Travel Tax
-
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
Insurance companies already are starting to do things like this. The less distance you go in your car, the less the insurance.
Toll roads work the same way. If you travel a further distance, you pay more toll.
I do think that the US has to revise the gas tax. With more and more cars going to electric, there is a smaller amount of gas tax money going in. I think what is said in the article is one potential way to get around this.
An electric car does as much ""wear and tear" on a road as a gas car, but the tax money that goes to keeping up the roads/building new ones is much less/almost zero for an electric car vs. a gas car.
What is an alternative plan?
Ever thought about cutting out the electric car subsidy?
-
Insurance companies already are starting to do things like this. The less distance you go in your car, the less the insurance.
Toll roads work the same way. If you travel a further distance, you pay more toll.
I do think that the US has to revise the gas tax. With more and more cars going to electric, there is a smaller amount of gas tax money going in. I think what is said in the article is one potential way to get around this.
An electric car does as much ""wear and tear" on a road as a gas car, but the tax money that goes to keeping up the roads/building new ones is much less/almost zero for an electric car vs. a gas car.
What is an alternative plan?
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
The Brad
-
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
@lufins-dad said in Travel Tax:
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
OK, that’s $10mil from the Pakistan gender program (and you can thank Sen. Lindsey Graham for pushing that Pakistan aid package through Congress). You replaced a little under 1/4300th of the 2020 Highway Trust Fund tax revenue of $43B. What other ideas have you got for the remaining 4299/4300?
-
Ax, Ax, Ax. . .
You don't get it, bud.
But Hay!
You're Consistent!!
ATTA BOY AX!! World Champion Forum Teh Winnerz!!! -
@axtremus said in Travel Tax:
@jolly said in Travel Tax:
Ever thought about cutting out the electric car subsidy?
Then what?
Then every pot sits on its own bottom.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
@lufins-dad said in Travel Tax:
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
Maybe they would take away money from the US-Taiwan defense fund. Then I would be mad.
Maybe they would take it away from the "Encourage Music Education" fund. Then you would be mad.
Never going to be a completely fair solution where everybody is happy. If the tax goes through as indicated in the article, then rural people will be mad.
If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund.
But I think @Axtremus has a point about the article. Like a consultant (sorry consultants!!!!!!), it is easy to say that there is a problem.
Much more difficult to come up with a solution.
-
@lufins-dad said in Travel Tax:
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
Maybe they would take away money from the US-Taiwan defense fund. Then I would be mad.
Maybe they would take it away from the "Encourage Music Education" fund. Then you would be mad.
Never going to be a completely fair solution where everybody is happy. If the tax goes through as indicated in the article, then rural people will be mad.
If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund.
But I think @Axtremus has a point about the article. Like a consultant (sorry consultants!!!!!!), it is easy to say that there is a problem.
Much more difficult to come up with a solution.
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
@lufins-dad said in Travel Tax:
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
Maybe they would take away money from the US-Taiwan defense fund. Then I would be mad.
Maybe they would take it away from the "Encourage Music Education" fund. Then you would be mad.
Never going to be a completely fair solution where everybody is happy. If the tax goes through as indicated in the article, then rural people will be mad.
If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund.
But I think @Axtremus has a point about the article. Like a consultant (sorry consultants!!!!!!), it is easy to say that there is a problem.
Much more difficult to come up with a solution.
US-Taiwan Defense Fund is a legitimate function of the Federal Government. All for it.
Education... That's an interesting debate. Personally, I tend to think that it belongs more in the State's responsibilities and is not the Federal Government's role, but education is at least a legitimate government function.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
@lufins-dad said in Travel Tax:
@taiwan_girl said in Travel Tax:
What is an alternative plan?
Well, since maintaining roads and infrastructure is a legitimate function of the US government gender programs in Pakistan, I would start with diverting those funds.
Maybe they would take away money from the US-Taiwan defense fund. Then I would be mad.
Maybe they would take it away from the "Encourage Music Education" fund. Then you would be mad.
Never going to be a completely fair solution where everybody is happy. If the tax goes through as indicated in the article, then rural people will be mad.
If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund.
But I think @Axtremus has a point about the article. Like a consultant (sorry consultants!!!!!!), it is easy to say that there is a problem.
Much more difficult to come up with a solution.
US-Taiwan Defense Fund is a legitimate function of the Federal Government. All for it.
Education... That's an interesting debate. Personally, I tend to think that it belongs more in the State's responsibilities and is not the Federal Government's role, but education is at least a legitimate government function.
"If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund."
This isn't a business. It's the responsibility of the government to maintain an adequate system of roads and adequate transportation to allow for interstate commerce, mail and message delivery, and national defense. These are things that EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the US benefits from and gets use of, even if they don't own a car. We don't charge parents of school children for their education in the public school system. We don't charge a poll tax to cover the costs of the election. We don't charge disaster areas for sending out FEMA and the National Guard. The road systems are a proper function of the government and should be paid for out of the general fund. Everybody contributes because everybody benefits. It's not that hard.
-
"If you use more of a service, should you pay more? Maybe decrease the subsidy for public tranportation by 0.1% and shift that to the road fund?
Maybe $1/month tax on each car? Money goes to road fund."
This isn't a business. It's the responsibility of the government to maintain an adequate system of roads and adequate transportation to allow for interstate commerce, mail and message delivery, and national defense. These are things that EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the US benefits from and gets use of, even if they don't own a car. We don't charge parents of school children for their education in the public school system. We don't charge a poll tax to cover the costs of the election. We don't charge disaster areas for sending out FEMA and the National Guard. The road systems are a proper function of the government and should be paid for out of the general fund. Everybody contributes because everybody benefits. It's not that hard.
@lufins-dad so, are you say to eliminate the National gas tax?
