phb10186 wrote:This entire thing reads like a page out of the idiots guide to governance and policy.
Not that agree with the UK system and don't the US one, but gas here is about $7 a gallon, about 70% of that is tax, pure tax.
Thus the more fuel you use the more you pay, all other variables excluded... now I'm not saying those prices are justified, but clearly if you drive a V8 SUV you're going to pay your fair share. If you drive a city car you pay a lot less... that's pretty equitable in my book. We are now in times that don't mandate 30mpg 20 mpg or whatever, you can get a cheap 60mpg capable car if that's your perogative.
There's the solution, fund lost fuel revenue by taxing gas guzzlers... simple. Europe does that, and has done that for 25 years.
Agreed 1000%, our county is unwilling to raise its sales tax, the state is unwilling to raise its gas tax, the road crews are unwilling to actually repair the roads that need repair correctly so we have a perfect storm of BS.
I would have ZERO issue with the gas tax being raised 10-20% to support the county crews, that way EVERYONE both people who live here and not get to help pay.
Too bad we don't have common sense here.
Well the 'Vehicle Excise Duty' (road tax) as it is called was meant to pay for road improvement directly... that stopped a long time ago and now just goes as an income stream for the treasury to fund...hmm...
- Bankers who get it wrong
- Spy agencies
- Nuclear power stations built by the Chinese
- The Queen
... and it goes on.
Some of it does go on roads, but essentially big infrastructure is worse than it was, and the roads are worse than they were - but they cant get EV users to cough up, as it would rubbish their car tax structure - so it's safe until they introduce something like road use pay per mile - which was talked about in the 90s. I remember driving through PA to MD a few years back and the PA roads were terrible, and there was brand new tarmac from the state line in Maryland all the way in - they had good roads there... must have been I-83.
The thing is, you can still have a gas guzzler, the system would just guide you to the decision that for daily use a small car makes more sense - use the gas guzzler on the weekends for fun if you have to have that sort of thing.
You would probably need fuel at $6 a gallon for that structure to work, and in the US it would be political suicide - much the same way as the gun control lobby always win (pistols are illegal in the UK - blanket ban, rifles are VERY heavily controlled, shotguns tend to be for farmers to shoot stuff with - not sure what they shoot as I live in the city - foxes and badgers probably). It took one mass shooting in Scotland in the early 90s to result in that policy change.
The 'right' thing to politically is very seldomly the 'right thing to do' - there has to be an appetite to make unpopular decisions - and we tend to be OK at stomaching that actually. I dont know if that's a British government quality, or a population quality/ impediment. There is certainly a tendency to adopt a more US style approach these days, but you do have to look at the long term sometimes, not just the political term.
If there are 2 things I know for sure here: free healthcare isnt going to stop, and taxes will remain high to pay for it, especially oil-based energy.
If you look at countries that have popularised electric motoring, they have done it with financial saving incentives, not eco tactics; that's the only way to change behaviors, by rewarding them with a money treat.
To contemplate surcharging EV and low emission vehicles a tiny amount of say $100 a year does 2 things. 1, it shows complete lack of foresight, and therefore incompetence, and 2, it proves regressive policy making is the status quo - which is also highly incompetent.
It should effectively be illegal to do that, as it would mandate the use of non-renewable resources (doubt it would sustain a legal challenge) - again that's a highly ignorant view of the world.
There is another post about crowd-funded bulk Leaf purchases - better off crowd-funding a federal government legal challenge I would assume.