Some states want to punish fuel-efficient car drivers!

It wasn't the size og govt, it was who the govt was bowing down to...

Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act, TSA, Real ID(which so far they
have been unsuccessful at)...

Yep. And now, it is payback time...

 

That causes people to drive even less, so it could get into a vicious
cycle. Reminds me the nicotin taxes that became such a large part of
state revenues. The more they raise it, the less they get out of it.
pj

 

Republicans are little different from democrats. They are also statists
and have expanded the size and scope of government greatly. Then again
you seem to know at least the later. Shattering people's illusions is
another story entirely.

 

Exactly how? By the democrats also expanding the size and scope of
government? The people are going to be the losers again.

 

In Canada they raised the cigarette tax so high at one point that
people actually <gasp!> cut back on their smoking and revenue started
to fall off. They promptly lowered the tax.

But our addiction to oil is much, much worse than our addiction to
nicotine. For most people, it's MUCH easier to cut back on smoking
than it is to cut back on driving.

 

At some US Naval officer clubs you used to pay according to the height
of your sandwich.

 

Whoa, that's something!

True, but for many driving is a necessity of life, while smoking is not.
Being able to go wherever you want and whenever you want is also an
important part of freedom that public transportation can not provide as
fully as one's own car. Most politicians know it and that's why they
feel they can tax it to death and there will still be people driving.
pj

 

I am all for use taxes, I just don't see this as manageable.

The problem is that in transporation this means tolls and the entire
infrastructure and industry which growa around them.

Imagine your surprise at registration time when you are presented a huge
mileage based tax bill.

It may seem fair but what about the person that has to drive a long way to
work because there is no effective public transit system available.
Promises of Light rail which will not be built for years will not pay that
renewal tax.

I think it will be hugely unmanageable.

Just raise the gas taxes

By the way, I remember those same clubs doing the Mongolian BBQ by the ounce
as well.

At some US Naval officer clubs you used to pay according to the height
of your sandwich.

 

And the driver is weighed along with the car, of course.

 

Take the bus.

 

Smoking is totally nonessential. SOME driving is essential. However, in my
observation, ONE trip
a week to buy groceries is all that is needed. Fess up, how many of you make
MORE than one driving trip a week
to buy groceries? Clue: one does NOT need fresh lettuce every frigging
day--it WILL keep for a fair while in the fridge.
I buy gas every TWO weeks, groceries every TWO weeks, except for milk which
I buy ONCE a week. Library trips are ONCE a week. No need to rent or buy
DVD's etc..I get them on my WEEKLY library trips..which I often walk to,
BTW.

Commuting for hours is pure bullshit most of the time. Surely, you can MOVE
closer if the job has any permanence at all. I have NO sympathy for those
who commute for HOURS year, after year, after year. Live closer to where you
work, damnit.

 

Unintentionally, I have always lived within a mile of the shops, Bing
70 years ld (Japoanese style) I still will often walk a miles to get
to some businesses where there won't be a heavy load to tote.

 

So you don't have any kids in your house. Big whoop. Put a couple
growing kids in your house and see how your grocery runs get. Every two
weeks? hahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

Jeff

 

Typical fucking LIEbrawl DEMONrats--their KIDS rule the house.

 

The question you should be asking is why are they not taxing mass transit
users, to help pay for the resources (road repair and building) that they
use, instead of take money from those that are currently paying for the
resources (road repair and building) that they use?

I don't understand the subject line. I don't see fuel efficiency being
taxed. Just people being held to pay for the resources (road repair
and building) that they use.

Jeff

 

Typical fucking LIEbrawl DEMONrats--their KIDS rule the house.
[/QUOTE]

What the **** are you talking about?

Kids eat. A lot. Preaching about "just go to the grocery store every
two weeks" is done out of ignorance of how things are in the real world.

As for my politics...I don't think I mentioned them, did I? So how did
you (a) decide what political persuasion I am (all on your own!), and
(b) change this from "going to the grocery every two weeks" into a
discussion on politics?

You're an idiot, an asshole, and ignorant--all in one fell swoop. Mr.
Hat Trick, that's what you are.

 

Not to meniton daily trips to and from the school (that is 3 blocks
away), soccer practice (at the schoolyard), piano lessons, gymnastics,
ballet...

 

In message

"But that's so *unfair!*"

- Quote from a random customer at a gas station being asked by a TV
reporter how he felt about a proposed gas tax rate increase.

 

Fuel efficiency would be discouraged, and also the proposed tax would
necessitate higher tax levels due to the buraucracy and infrastructure
required to implement it, than would a straight increase in gas tax.
The latter would not only continue incentivizing conservation but would
a) be much more economical and b) would likely have the same or less
impact on the average road user.

nate