difference. If it's a simple fuel tax increase (of the type that has always taken place when funds were needed), it means that old cars will be paying a disproportionally large share of the burden. A mileage-based charge was one means, Orwellian or no, to try and prevent that.

My guess is that your license plates are about to become <span style="text-decoration: underline">REALLY</span> expensive no matter what kind of car you drive! You can bet that no system that encourages older cars over newer ones will be allowed to stand no matter what happens. Maybe they will just raise gas taxes, as apparently most people here would prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave, Im not sure I understand why you would criticize what conservatives have to say??

They are trying to help YOU keep YOUR money in YOUR OWN pocket instead of giving it to the illegal aliens and welfare pukes as well as wasting it on pork projects like 'Bridges to Nowhere'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: oldohioan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dave, Im not sure I understand why you would criticize what conservatives have to say??

They are trying to help YOU keep YOUR money in YOUR OWN pocket instead of giving it to the illegal aliens and welfare pukes as well as wasting it on pork projects like 'Bridges to Nowhere'.

</div></div>

Becuase if <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline"><span style="font-style: italic">I</span></span></span> posted something this obviously political, myopic, and off-topic the thread would disappear within minutes. As I type this your comment has lasted more than 5 hours, and probably will remain until someone's dumb enough to take the bait. This is because yours is the conventional and plainly dominant school of thought on all things around here, nearly all others having been driven off by now.

I didn't change my tag line on this forum after 8 years by mistake, or as a plea for physical fitness.

Believe what you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R W Burgess</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't judge the AACA Forum by one posting or poster Ohio. frown.gif

Wayne </div></div>

Wayne, I think it's pretty obvious he's talking about something P.M.ed to him by one of the other moderators, and I would say appropriately so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Dave has a very valid point. Roads in this country are publicly funded, primarily through taxes on fuel. If/when that source of revenue drops, less roads can be constructed or maintained. Thats a real simple equation to solve.

As a car nut, I want the best roads I can get. While it may be politically expedient to deplore taxation, it is the one thing that makes this country work. Without it, there would not be universal access to education or transportation. Both of these things make this a great country and separate us from much of the rest of the world.

Yeah, taxes are a bite and I don't want a GPS tracking me either. But, from a fairness standpoint, paying by the mile makes a lot of sense. Same with demand pricing for access to certain roads. We can't just keep building the things, we need to find better ways.

A subject well worth discussing.

Zimm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Guest Ravensmiles

Sad part is the same people that want a family of six to drive a shoebox on wheels also thinks this is a great idea. there's enough radical tree huggers running around to make sure this thing passes. just look at cash for clunkers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The day has already arrived. New cars today already have GPS driven black boxes. Rental car companies track every mile you drive, where you went and how fast. The government will be doing so very soon if not already. Speeding tickets will just be mailed out. Your driving habits right before a crash is already recorded. Ths nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans it is just fact. We better plan on going back to driving or antique cars as daily drivers if we want our privacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest windjamer

Think it cant happen?? Headline in my morning newspaper says Dutch drivers to pay taxes on road time. www.pressconnects.com Amsterdam, The Dutch goverment plans to bring the polluter-pays principle into the home garage.

Acording to the paper, in 2012 the gps unit in your car will track the time and place each car moves and send the data to a billing agent witch will then bill the owner. Others, and Im sure that includes we uns will watch the new system to see how it works. You can bet your last hard earned dollar New York will JUMP on this wagon. The only thing NY. dosnt charge a tax on now is the air we breathe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet we pay the lowest taxes in the Western world. Go figure.

It's just not going to work looking at this issue with a "glass half-empty" perspective.

Bluntly put, roads cost money and you have to cough it up somehow. While there's no excuse for any government agency to abuse that reality, there's equally no excuse for denying it or thinking you can legitimately avoid it. Fuel taxes will soon be a VERY unfair way of raising this money, heavily penalizing older car owners (Sound like anyone you know?) in favor of the owners of hybrid and alternative fuels cars (Sound like anyone whose words you're reading?).

So just keep carping about the "unfairness" of all of this, and keep on doing whatever you can to stop this from happening. Please!:P:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the gov't entity owns the GPS unit, there's no way for them to access it to determine driving habits. It probably would take a valid search warrant to gain access to any possible OnSTAR records, too, if any exist for areas traveled, etc.

Some states are passing enabling legislation for car insurance companies to have variable rates depending upon how much a vehicle is driven, in what zip codes, etc. in order to better match "risk" (i.e., monthly payments) to vehicle use and location. This could help "fixed income" customers have lower rates, but might also increase rates for a high-mileage driver or drivers that drive in "high-risk" areas. The GPS unit would be the property of the insurance company.

There's also a deal where a used car dealer can install a tracking device on vehicles they sell to ensure their customers make their payments on time.

Raising the federal gasoline tax might not get Presidential approval, but the states also have their own gas taxes which they can consider raising. An 8 cent raise has been mentioned in TX . . . seems our Federal gas taxes have been financing road projects in other states, our current Governor claims. What might be better . . . an increase in gas taxes or more toll roads? In reality, "neither" in our current times of struggling economies and the vanishing middle class.

Regards,

NTX5467

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At a local Valero gas station, there were some ads on the gas pumps about how much the proposed "Cap and Trade" situation could raise fuel prices by 75cents/gallon OVER what they now are.

With all due respect, "CaT" seems to be highly regarded by those with lots of money OR some ties to the Chicago Environmental Exchange. Such higher energy and consumer goods prices would not affect them very much, but those in the lower income spectrums would really feel such an increase. Consider how many of our normal, every day items have some link to carbon fuels!

As some might desire to raise taxes on the upper 2% of incomes in the USA to compensate for tax cuts for lower income demographics, CaT would be a tax for EVERYBODY, just not called "a tax".

It seems that trying to move away from a carbon-based society is something that will take many years to really accomplish, but those with money who are strongly advocating this "dream" are passionate about it . . . at all costs.

They keep talking about all of the new "clean energy" jobs that'll be created by such a switch . . . but the FAIL to acknowledge the "carnage" of lost jobs and economic buying power which would result in many significant industries related to energy production in the USA and the world. The world they claim to be adamant about saving might not be such a great place to be, after they get their way, especially for those "without" money to enjoy the fruits of the alleged benefits!

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To go along with the hijack of this thread.....

At a local Valero gas station, there were some ads on the gas pumps about how much the proposed "Cap and Trade" situation could raise fuel prices by 75cents/gallon OVER what they now are.

That's a drop in the bucket compared to what gas is about to cost. Read all the science, not just what seems comfortable or is compatible with preconceived notions.

Uncomfortable times are coming. "Cap & Trade" is only a cushioning blow.

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."--Dr. Steven T. Colbert D.F.A., 4/26/06

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Chapman

Well, as long as the hijack has taken place... relax and enjoy.

As for the 'tax by mile' discussion, it's pretty easy to set it up. Progressive Insurance has already developed a module that will extract driven miles information from OBD II systems (most all passenger cars >1996) in order to offer MyRate (currently available in Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Maryland, New Jersey and Oregon). Cars without OBD II could be easily required to have an annual mileage certification. No GPS required.

If (and that's a big word here) all, or most, road tax was transitioned to a use-based tax it would be an effective way to generate tax revenue divorced from fuel consumption. IMHO, there should continue to be a reduced 'general revenue' tax component to road funding in reflection of the general good derived by a well-maintained road system by all citizens whether they directly use it or not. It would also be 'tunable' to impose the highest taxes on vehicles that cause the most wear on the roads. We must watch our greedy political brethren, lest they try to continue both (current fuel tax and mileage tax). The VAT discussion is germane.

As for coupling this to the 'Tax and Cap' discussion, it is an essential part of that discussion. Whether 'Peak Oil' is the issue is irrelevant to a large extent. What is relevant is that the 'T&C' is an economy-crippling wealth transfer mechanism that will enrich some at the expense of many and hold productive economies hostage to unproductive economies.

What we really need is a coherent, functional national energy policy that will maximize our natural energy resources and prepare the groundwork for transitioning to a fundamentally new energy use model. We have immense energy resources available in petroleum, natural gas, and coal. We need a policy that: First, significantly reduces dependence on outside sources; Second, begin a transition to electrification of personal urban transport; Three, work at restoration of our national freight and passenger train service; Fourth, let the Government set the guidelines and fund infrastructure... then get out of the way.

Edited by John Chapman (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really need is a coherent, functional national energy policy that will maximize our natural energy resources and prepare the groundwork for transitioning to a fundamentally new energy use model. We have immense energy resources available in petroleum, natural gas, and coal. We need a policy that: First, significantly reduces dependence on outside sources; Second, begin a transition to electrification of personal urban transport; Three, work at restoration of our national freight and passenger train service; Fourth, let the Government set the guidelines and fund infrastructure... then get out of the way.

There's no way a coherent, functional anything is going to be adopted as long as people continue to 1.) Believe that there is "immense resources" of petroleum in the U.S. or anywhere else relative to (current) need. and 2.) Believe that 99.99% of the world's scientists are liars concerning the future costs of buring the natural gas and coal we do have in relative abundance. The first flies in the face of even the most basic math, especially re. U.S. oil reserves. The second flies in the face of prudence, let alone logic.

For the life of me I'm astounded how many people there are who think they can tell vast sums of degreed professionals in the scientific fields of study that they know less about their own field of study than the average Fox News viewer because they said something else (or found someone who would). Until these ideas are abandoned that facts are negotiable, and/or that sources for "facts" are all of equal weight (with the concomitant assumption that we only believe the nice "facts"), there will never be enough understanding to build even a shaky policy on, let alone a "coherent, functional policy".

Conservation, whether voluntary or involuntary, is coming. It's the truly conservative thing to do given our situation as a species or as a nation. You can help or you can rail against it. It won't matter. Uncomfortable times are coming, blame yourself first. I do.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Chapman

Dave,

A predictably toned response from you. Recent relevations about the veracity of the AGP community aside, I doubt that 99.99% of the world's scientists are liars. I just think that the ones that support conclusions based on massaged data that are then foisted upon us by failed politicians for personal gain are suspect. With good reason and regardless of news source.

Now, that said, I think we did say the same thing: conservation from both reduction of consumption and efficiency are the answer.

A coherent national energy policy could bring to bear the natural and intellectual resources we have in abundance to solve our energy problems. We are NOT doing that, chosing instead to pursue a politically infused path that has a separate agenda not in the best interest of our nation. We should keep in mind that this is the nation that, in the short interval of 12 years (1957-1969), progressed from exploding rockets on the pad at Cape Canaveral to landing a man on the moon. We can do this.

So, we don't have 200 years of oil... OK, what we do is prioritize how it is used. We do have 200 years of coal and a lot of natural gas. How can we best use those resources? And so goes the question... where's the coherent, productive policy? What would YOU do?

JMC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...