Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now

Now available from EcoModder: ScanGauge II fuel economy gauge.  Click for details.  

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-07-2013, 01:15 AM   #11 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 369
Thanked 199 Times in 152 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist View Post
I stand corrected. I confused a comma and a period.

It sounded high...
To be honest, it would be fantastic if they did have that much money...

Of course, as to what the US Government actually does with the 2.3 trillion it collects...

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 03:03 AM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 3,045
Thanks: 419
Thanked 776 Times in 614 Posts
It's actually a subtle problem. With a fixed fuel tax rate, as the proportions change, you go from rewarding the early adopters to penalizing the poor. But additional taxes on fuel efficiency brings in transponders in all the new vehicles, because it would be un-Constitutional to collect taxes on out-of-state travel.

While I agree taxes are necessary and proper; Oregonians won't accept a state sales tax unless the income tax is reduced first, and that's not going to happen.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 01:40 PM   #13 (permalink)
Prime Directive Violator
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,773

Bacon - '99 Subaru Forester L
90 day: 27 mpg (US)

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 41.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 432
Thanked 360 Times in 270 Posts
Wouldn't a federal tax be Constitutional for all travel within the country? Would people complain about travel to Canada and Mexico?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 04:54 PM   #14 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: mn
Posts: 180

jaws - '94 Honda Civic vx
90 day: 52.15 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 11 Times in 10 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepick View Post
.

I'm proud to pay taxes.
Within reason.

When I see people using their welfare cards to buy cancer causing cigarettes, alcohol or other non necessities, it gets to me. Don't get me started on corporate welfare and the banking industry bailouts. More than one person should have gone to prison for that

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:55 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 3,045
Thanks: 419
Thanked 776 Times in 614 Posts
Xist -- Different question. This is a state initiative.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 07:57 PM   #16 (permalink)
Prime Directive Violator
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 2,773

Bacon - '99 Subaru Forester L
90 day: 27 mpg (US)

Chorizo - '00 Honda Civic HX, baby! :D
90 day: 41.96 mpg (US)
Thanks: 432
Thanked 360 Times in 270 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
Xist -- Different question. This is a state initiative.
I stand corrected.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:12 AM   #17 (permalink)
EcoModding Newb
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,415

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 31.53 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 15.9 mpg (US)

Camry - '98 Toyota Camry
90 day: 29.83 mpg (US)
Thanks: 434
Thanked 280 Times in 202 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepick View Post
I was wondering when reduced overall fuel consumption would finally provoke a response by government.

Heavier cars cause more road deterioration than lighter ones. I say, rather than multiply vehicle weight by miles driven to determine a tax amount, just let the cents-per-gallon taxes continue.

There has to be an up side to conserving fuel - that last thing our government (which is us, actually) should do is penalize fuel conservation!
Oregon, being a "progressive" state, hates rich old people. It is rich old people that drive the Volts and the Leafs, so Oregonians are left wondering why wealthy old Leaf owners should not pay any road taxes. The current system of funding road infrastructure with gasoline taxes is unsustainable. It is right for a necessary entity that is going insolvent to look for an equitable way to raise funds.

I see 2 ways to accomplish this:

The first is to levy a distance * weight tax. This appears to be a fair way to tax, but then what do we do about people with studded tires? Shouldn't they pay more tax?

The second is to just pay for infrastructure in the regular income tax. At first, this appears unfair because people that don't travel much end up paying taxes for an infrastructure they don't directly use very often. In reality, everyone benefits from a properly maintained infrastructure. Commerce depends on an efficient and safe means of travel, and that directly relates to the economy.

I'm in favor of the second method of funding since the method of collection is already in place. It reduces the overhead of having yet another source of taxation and regulation. Most all taxes should just be rolled up into a single state sales tax and a federal sales tax. All income taxes should be eliminated.

The upside to conserving fuel is already in place; it is conservation of money. No other hands need to artificially influence this incentive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
While I agree taxes are necessary and proper; Oregonians won't accept a state sales tax unless the income tax is reduced first, and that's not going to happen.
I wouldn't allow a sales tax unless income tax was eliminated altogether.

I used to be against sales tax, but income taxes are so inefficient. I should never have to "do taxes" or hire a CPA. Taxes should be "done" at the time something is purchased. This would free up millions of hours that would normally be wasted "doing taxes" and eliminate the thousands of pointless jobs held by CPAs and tax collectors. They could then be put to work doing something productive.
__________________






Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:51 AM   #18 (permalink)
It's all about Diesel
 
cRiPpLe_rOoStEr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Posts: 2,898
Thanks: 0
Thanked 177 Times in 163 Posts
It's all about excuses for more taxes...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 07:11 AM   #19 (permalink)
OCD Master EcoModder
 
brucepick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Eastern CT, USA
Posts: 1,674

According to Hoyle - '96 Honda Accord DX
Team Honda
90 day: 40.59 mpg (US)
Thanks: 219
Thanked 211 Times in 157 Posts
TIn addition to redpoint5's two options above, there's a third: have states increase their gasoline taxes. I would do that along with using income taxes to partially fund highway infrastructure.

Income tax - as redpoint5 says, we all benefit from the roads, so all should pay.

Increased fuel tax - the European method. Nothing wrong with raising the rate in the face of dropping consumption. There's nothing like $5 or $6 or more per gallon to get people to conserve. If you think $3.xx is your limit, you may have to choose between not using it or stealing it. Some say that's basically what we're doing at $3.xx/gallon because apparently the real cost is higher.

I'm modding for FE in preparation for those higher prices that may well arrive. Not just for today's prices.
__________________
Check your tire pressure - keep it up !!

We've learned that diet has a closer relationship to cancer than we ever thought. Please see this Wikipedia article on The China Study.

Driving '96 Accord DX. Planning on an Elio enclosed three-wheeler, due out 3rd-4th quarter 2015.



Last edited by brucepick; 01-08-2013 at 07:18 AM.. Reason: Fix typo
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 08:31 AM   #20 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucepick View Post
TIn addition to redpoint5's two options above, there's a third: have states increase their gasoline taxes. I would do that along with using income taxes to partially fund highway infrastructure.

Income tax - as redpoint5 says, we all benefit from the roads, so all should pay.

Increased fuel tax - the European method. Nothing wrong with raising the rate in the face of dropping consumption. There's nothing like $5 or $6 or more per gallon to get people to conserve. If you think $3.xx is your limit, you may have to choose between not using it or stealing it. Some say that's basically what we're doing at $3.xx/gallon because apparently the real cost is higher.

I'm modding for FE in preparation for those higher prices that may well arrive. Not just for today's prices.
Spend some time at the bottom of the food chain and tell me how much you still like this idea.

An extra $.50/gal (or whatever) is a drop in the bucket when your household income is $100g/yr +
At $30g/yr it becomes an issue of “do I fill up the car or buy groceries?” I know people right now that flirt with this issue on far too regular of a basis, even at $3-4/gal.

My point is, when the money left over at the end of the week is $0 something has to be neglected to make ends meet. Raising the gas tax will be a kick in the nuts to the people stuck on the bottom as buying a new, more efficient car is not even an option. If they can’t afford $10-20/wk more in gas they SURE AS HECK can’t afford a $400-500/month new car payment or even $100-200 for a modest used car (keep in mind the poor don’t have the means to make a big down payment or get good financing to keep the payment down).

In my mind, the idea that makes the most sense is a registration tax; to be paid at your yearly auto registration. The tax rate should be based on 2 things: vehicle year and EPA combined MPG rating. It should taper off as the vehicle age becomes greater so as to not hammer the poor-er that are buying 10-20yr old vehicles and should be outrageously high on brand new, gas sucking monstrosities. The people that “need” that new 13mpg Escalade for their status symbol in the subdivision should pay out the nose for it. The single mom driving the $1500 Chevy Astro van toting her kids around at 13mpg, shouldn’t.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com