Not US politics
-
I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes and that's essentially what this is. People should only pay for what they use. We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. It's really the freedom over nanny state argument and I'll opt for freedom of choice every time, I wouldn't last long paying taxes in Europe.
Sound nice but what if you live in a state that does not have this tax but you drive thru the other state? Do you have to stop at the border and get a device put on your car just to drive thru the state? i would look for a different route to go to bypass this. I would feel a little paranoid that they where tacking me. And if they don't make you get a device on entering the state you would be using the road but not paying for it. Plus what about all the interstate trucking pepole how do you get them to pay? Too many Question for me to think it as a good idea. ----------------------- Ok now what? -----------------------
-
I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes and that's essentially what this is. People should only pay for what they use. We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. It's really the freedom over nanny state argument and I'll opt for freedom of choice every time, I wouldn't last long paying taxes in Europe.
John Cardinal wrote: We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. Sounds fair... can we apply it to the elderly as well? I'm not elderly yet my taxes pay for their programs (Social Security, Medicare, etc...). I'm thinking only the elderly should fund the elderly. :rolleyes: How about fire and police protection? I've never had to call either to my home, yet my neighbor has had the fire department out twice in 5 years. Shouldn't he pay more in taxes to the fire department than me? :rolleyes: "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
-
And that solves the problem how? People will just [mo/li]ve closer to work. They need a way to make cars consume less fuel and build roads to last longer. Persoanl flying jet packs. Now that's the way to go. :) "For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you would never have considered. That is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebula, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence." - Q (Star Trek: The Next Generation) ^ Blog
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote: People will just [mo/li]ve closer to work. =real estate prices rise. Tomaž
-
I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes and that's essentially what this is. People should only pay for what they use. We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. It's really the freedom over nanny state argument and I'll opt for freedom of choice every time, I wouldn't last long paying taxes in Europe.
I think the trouble is that this guys first pay for usage and then income tax. So a good taxi driver will be taxed much more progressive then before. Tomaž
-
John Cardinal wrote: We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. Sounds fair... can we apply it to the elderly as well? I'm not elderly yet my taxes pay for their programs (Social Security, Medicare, etc...). I'm thinking only the elderly should fund the elderly. :rolleyes: How about fire and police protection? I've never had to call either to my home, yet my neighbor has had the fire department out twice in 5 years. Shouldn't he pay more in taxes to the fire department than me? :rolleyes: "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
Got my five. A pity common sense can't be added to drinking water... :) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote: People will just [mo/li]ve closer to work. =real estate prices rise. Tomaž
Yes, then the average home in California costs ten million dollars instead of just one million. :-D "For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you would never have considered. That is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebula, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence." - Q (Star Trek: The Next Generation) ^ Blog
-
And that solves the problem how? People will just [mo/li]ve closer to work. They need a way to make cars consume less fuel and build roads to last longer. Persoanl flying jet packs. Now that's the way to go. :) "For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you would never have considered. That is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebula, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence." - Q (Star Trek: The Next Generation) ^ Blog
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote: Persoanl flying jet packs Yeah, cause we all know how fuel efficient those are! :) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
-
I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes and that's essentially what this is. People should only pay for what they use. We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. It's really the freedom over nanny state argument and I'll opt for freedom of choice every time, I wouldn't last long paying taxes in Europe.
John Cardinal wrote: I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes You know of course you would get both. Richard Anyone who lives in California should have to pay a large STUPID tax. "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-
John Cardinal wrote: I like it! I'm all for user fees over taxes You know of course you would get both. Richard Anyone who lives in California should have to pay a large STUPID tax. "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
Richard Stringer wrote: Anyone who lives in texas should have to pay a large STUPID tax. Dur Hur Hur!! That's durn funny jethro! I agree 10 hunred percent! P.S. Yes I know you lived in CA during the '60s, and I don't care. I still haven't found what I'm lookin' for - U2
-
The argument aginst that is that it discrimates the low paid workers in the countryside who must drioe to get to shops, doctors, hospital etc. who do not have access to public transport.
"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Neils Bohr
Like the existing fuel tax the mile tax would be a higher percentage of the low wage earner's salary. But, I'm not sure that qualifies as a classic example of discrimination. Afterall, I don't think equality includes commuting distance. Also, right now higher wage earners are more likely to be driving the gas guzzling SUVs which would be subsidizing the tax of low wage earners who drive more fuel efficient vehicles. But then again, hybrids are more expensive and likely to be choosen by the higher wage earners. So who knows?
-
Richard Stringer wrote: Anyone who lives in texas should have to pay a large STUPID tax. Dur Hur Hur!! That's durn funny jethro! I agree 10 hunred percent! P.S. Yes I know you lived in CA during the '60s, and I don't care. I still haven't found what I'm lookin' for - U2
Sad to see that the efforts to educate all the childern are wasted on some. Jethro indeed. Richard :) "Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer --Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
-
John Cardinal wrote: We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. Sounds fair... can we apply it to the elderly as well? I'm not elderly yet my taxes pay for their programs (Social Security, Medicare, etc...). I'm thinking only the elderly should fund the elderly. :rolleyes: How about fire and police protection? I've never had to call either to my home, yet my neighbor has had the fire department out twice in 5 years. Shouldn't he pay more in taxes to the fire department than me? :rolleyes: "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
Mike Mullikin wrote: How about fire and police protection? I've never had to call either to my home, yet my neighbor has had the fire department out twice in 5 years. Shouldn't he pay more in taxes to the fire department than me? Actually, I know of at least one place that charges residents a fee if the fire department is called to their property. I don't know the details, but I think you can opt in to a slightly higher tax to avoid it.
-
John Cardinal wrote: We've paid ridiculous municipal taxes for years which in large part fund local schools, we have zero children and many of our neighbors have 3 or more children but pay the same in taxes. There is no fairness in that whatsoever. Sounds fair... can we apply it to the elderly as well? I'm not elderly yet my taxes pay for their programs (Social Security, Medicare, etc...). I'm thinking only the elderly should fund the elderly. :rolleyes: How about fire and police protection? I've never had to call either to my home, yet my neighbor has had the fire department out twice in 5 years. Shouldn't he pay more in taxes to the fire department than me? :rolleyes: "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
:sigh: Taking something to ridiculous extremes does not add to the discussion. Obviously there are limits in everything. However it's just common sense that something non-life threatening and entirely a matter of choice should be paid for by the person who makes the choice. Yet in today's society we are forced to pay and pay and pay for other's choices. It's the lowest common denominator theory of social management: bring everyone down to the level of the people who make the worst choices in life.
-
but an interesting way to tax. by the mile[^] Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Taxing by milage would make more sense in Europe, where usually more alternatives exist (but still there>'s a notable percentage who's bound to long commutes). Could raising gas taxes be the only way to spurn so-called innovation to catch up with European standards? :rolleyes: I am not arguing that the US people are driving to much, but with the amount of driving done, shouldn't it make absolute economic sense toinvest in more economic technologies? Which country, if not the US? They have the technology, they have the need. Just think about it: if Operation Iraqui Liberation was only 1% about oil, and by catching up with standards you can save an average of 10% on oil consumption, your deficit would be $350 Million less :rolleyes: I know this is what we call a Milchmädchenrechnung, but who wants to deprive an old man of his fun.. ;)
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
:sigh: Taking something to ridiculous extremes does not add to the discussion. Obviously there are limits in everything. However it's just common sense that something non-life threatening and entirely a matter of choice should be paid for by the person who makes the choice. Yet in today's society we are forced to pay and pay and pay for other's choices. It's the lowest common denominator theory of social management: bring everyone down to the level of the people who make the worst choices in life.
-
but an interesting way to tax. by the mile[^] Mike "liberals were driven crazy by Bush." Me To: Dixie Sluts, M. Moore, the Boss, Bon Jovi, Clooney, Penn, Babs, Soros, Redford, Gore, Daschle - "bye bye" Me "I voted for W." Me "There you go again." RR "Flushed the Johns" Me
Last time I visited New York state, I paid tolls to drive from Albany to Buffalo on the I-90 (New York Thruway). I noticed that the toll card charged different amounts depending on the distance along the I-90 that I drove. So, what's the big deal? It just means California can no longer call its highways "Freeways" any more.
Do you want to know more? WDevs.com - Open Source Code Hosting, Blogs, FTP, Mail and Forums
-
:sigh: Taking something to ridiculous extremes does not add to the discussion. Obviously there are limits in everything. However it's just common sense that something non-life threatening and entirely a matter of choice should be paid for by the person who makes the choice. Yet in today's society we are forced to pay and pay and pay for other's choices. It's the lowest common denominator theory of social management: bring everyone down to the level of the people who make the worst choices in life.
John Cardinal wrote: However it's just common sense that something non-life threatening and entirely a matter of choice should be paid for by the person who makes the choice. Ok, then for that reason you should pay less tax. But the society needs children to maintain stability, so by refusing to add to the society, your reduction should be leveled out :-) You don't want to pay for other peoples children, then other peoples children shouldn't pay for you when you get old. "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
-
Like the existing fuel tax the mile tax would be a higher percentage of the low wage earner's salary. But, I'm not sure that qualifies as a classic example of discrimination. Afterall, I don't think equality includes commuting distance. Also, right now higher wage earners are more likely to be driving the gas guzzling SUVs which would be subsidizing the tax of low wage earners who drive more fuel efficient vehicles. But then again, hybrids are more expensive and likely to be choosen by the higher wage earners. So who knows?
With all policies it is easy to thow a spanner in the works. In the UK a low wage earning farm worker or retired person in the countryside is likely to drive an old car that is not fuel efficient. But they are unlilely to travel 2,000 miles a month to work! I used to drive 76 miles each way to work, it took about 1 hour 10 mins, the firm paid for the car and fuel. Unless you stop that type of driving no matter how many roads you build, or taxes you impose things aint going to change!
"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Neils Bohr