Tax by mile with a Big Brother GPS device in all cars back on the table.

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, us kooks and weirdos were all over this ten years ago.

This vampire is not going to die until it is decisively killed.


CBO Sees Benefits in Taxing Motorists Based on Miles Driven

Friday, March 25, 2011
By Susan Jones

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-sees-benefits-taxing-motorists-based#

(CNSNews.com) - A new Congressional Budget Office study says taxing motorists based on the number of miles they drive would be a fair and "efficient" way to charge motorists for the real cost of using the nation's highways. "Vehicle-miles traveled" taxes (or VMT taxes) also would provide a strong incentive for people to drive less.

[DamianTV]

Why arent they doing what they always do and just introduce a "Temporary Gas Tax" or raise the existing Gas Taxes?

Oh yeah, it isnt about fair and efficient taxation at all, its all about invasion of privacy. You want to put a GPS in my car to track how many miles I drive? Get a fucking warrant!

[acptulsa]

Don't forget how easy it would be to catch speeders with this technology.

[Philhelm]

Motherfuckers! I swear that they will not rest until they can pinch every conceivable penny they can from us.

[dannno]

Sounds like whoever makes the GPS devices is going to make a killing.

[acptulsa]

And every scrap of privacy.

Easier to keep track of who is associating with whom that way.

[anaconda]

Why arent they doing what they always do and just introduce a "Temporary Gas Tax" or raise the existing Gas Taxes?

Oh yeah, it isnt about fair and efficient taxation at all, its all about invasion of privacy. You want to put a GPS in my car to track how many miles I drive? Get a fucking warrant!

Yes. This is obviously about the police state grid.

[virgil47]

This simply proves that the electric vehicle movement is all about keeping track of everyone.

[Freedom 4 all]

This is absolutely unconstitutional as it violates the freedom of mobility. If it happens it would be the worst thing Obama has done to date. Fortunately though, I don't see them actually getting away with this. You can trick idiots into supporting the patriot act by bleating about scary brown people, you can trick idiots into supporting health care because no one wants to pay for their own health care, and you can trick idiots into supporting gun control by bleating about Columbine, but this is something even the dumbest of people can recognize as a bad thing and it would be political suicide for Obama to pass it.

[acptulsa]

How many people have OnStar?

How many people have state turnpike passes?

Who is standing up against the GPS technology they've been putting in cell phones for about fifteen years now?

[freshjiva]

Oh fuck me.

Soon they'll tax people on how many children they have.

[Anti Federalist]

How many people have OnStar?

How many people have state turnpike passes?

Who is standing up against the GPS technology they've been putting in cell phones for about fifteen years now?

<<<Does not and never will.

<<<Does not and never will.

<<<Has been for years.

[Fox McCloud]

I'm fine with this provided 3 things happen:

(1) No data is ever retained on where you travel
(2) This replaces all current gas taxes
(3) road/highway funds are set up that are separate from the general revenue fund; all gas taxes would go into these funds and only be available to be used for roads/highways

Of course, none of those are going to happen; only about 60% of the current gasoline tax actually goes to infrastructure....all the revenue goes to the general fund first, then it's re-apportioned to other governments/governmental sectors to use for roads...the federal government would just use this as another revenue source, in my eyes, with no tax cuts on gasoline and no changes to the structure of how funds are handled.

Would they refuse to keep track of your location? They might, but I'm highly skeptical; the DoHS has far too many vested interests in knowing what people are doing...

[South Park Fan]

While it would be nice to end the tragedy of the commons we call roads, this clealy opens up a whole new Pandora's box with regard to privacy concerns. Besides, the only way you can truly end the tragedy of the commons is by making them privately owned and operated.

[Kregisen]

The whole reason why people hate the idea of private roads is because they don't want to pay to use them....the only good thing that would come out of this is it would show people that we DO already pay for the roads, whether or not people knew it with the gas taxes or not.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm fine with this provided 3 things happen:

(1) No data is ever retained on where you travel
(2) This replaces all current gas taxes
(3) road/highway funds are set up that are separate from the general revenue fund; all gas taxes would go into these funds and only be available to be used for roads/highways

Of course, none of those are going to happen; only about 60% of the current gasoline tax actually goes to infrastructure....all the revenue goes to the general fund first, then it's re-apportioned to other governments/governmental sectors to use for roads...the federal government would just use this as another revenue source, in my eyes, with no tax cuts on gasoline and no changes to the structure of how funds are handled.

Would they refuse to keep track of your location? They might, but I'm highly skeptical; the DoHS has far too many vested interests in knowing what people are doing...

So why even open the door?

What's wrong with current gas tax structure?

Why even open the door to these bastards by saying "I'm OK with this as long as x,y,z happens".

The only answer to this should be a resounding and unequivocal NO!

[Fox McCloud]

So why even open the door?

What's wrong with current gas tax structure?

Why even open the door to these bastards by saying "I'm OK with this as long as x,y,z happens".

The only answer to this should be a resounding and unequivocal NO!

Why open the door? Because, assuming those conditions were met and maintained, I truly would be fine with it....but those conditions will never be met or maintained; not by a longshot.

[Anti Federalist]

Why open the door? Because, assuming those conditions were met and maintained, I truly would be fine with it....but those conditions will never be met or maintained; not by a longshot.

Well, that was what I was asking, in part.

What's so positive about this, strictly from a revenue and not BB standpoint?

[Freedom 4 all]

It truly is hard to imagine something more universally offensive.

1) It's offensive to Republicans because it's a new, unnecessary federal tax that has nothing to do with killing brown people
2) It's offensive to Democrats as it primarily hits the lower and middle classes
3) It's offensive to Libertarians for about a million reasons
4) It's offensive to envirofascists because it takes away incentive to use electric and hybrid cars (as all are presumable taxed at the same rate)
5) It's offensive to the dying auto industry and gas companies as fewer can afford to drive now.
6) It's REALLY offensive to independent truckers and cab drivers and will drive many in the industry out of business

[Romulus]

were already taxed by the mile, its called the gas tax. This is a sham.

[farrar]

were already taxed by the mile, its called the gas tax. This is a sham.

Right, so now we will be taxed by the mile not the mile per gallon. Either way we are taxed. It's like the fair tax debate in a sense. It will screw some but help others. I'm not all that happy about government sticking tracking devices in my vechile though. Not to happy about corporations doing it either but at least I have a say there. No voice in government... Ironic no?

[AZKing]

And what exactly will make me put this GPS in my car? It's pretty unpractical to expect to put GPS devices in 300 million vehicles.

How much do they want me to pay for the roads? I already pay for them in property taxes, gas taxes, and sales taxes. My road isn't even maintained; everyone on the road chips in to get it grated once in a while :|

[AuH20]

You really can't fight these people at the ballot box. I hate to be the shit-stirrer here, and I advocate peaceful means via elections, but when you have the vampire on your windshield sizing up your jugular, it's time to break out the wooden stake. There is no reasoning with these people. I'm sorry. Take. Take. Take.

[puppetmaster]

This is brought on by electric cars. cell phone jammers are easy to build along with gps jammers. I have both

[johnrocks]

Why arent they doing what they always do and just introduce a "Temporary Gas Tax" or raise the existing Gas Taxes?

Oh yeah, it isnt about fair and efficient taxation at all, its all about invasion of privacy. You want to put a GPS in my car to track how many miles I drive? Get a fucking warrant!

*golf clap*

[Grubb556]

How much do you want to bet, that if implemented, the GPS would be rigged and excessivly tax you ? >:(

[Travlyr]

You really can't fight these people at the ballot box. I hate to be the shit-stirrer here, and I advocate peaceful means via elections, but when you have the vampire on your windshield sizing up your jugular, it's time to break out the wooden stake. There is no reasoning with these people. I'm sorry. Take. Take. Take.

The only way to fix it is End The Fed. When we finally take their unlimited credit card away from them, then they'll have to come to the people to beg for money to fund their crap. Honest Sound Money FTW!

[dean.engelhardt]

Could easily be gone by raising the federal gas tax. There is some GPS manufacturer lobby behind this.

[acptulsa]

Could easily be gone by raising the federal gas tax. There is some GPS manufacturer lobby behind this.

Well, they may be helping with their brib--er, sorry, lobbying efforts, but it really is the hybrid and the general free market car downsizing underway ever since we started a third war in the oil patch. All of the sudden, gas tax revenues are way down, and they're scrambling to regain a source.

As for raising the gas tax, the states could do that too. But for the really, really obnoxious and privacy-invading stuff, helps to have the Federal Octopus involved.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

I was talking with my car insurance representative about lower my rate the other day. He said there was nothing he cold do except put a device in my car that would track certain driving behaviors like acceleration and braking rates. But it could possibly lower my insurance cost by 30%.

I said no thanks and will be switching carriers.

[Working Poor]

Who is standing up against the GPS technology they've been putting in cell phones for about fifteen years now?

Which is why I do not carry a cell phone unless the battery is out. I only use it in case I have an emergency. I do not accept calls on it or have the voice mail activated.

[acptulsa]

Which is why I do not carry a cell phone unless the battery is out. I only use it in case I have an emergency. I do not accept calls on it or have the voice mail activated.

I do all of the above except remove the battery--I just turn mine off.

I also bought it in 1993. Nokias were wonderfully tough about then. Can't speak for the new ones..

P.S. It doesn't have a camera, no. I do. Good ones.

[brandon]

gps technology is fucking awesome. No reason to fear a technology just because it may have nefarious applications. If they tried to put a "big brother" gps device in cars, why not just cover it up so it can't get a fix?

[brandon]

were already taxed by the mile, its called the gas tax. This is a sham.

This.

This will never happen.

[acptulsa]

My Rand McNally is awesome. You don't even have to charge it up. It never tells me to turn right into a concrete wall. And if it doesn't have the specific city street I need when I'm traveling, I get to either talk with the locals, explore or both.

And when they put the device in a car, they are liable to put it where you need to remove panels, liners and/or whole panels of instruments to get at it.

[acptulsa]

This.

This will never happen.

They're going to try to do some damned thing. They're selling us on the notion of electric vehicles, and they're not going to slit their own throats if they can help it. They'll put a road tax on your electric bill, if they can get away with it.

[hugolp]

Why arent they doing what they always do and just introduce a "Temporary Gas Tax" or raise the existing Gas Taxes?

Oh yeah, it isnt about fair and efficient taxation at all, its all about invasion of privacy. You want to put a GPS in my car to track how many miles I drive? Get a fucking warrant!

Exactly. If you have to tax, tax gas so you punish less efficient cars and reward more efficient cars. This is all about control.

In the EU they are trying to pass it as well. Apart from the excuse of taxing or checking velocity limits through GPS, the last excuse to get forced gps in your car was to have a system of automatic accident assistance. They wanted to connect the sensors in the car that know if you had an accident connected to the mandatory GPS and send a signal to a government agency that then sends help your way. The claim that way help will get there sooner. The idea is not that bad, the problem is doing it in a forced way. Maybe this burocrats should try to create a company that provides that service and see how it goes.

[acptulsa]

Exactly. If you have to tax, tax gas so you punish less efficient cars and reward more efficient cars. This is all about control.

Even more than that. So long as electrics and the efficiencies of hybrid -electirc drives which reclaim braking energy were rare or nonexistent, they could do pretty well just by taxing motor fuels in that heavier vehicles tend to use more, and put more stress on a highway. After all, neighborhood streets aren't paved like runways as they don't have jumbo jets doing a controlled fall on them. And in between. And roads would last longer without semis on them. Bridges would be cheaper, too. So, the more tonnage, the more fuel, the more tax, it worked.

Now we're trying everything from corn sqeezin's to nuclear power stored in arrays of cell phone batteries to get around. So, unless you privatize and make everything a turnpike, how do you seperate the truckers from the people who never leave home?

And here in the U.S., it's debatable whether the government is offering OnStar or not. After all, they claim G.M. is a private company again.

[Dr.3D]

My Rand McNally is awesome. You don't even have to charge it up. It never tells me to turn right into a concrete wall. And if it doesn't have the specific city street I need when I'm traveling, I get to either talk with the locals, explore or both.

And when they put the device in a car, they are liable to put it where you need to remove panels, liners and/or whole panels of instruments to get at it.

More like it would be incorporated into the engine diagnostic and computer system. The only way to get rid of it then would be to replace the entire computer system with one that was made up special to remove the GPS system and still allow the engine to run. I can see a new black market coming down the road if they do implement this.

[Anti Federalist]

You really can't fight these people at the ballot box. I hate to be the shit-stirrer here, and I advocate peaceful means via elections, but when you have the vampire on your windshield sizing up your jugular, it's time to break out the wooden stake. There is no reasoning with these people. I'm sorry. Take. Take. Take.

Can't disagree with that.

There will be no avoiding or jamming this system.

If your vehicle falls off the grid for whatever reason every cop within 1000 miles will immediately be after your ass.

[ivflight]

This would be a better way to tax people and distribute funds for the roads (mileage, weight, and location). I don't want the govt handling roads but so long as they are we might as well keep the economic signals as accurate as possible ( taxing gas doesn't do this terribly well).

At the end of the day the privacy issue wins by a mile. I think making the right argument is important to your/our integrity. The privacy argument is truer and will hold with more people than the "I don't believe in taxes" argument.

[Fox McCloud]

Exactly. If you have to tax, tax gas so you punish less efficient cars and reward more efficient cars. This is all about control.

My biggest problem with this is that low MPG cards are subsidizing the experience of high MPG cars.

Take for example two cars that weigh roughly the same, but one gets better MPG than the other:

Car 1: 30 MPG
Car 2: 20 MPG

They travel to work, which is 60 miles away; car 1 will have used 2 gallons, and car 2 will have used 3 gallons.

Assuming the tax is 50 cents per gallon, car 1 is paying $1 in tax, and card 2 is paying $1.50 in tax---both have caused roughly the same amount of damage to the road, yet the lower MPG car is paying a lot more for road repair/maintenance than is the high MPG car.

With a mileage tax (again, this is assuming no tracking and so on and so forth), this is eliminated; they both weigh roughly the same, and they're both traveling 60 miles--likewise, their tax bills will be identical.

It's still a tax, yes, but it's far closer to a usage fee.

[acptulsa]

But the driver of the car that weighs the same, yet uses more fuel, could well be having more fun. So, just think of it as a sin tax. :rolleyes:

Actually, this has been an issue off and on since cars in this country first began to seriously reduce their fuel consumption--since the mid Seventies. Poor people can't afford the latest cars, so they buy more gas. So, they subsidize the roads for the rich people. Kinda regressive, eh?

[Anti Federalist]

I just see that as an incentive to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.

It also an example of government double speak, "use less fuel" sez teh fedgov, but when you do, they whine that it's undercutting the tax base.

This is one of those camel's nose in the tent sort of thing where the only response is no, hell no, period.

Anything else will allow the regulators their foot in the door, and they'll sell the idea to "rational, reasonable" people and promise never, ever to enact tracking.

Until five years pass, then it will be required for some fool reason, Osama bin Goldstein or some such.

No, there is nothing good about this, it should never even for a second be contemplated, for any reason, whatsoever.




My biggest problem with this is that low MPG cards are subsidizing the experience of high MPG cars.

Take for example two cars that weigh roughly the same, but one gets better MPG than the other:

Car 1: 30 MPG
Car 2: 20 MPG

They travel to work, which is 60 miles away; car 1 will have used 2 gallons, and car 2 will have used 3 gallons.

Assuming the tax is 50 cents per gallon, car 1 is paying $1 in tax, and card 2 is paying $1.50 in tax---both have caused roughly the same amount of damage to the road, yet the lower MPG car is paying a lot more for road repair/maintenance than is the high MPG car.

With a mileage tax (again, this is assuming no tracking and so on and so forth), this is eliminated; they both weigh roughly the same, and they're both traveling 60 miles--likewise, their tax bills will be identical.

It's still a tax, yes, but it's far closer to a usage fee.

[EndDaFed]

Why arent they doing what they always do and just introduce a "Temporary Gas Tax" or raise the existing Gas Taxes?

Oh yeah, it isnt about fair and efficient taxation at all, its all about invasion of privacy. You want to put a GPS in my car to track how many miles I drive? Get a fucking warrant!

I guess the argument would be that it will turn out to be a regressive tax. Given that people of greater means can buy cars with better gas mileage, they will pay less taxes than those that can't. I have a good counter argument to anyone that makes that argument. You say to them that the law should be opt in. If someone wants a tax reduction they can voluntary take there car to have its odometer read by a person every year for a tax break.

[Fox McCloud]

But the driver of the car that weighs the same, yet uses more fuel, could well be having more fun. So, just think of it as a sin tax. :rolleyes:

Actually, this has been an issue off and on since cars in this country first began to seriously reduce their fuel consumption--since the mid Seventies. Poor people can't afford the latest cars, so they buy more gas. So, they subsidize the roads for the rich people. Kinda regressive, eh?

Exactly.

I think that until we have a truly private road system (I can dream, right?), a good alternative would be to abolish all gasoline taxes and replace it with a mileage tax based on Odometer readings...you already have to get stickers for your plates each year; this would be a perfect time to report it/have it inspected.

It wouldn't be perfect, but it would avoid the privacy issue.

[Pauls' Revere]

This is absolutely unconstitutional as it violates the freedom of mobility. If it happens it would be the worst thing Obama has done to date. Fortunately though, I don't see them actually getting away with this. You can trick idiots into supporting the patriot act by bleating about scary brown people, you can trick idiots into supporting health care because no one wants to pay for their own health care, and you can trick idiots into supporting gun control by bleating about Columbine, but this is something even the dumbest of people can recognize as a bad thing and it would be political suicide for Obama to pass it.

I dunno, I think you give people to much credit. They will simply go on bleating about how its your moral obligation to save the planet because we have been so rich and prosperous. In other words, they will bleat about it with a green spin.

[hugolp]

My biggest problem with this is that low MPG cards are subsidizing the experience of high MPG cars.

Take for example two cars that weigh roughly the same, but one gets better MPG than the other:

Car 1: 30 MPG
Car 2: 20 MPG

They travel to work, which is 60 miles away; car 1 will have used 2 gallons, and car 2 will have used 3 gallons.

Assuming the tax is 50 cents per gallon, car 1 is paying $1 in tax, and card 2 is paying $1.50 in tax---both have caused roughly the same amount of damage to the road, yet the lower MPG car is paying a lot more for road repair/maintenance than is the high MPG car.

With a mileage tax (again, this is assuming no tracking and so on and so forth), this is eliminated; they both weigh roughly the same, and they're both traveling 60 miles--likewise, their tax bills will be identical.

It's still a tax, yes, but it's far closer to a usage fee.

Yes, you are absolutely right, BUT the way I propose takes (somehow) into consideration environmental issues, not only road mantenaince.

[Freedom 4 all]

I dunno, I think you give people to much credit. They will simply go on bleating about how its your moral obligation to save the planet because we have been so rich and prosperous. In other words, they will bleat about it with a green spin.

Yeah if they could paint their tyranny green the people would swallow it whole, but even the greens are against this as it taxes hummers at the same rate as Smart cars. The whole point of by mile rather than by gallon is to counteract the fact that people are getting around the gas tax by driving more fuel efficient cars. It's as anti-green as it gets.