The Libertarian Party is generally anti-tax and would like to repeal all of them, however even the LP supports "use" taxes. Like taxes assessed on gasoline or diesel. If you drive, you are a user of the road, and pay the tax. If you don't use the roads, then you pay nothing.
Revamp the federal fuel tax
- Thread starter Donald
- Start date
- Status
Largely agree with the concept, but the ambulances, fire trucks,and Police us the same roads to get to your house if they need to...so there's got to be some underlying level of taxation across the economy.
I'm in favour of a simple transaction tax for the base tax rate... every time you deposit into or take from an account, 0.1% is automatically and electronically skimmed off. OK for me, but the ones transferring huge money on the stock market on 0.1c rises and shorts hate the idea.
IMO Fuel taxes are OK for useage, as long as they don't just get dumped into the slush fund to buy the next election.
neither idea will ever apply...
I'm in favour of a simple transaction tax for the base tax rate... every time you deposit into or take from an account, 0.1% is automatically and electronically skimmed off. OK for me, but the ones transferring huge money on the stock market on 0.1c rises and shorts hate the idea.
IMO Fuel taxes are OK for useage, as long as they don't just get dumped into the slush fund to buy the next election.
neither idea will ever apply...
Easy solution: the NEW Affordable Transportation Act will regulate, ration (and TAX)...
1) FUEL PRICES (all forms of energy used for transportation)
2) Oil prices (HDEO, PCMO, etc.)
3) Mandatory Insurance (liability, medical, collision)
4) All Safety-related required equipment
5) Miles driven, where and when (and how often?)
All this at VIRTUALLY no ADDITIONAL CO$T (to those already on the ENTITLEMENTS BANDWAGON)
Coming SOON to your State, compliments of the Federal Government
1) FUEL PRICES (all forms of energy used for transportation)
2) Oil prices (HDEO, PCMO, etc.)
3) Mandatory Insurance (liability, medical, collision)
4) All Safety-related required equipment
5) Miles driven, where and when (and how often?)
All this at VIRTUALLY no ADDITIONAL CO$T (to those already on the ENTITLEMENTS BANDWAGON)
Coming SOON to your State, compliments of the Federal Government
^^^And just wait till you get to use the NEW WEB SITE!!!
Freedumb Fries mentality
Originally Posted By: blackman777
The Libertarian Party is generally anti-tax and would like to repeal all of them, however even the LP supports "use" taxes. Like taxes assessed on gasoline or diesel. If you drive, you are a user of the road, and pay the tax. If you don't use the roads, then you pay nothing.
Following their logic, every road would be a toll road. Thank *** they will never be in power.
The Libertarian Party is generally anti-tax and would like to repeal all of them, however even the LP supports "use" taxes. Like taxes assessed on gasoline or diesel. If you drive, you are a user of the road, and pay the tax. If you don't use the roads, then you pay nothing.
Following their logic, every road would be a toll road. Thank *** they will never be in power.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2025
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
the only fair way is to just tax gas.
Originally Posted By: sciphi
Raise the blasted federal gas tax already and be done with it. That's about the fairest way to do things without going all Big Data on folks.
Seems to me to be the fair way. I will pay more when I drive my larger truck, and less when I drive the smaller vehicles.
the only fair way is to just tax gas.
Originally Posted By: sciphi
Raise the blasted federal gas tax already and be done with it. That's about the fairest way to do things without going all Big Data on folks.
Seems to me to be the fair way. I will pay more when I drive my larger truck, and less when I drive the smaller vehicles.
For electrics and other alternative-fuel vehicles where raising the fuel tax will not recoup costs, an option might be front-loading their expected use as another fee to pay upon purchase. We have the numbers to show how much damage a car does. Take that out over the expected lifetime of the car and calculate how much the fee is. If the vehicle gets sold or totaled, the odometer is read and the balance gets refunded to the owner or credited to the loan on the vehicle. If the vehicle is within 1000 miles of hitting the "lifetime" mileage when totaled or sold, the remainder gets forfeited.
Obviously this does not address the vehicles that folks keep past the lifetime envisioned in the fee schedule. I'd say let those folks get a pass, since they paid it and the numbers will probably be low enough to not matter that much.
Obviously this does not address the vehicles that folks keep past the lifetime envisioned in the fee schedule. I'd say let those folks get a pass, since they paid it and the numbers will probably be low enough to not matter that much.
In California we're already paying 72 cents per gallon gasoline tax. I'm thinking for that amount of money, we should have all concrete roads; no asphalt.
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
.. haha now who's the grandpa now? (I was raised in a "respect thy elders" (for their wisdom) home)
TiredTrucker, my hat off to you sir!
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
.. haha now who's the grandpa now? (I was raised in a "respect thy elders" (for their wisdom) home)
TiredTrucker, my hat off to you sir!
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
Exactly. Increase the cost of fuel - either from increasing the cost of the oil barrel or increasing taxes - and it will have an effect on the prices of food and other goods.
But in turn, this decreases the profitability of industries like trucking. I'm sure there are many truckers not making as much as they used to.
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
Exactly. Increase the cost of fuel - either from increasing the cost of the oil barrel or increasing taxes - and it will have an effect on the prices of food and other goods.
But in turn, this decreases the profitability of industries like trucking. I'm sure there are many truckers not making as much as they used to.
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
TiredTrucker
I rarely agree with you however you're right on the money with this post.
Go ahead and make truckers pay more. That extra cost filters down to the consumer which will just inflate the costs of goods at purchase time and in the end it's the consumer paying it.
It costs what it costs to transport goods. Profit is added over and above those costs. If truckers end up having their costs increased it gets put in the "costs " column and profit is still added over and above.
So by making transporters pay more the end result is the consumer pays more,it's just that simple.
As far as I'm concerned the costs of goods is high enough. Taking more from the transporters doesn't help anyone and just shortens how far my dollar goes.
Increasing the taxes on transporters is stupid. We just end up paying more in the end,but it seems whether it costs more for goods or costs us more in taxes the money gets taken from us either way so rather than cut into the truckers wallet I figure blame the government and make them the bad guy.
Originally Posted By: grampi
18 wheelers do the most damage, therefore they should pay more in taxes...
And I do. Like to the tune of around $17,000, give or take, a year. Just wonder if my truck is actually doing $17,000 in damage. Not convinced.
But when it comes to commercial trucks, it really isn't me who is paying the road tax, it's you. I pay it from what I charge to haul the goods. You buy the goods, so you are paying the tax. So go ahead and demand that those big nasty 18 wheelers pay more of their "fair share". And restrict them to certain lanes of traffic, so that those lanes get beat to a pulp instead of spreading the wear and tear evenly. Remember that when you buy those parts at the auto parts store, when UPS brings that package, and you buy your Wheaties at the grocery store. Part of what you pay is going to that road tax, right along with what you pay at the pump.
TiredTrucker
I rarely agree with you however you're right on the money with this post.
Go ahead and make truckers pay more. That extra cost filters down to the consumer which will just inflate the costs of goods at purchase time and in the end it's the consumer paying it.
It costs what it costs to transport goods. Profit is added over and above those costs. If truckers end up having their costs increased it gets put in the "costs " column and profit is still added over and above.
So by making transporters pay more the end result is the consumer pays more,it's just that simple.
As far as I'm concerned the costs of goods is high enough. Taking more from the transporters doesn't help anyone and just shortens how far my dollar goes.
Increasing the taxes on transporters is stupid. We just end up paying more in the end,but it seems whether it costs more for goods or costs us more in taxes the money gets taken from us either way so rather than cut into the truckers wallet I figure blame the government and make them the bad guy.
Transportation is plenty cheap, as evidenced by Chinese Apple juice replacing locally made stuff. If over-the-road trucking were too expensive, they'd figure out the logistics of container rails carrying more of the load, except for the last 20-100 miles to the store/warehouse.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Go ahead and make truckers pay more. That extra cost filters down to the consumer which will just inflate the costs of goods at purchase time and in the end it's the consumer paying it.
wouldn't that be much more honest and reflect the true cost of things? gee maybe we'd stop transporting useless gadgets and garbage and eat more local food.
Go ahead and make truckers pay more. That extra cost filters down to the consumer which will just inflate the costs of goods at purchase time and in the end it's the consumer paying it.
wouldn't that be much more honest and reflect the true cost of things? gee maybe we'd stop transporting useless gadgets and garbage and eat more local food.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Transportation is plenty cheap, as evidenced by Chinese Apple juice replacing locally made stuff. If over-the-road trucking were too expensive, they'd figure out the logistics of container rails carrying more of the load, except for the last 20-100 miles to the store/warehouse.
It always sounds good, in theory, to put more on the rail. That is, until you realize that 80% of goods moving around are done by truck. It is a logistics nightmare just to transfer a quarter of that over to rail. And when you figure that businesses are just like consumers.... they want things they order to be delivered yesterday. Putting products on rail will extend delivery times considerably. Switching cars in a rail yard is not like a drop and hook deal for trucks. And a major portion of manufacturing in this country is done by the "just in time" method. Straight from the truck to the build floor. And on the front end, many products need shipped within hours of being readied. Rail cannot even compete with that, even with containers. To transfer a significantly larger portion of freight to rail would cause a lot of disruption in the economy. Some could be transferred, for sure. But not on the level some think.
And there is the regional stuff, like I generally stay involved in. It is not practical to put commodities on rail in Sioux City, IA that goes to a bakery in Kentwood, MI. Times are just too critical. If Rail were to "lose" a car or container in their system (happens more than some think), the consignee is going to have to have another load overnighted to them at a substantially higher freight cost. Just better to go with the truck to begin with.
International and cross nation, yes, rail is not a bad thing for a lot of stuff. But anything in between, especially regional, can be a real logistics nightmare. And any perceived cost savings would not materialize. I am not sure that a lot of people, even those involved in trucking, have a firm grasp on the logistics involved to make the economy work. The reason we do a lot of what we do in transporting goods, is that it is the most cost effective way to do it to meet production schedules and other issues.
Transportation is plenty cheap, as evidenced by Chinese Apple juice replacing locally made stuff. If over-the-road trucking were too expensive, they'd figure out the logistics of container rails carrying more of the load, except for the last 20-100 miles to the store/warehouse.
It always sounds good, in theory, to put more on the rail. That is, until you realize that 80% of goods moving around are done by truck. It is a logistics nightmare just to transfer a quarter of that over to rail. And when you figure that businesses are just like consumers.... they want things they order to be delivered yesterday. Putting products on rail will extend delivery times considerably. Switching cars in a rail yard is not like a drop and hook deal for trucks. And a major portion of manufacturing in this country is done by the "just in time" method. Straight from the truck to the build floor. And on the front end, many products need shipped within hours of being readied. Rail cannot even compete with that, even with containers. To transfer a significantly larger portion of freight to rail would cause a lot of disruption in the economy. Some could be transferred, for sure. But not on the level some think.
And there is the regional stuff, like I generally stay involved in. It is not practical to put commodities on rail in Sioux City, IA that goes to a bakery in Kentwood, MI. Times are just too critical. If Rail were to "lose" a car or container in their system (happens more than some think), the consignee is going to have to have another load overnighted to them at a substantially higher freight cost. Just better to go with the truck to begin with.
International and cross nation, yes, rail is not a bad thing for a lot of stuff. But anything in between, especially regional, can be a real logistics nightmare. And any perceived cost savings would not materialize. I am not sure that a lot of people, even those involved in trucking, have a firm grasp on the logistics involved to make the economy work. The reason we do a lot of what we do in transporting goods, is that it is the most cost effective way to do it to meet production schedules and other issues.
Yeah, sliding off topic, I don't get "just in time". It seems like something the Japanese were doing, so we started doing it too. Except they know why they're doing it.
Look at Autozone blowing out their oil for $1/qt; they have to dump it by a self-imposed artificial deadline to make some MBA's balance sheet happy.
I know someone who drove a regular truck route from Maine to Florida with premium unconcentrated lemonade in glass bottles. Seems wasteful but it's a premium product so the consumers don't mind, I guess. We also truck LOTS of Poland Spring water out of here. For "Public Relations" the trucks are plain white and don't advertise that they're taking "our" water elsewhere and beating up the roads in the process. It's a short drive to Rigby Train Yards but these trucks hit the Turnpike instead...
I know someone who drove a regular truck route from Maine to Florida with premium unconcentrated lemonade in glass bottles. Seems wasteful but it's a premium product so the consumers don't mind, I guess. We also truck LOTS of Poland Spring water out of here. For "Public Relations" the trucks are plain white and don't advertise that they're taking "our" water elsewhere and beating up the roads in the process. It's a short drive to Rigby Train Yards but these trucks hit the Turnpike instead...
Originally Posted By: blackman777
P.S. Even if the present government is an angel on earth, what about a future government? We have no idea what future dictator might rise-up (another Bush?) and start rounding-up citizens. It makes no sense to make his job easy by having transponders broadcasting "Here I am."
+10 ... Governments especially our own have shown a propensity to break their own laws, especially in times of war or national distress, then excuse it with propaganda. During WWII, during the Cold War, after 9/11, and probably many other cases we don't know about. How do you think they were able to find Japanese-Americans to round up in WWII? They illegally used Census data, which was promised by the Census Bureau that it would only be used for Census reporting.
Anyone who thinks the government will never again violate the rights of a large segment of the population, is totally naïve. It *WILL* happen again. It only takes a war or something similar
P.S. Even if the present government is an angel on earth, what about a future government? We have no idea what future dictator might rise-up (another Bush?) and start rounding-up citizens. It makes no sense to make his job easy by having transponders broadcasting "Here I am."
+10 ... Governments especially our own have shown a propensity to break their own laws, especially in times of war or national distress, then excuse it with propaganda. During WWII, during the Cold War, after 9/11, and probably many other cases we don't know about. How do you think they were able to find Japanese-Americans to round up in WWII? They illegally used Census data, which was promised by the Census Bureau that it would only be used for Census reporting.
Anyone who thinks the government will never again violate the rights of a large segment of the population, is totally naïve. It *WILL* happen again. It only takes a war or something similar
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Transportation is plenty cheap, as evidenced by Chinese Apple juice replacing locally made stuff. If over-the-road trucking were too expensive, they'd figure out the logistics of container rails carrying more of the load, except for the last 20-100 miles to the store/warehouse.
It always sounds good, in theory, to put more on the rail. That is, until you realize that 80% of goods moving around are done by truck. It is a logistics nightmare just to transfer a quarter of that over to rail. And when you figure that businesses are just like consumers.... they want things they order to be delivered yesterday. Putting products on rail will extend delivery times considerably. Switching cars in a rail yard is not like a drop and hook deal for trucks. And a major portion of manufacturing in this country is done by the "just in time" method. Straight from the truck to the build floor. And on the front end, many products need shipped within hours of being readied. Rail cannot even compete with that, even with containers. To transfer a significantly larger portion of freight to rail would cause a lot of disruption in the economy. Some could be transferred, for sure. But not on the level some think.
And there is the regional stuff, like I generally stay involved in. It is not practical to put commodities on rail in Sioux City, IA that goes to a bakery in Kentwood, MI. Times are just too critical. If Rail were to "lose" a car or container in their system (happens more than some think), the consignee is going to have to have another load overnighted to them at a substantially higher freight cost. Just better to go with the truck to begin with.
International and cross nation, yes, rail is not a bad thing for a lot of stuff. But anything in between, especially regional, can be a real logistics nightmare. And any perceived cost savings would not materialize. I am not sure that a lot of people, even those involved in trucking, have a firm grasp on the logistics involved to make the economy work. The reason we do a lot of what we do in transporting goods, is that it is the most cost effective way to do it to meet production schedules and other issues.
Not to mention: that would require more train yards...which would have the NIMBY folks wetting their pants!
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Transportation is plenty cheap, as evidenced by Chinese Apple juice replacing locally made stuff. If over-the-road trucking were too expensive, they'd figure out the logistics of container rails carrying more of the load, except for the last 20-100 miles to the store/warehouse.
It always sounds good, in theory, to put more on the rail. That is, until you realize that 80% of goods moving around are done by truck. It is a logistics nightmare just to transfer a quarter of that over to rail. And when you figure that businesses are just like consumers.... they want things they order to be delivered yesterday. Putting products on rail will extend delivery times considerably. Switching cars in a rail yard is not like a drop and hook deal for trucks. And a major portion of manufacturing in this country is done by the "just in time" method. Straight from the truck to the build floor. And on the front end, many products need shipped within hours of being readied. Rail cannot even compete with that, even with containers. To transfer a significantly larger portion of freight to rail would cause a lot of disruption in the economy. Some could be transferred, for sure. But not on the level some think.
And there is the regional stuff, like I generally stay involved in. It is not practical to put commodities on rail in Sioux City, IA that goes to a bakery in Kentwood, MI. Times are just too critical. If Rail were to "lose" a car or container in their system (happens more than some think), the consignee is going to have to have another load overnighted to them at a substantially higher freight cost. Just better to go with the truck to begin with.
International and cross nation, yes, rail is not a bad thing for a lot of stuff. But anything in between, especially regional, can be a real logistics nightmare. And any perceived cost savings would not materialize. I am not sure that a lot of people, even those involved in trucking, have a firm grasp on the logistics involved to make the economy work. The reason we do a lot of what we do in transporting goods, is that it is the most cost effective way to do it to meet production schedules and other issues.
Not to mention: that would require more train yards...which would have the NIMBY folks wetting their pants!
- Status
Similar threads
