Transportation Secretary wants to consider taxing motorists based on mileage

[Area52]

Just another example of US citizen's freedom and privacy being openly challenged by the very people you entrust to represent your interests.

(Excerpt)
"Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he wants to consider taxing motorists based on how many miles they drive. The system would require all cars and trucks be equipped with global satellite positioning technology, a transponder, a clock and other equipment to record how many miles a vehicle was driven, whether it was driven on highways or secondary roads, and even whether it was driven during peak traffic periods or off-peak hours.

Rob Atkinson, president of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, the agency that is developing future transportation funding options, said moving to a national VMT would take about a decade.

Privacy concerns are based more on perception than any actual risk, Atkinson said. The satellite information would be beamed one way to the car and driving information would be contained within the device on the car, with the amount of the tax due the only information that's downloaded, he said."

Outright lie. There was opposition to the Social Security registration system on the basis of privacy. The government gave assurance that issued SS numbers would not be used for identification purposes. You know how those numbers are used today.

Full article. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29298315

[Commerce]

Strange ideas, but then these are strange days. As mentioned in the article, there already is a tax on how many miles we drive, it is referred to as a federal fuel tax. I would guess those GPS systems and all the infrastructure needed to track the data would cost quite a bit, but then you are probably misguided if you really think this is about gasoline taxes.

Call me nostalgic, but I sort of preferred the days when the war on terror was not quite so overtly a war on each of us.

What this "former Illinois Republican lawmaker" offers will certainly cost far more than a nominal tax increase at several levels.

-Commerce

[Gerry]

Strange ideas, but then these are strange days.

Quote of the day, even though the day is still young.

[JMJ]

Welcome to socialism.

[Gerry]

Welcome to socialism.

show me socialism in this.

If I drive 10,000 miles and you drive 100,000 miles - who is consuming more resources and who is putting more greenhouse gases in to the atmosphere?

Who is placing a strain and wear and tear on roads.

Seriously, don't get me wrong - I do not agree with this proposal at all.

We are all paying more than our fair share at the pumps in federal and state dollars.

The problem is all those tax dollars are being siphoned off and diverted elsewhere.

That is one of the biggest cracks in our infrastructure.

Years ago (actually decades ago) there was a proposal to stop the borrowing from one fund to another. This was mainly due to all the money that was being borrowed from Social Security.

But there have been so many loopholes around this.

With the billions and trillions recouped from this gas tax, we should have the most remarkable roads, rail and mass transit system on earth.

Not to mention the billions paid in addition by large freight companies for road use tax.

This bugs the crap out of me that we have none of this.

We do have amtrak that is an sore on the ass of the economy that should be stopped. Billions of dollars put into a system that I believe has never posted a profit by billions keep pouring in.

I think we used that same model of failure last fall with many of the wall street bailouts. Yet we left those same people in charge of the failed companies and allowed them to collect their massive salaries...at the bequest of Congress, Paulson, and President Bush.

Remember this was one of the sticking points and why the bailout bill did not pass the first time? Many were calling for the removal of the CEO's while many others want them to stay in those positions (wink wink - I can feel your hand in my pocket). But while the delay and debate went on a more dismal and bleak picture was on the horizon with the delay and a bill was hastily passed.

If a tax like this were allowed to be passed it would solve nothing and open the door for a tax on energy usage, period. Electricity usage would be next followed by perhaps an increase excise tax on phones.

Speaking of which, there are an estimated 1.2 billion PC's in the world. Meanwhile, there are nearly 4 billion mobile phones in the world.

How much do you want to bet that the government (perhaps not just the US) will see this not only as a new frontier by as a new means to tax mobile internet usage and all those little fees and taxes that you see on your bill will go up?

I would venture to say that nearly 3/4 or more of the US population have mobile phones.

An increase of a dollar a month, which is insignificant really, in federal excise fees, would bring in perhaps $200 million a month.

And you know people aren't going to give up their phones.

No way. They would quit driving but they will still talk away.

[500,000]

The Domain name.

[Gerry]

Strange ideas, but then these are strange days.
-Commerce

I think this said it best.

It is not a dem thing.

It is pulling out all the straws until you get to the last straw.

[JMJ]

They are hitting us every which way but loose with the taxes. It's time for a end to a bunch of nitwits running around talking about tax this and tax that. If you're wondering where all of the money goes to look no further than the Federal Reserve. Even your state pretty much pays taxes on the tax revenue it generates. Imagine that. This one here is a real kicker. It gets divided up to the world government/UN for "global warming."

[Commerce]

Doc Com,

If I drive 10,000 miles and you drive 100,000 miles - who is consuming more resources and who is putting more greenhouse gases in to the atmosphere?

Certainly the statement stands, however, I think that the problem remains that the tax is focused only on mileage and as such could encourage bad behavior. For example, taking city streets over a beltway to avoid extra mileage could have a measureable negative impact on greenhouse gases.

Perhaps I am giving too much credit to folks in government as regards early proactive thinking and planning, but I think that part of the real problem is that the government agencies are actually trying to get their arms around how to tax electric vehicles, which will also be using those roads, but will not contribute to the existing gas tax infrastructure. Of course, that would be wildly politically incorrect for them to admit to at a time when current generation electrics are at such an infant stage.

Even so, the mandated GPS concept for all vehicles seems way over the top as regards the use of (and potential for misuse of) personally invasive technologies. Simple mileage recording would be an adequate method to address the stated need.

Heck, even an RFID chip for cars, which could keep track of both a car's unique id (perhaps simply using the VIN) and current mileage, would be simple enough and a heck of a lot cheaper to install and/or retrofit.

-Commerce

[000]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday rejected his transportation secretary's suggestion that the administration consider taxing motorists based on how many miles they drive instead of how much gasoline they buy.

Good cop bad cop.

The idea also is gaining ground in several states... A tentative plan in Massachusetts to use GPS chips in vehicles to charge motorists by the mile has drawn complaints from drivers who say it's an Orwellian intrusion by government into the lives of citizens.

Which state will intrude progress first - Taxachusetts or Oregon or Vermont or ...? Smart money is on Taxachusetts, with Billy Bulger as VMT Commissioner.

Other motorists say it eliminates an incentive to drive more fuel-efficient cars since gas guzzlers will be taxed at the same rate as fuel sippers.

Tree hugging Marxist solution: progressive GPS units for gas guzzlers.

A blue-ribbon national transportation commission is expected to release a report next week recommending a VMT tax.

At least its not a coalition.

Privacy concerns are based more on perception than any actual risk, Atkinson said. The satellite information would be beamed one way to the car and driving information would be contained within the device on the car, with the amount of the tax due the only information that's downloaded, he said.

The government would never abuse vehicle GPS data, nor would they ever dream of new revenue sources such as a pedestrian sidewalk tax enabled by human GPS implants. In Barney Frank we trust.

source of quotes

[Gerry]

Certainly the statement stands, however, I think that the problem remains that the tax is focused only on mileage and as such could encourage bad behavior.

As stated, I am not for this tax at all.

Again, reaching for straws in trying to generate tax revenue.

I already claim mileage on my taxes.

So now what?

Give me XX cents per mile then take back XX cents per mile?

Someone needs to revisit this idea.

[Area52]

Good cop bad cop.

Either that's it or they just found out LaHood didn't pay some back taxes.

Looks like they revised the MSNBC article later in the day. The part about Obama rejecting the idea wasn't in the original.

The government would never abuse vehicle GPS data, nor would they ever dream of new revenue sources such as a pedestrian sidewalk tax enabled by human GPS implants. In Barney Frank we trust.

Most of you probably know this but if you have a cell phone (Who doesn't?), most people can already be tracked.

[fab]

Am i'm missing something here. What's wrong with simply taxing per gas usage. More efficient, less intrusive and encourages better fuel savings.

[Gerry]

Am i'm missing something here. What's wrong with simply taxing per gas usage. More efficient, less intrusive and encourages better fuel savings.

For one, it is an invasion of privacy if you consider GPS feeds of your habits, etc.

So it is not less intrusive.

A tax on mileage would still do nothing to regarding better fuel savings.

It is a tax on miles driven, not mpg.

I would hope that it would be an incentive for the gas guzzlers but a vast majority are going to keep driving them no matter what the cost per gallon.

And it does nothing to address the efficiency issue.

Most of all, I feel it is a tax on top of a tax on top of a tax.

Consider every dollar that you make is taxed before you deposit it.

When you go to the pump you are paying an additional hefty tax to the state and federal levels already (see chart that shows each state's gas tax).

Add to that the taxes paid every year for vehicle and licensing registrations and fees.

If you happen to be an OTR driver, imagine the impact this would have on your paycheck.

If all OTR fleets are taxed again on usage mileage fees needless to say that the fleet companies are going to pass on that to the customer.

Those customers (walmart, local grocery, beer joints) needless to say will pass those added fees on to you - the consumer.

The UK is about to undergo a road tax hike themselves. Look for more protests and lorie driver pickets and highway shut downs.

Here in the states, this closely matches the UK road tax.

Here in NC, I already have to go through an annual emissions test on each vehicle I own in addition to the annual safety inspection.

The annual safety inspection is only required in something like 25 states.

That should be a concern to all.

As for the emission inspections, very few states require this but I happen to be in one and I believe California is also.

I have also heard talk about a motorcycle use tax here in NC.

You would think with all the taxes we have here in NC plus having the Education Lottery that we would have the best roads in the country and the best schools.

Can you tell I am bored today?

[Seraphim]

What's next, a food and beverage consumption tax? An air tax? A thought tax? How about a gravity tax? A scratch your nuts tax maybe?

"Mr. Anderson, I can't help but notice you're putting some serious mileage on those nuts, better ease up before you scratch your way into the next tax bracket."

You need it to live, they come up with a scheme to cash in on it. The rich aren't rich enough, and the poor aren't poor enough... And for what, so someone can sit out on a slightly larger patio, smoking a slightly larger cigar, clinging to a slightly larger illusion of self grandeur, all the while waiting for a slightly larger burial plot... Welcome to the ruthless barbarism of the 21st century.

If I hadn't been raised by hippie stoners, I could probably see things differently. In the mean time, here you go: Styx "The Grand Illusion"

[Gerry]

What's next

Dammit!

The sons of *****es want to tax me per typed character!

What's next

I am fortunate that I live in a state that food is not taxed.

Will that change?

[Seraphim]

Dammit!

The sons of *****es want to tax me per typed character!

I am fortunate that I live in a state that food is not taxed.

Will that change?

We have no sales tax in Oregon, but state income taxes are a b!tch and a half. You're in NC right? Not sure what you're paying there. Regardless, I believe most produce and meat is taxed to hell and back before it reaches consumers. How many times along the way, not sure on that, I suppose it depends on the origin of the goods...

And what do we get in return for taxes again, I keep forgetting. Law and order, like keeping the Madoff's at bay? Road upkeep maybe? Street lights, or is that built into our electricity bill?

[Gerry]

We have no sales tax in Oregon, but state income taxes are a b!tch and a half. You're in NC right? Not sure what you're paying there. Regardless, I believe most produce and meat is taxed to hell and back before it reaches consumers. How many times along the way, not sure on that, I suppose it depends on the origin of the goods...

And what do we get in return for taxes again, I keep forgetting. Law and order, like keeping the Madoff's at bay? Road upkeep maybe? Street lights, or is that built into our electricity bill?

NC is 7%.

I look for an increase of perhaps .50 at least, if not another penny.

Imagine what it must be like in New Orleans who have a historical district tax of I believe 14%.

If I am not mistaken, yes...that is in addition to city and state taxes.

I have had two close friends, one a doctor and the other an attorney, who both practiced there.

The doctor moved because he could no longer afford to pay the malpractice insurance, the taxes, etc. He had a few children and he decided it just was not worth it.

He and the attorney both went to Tulane.

The attorney is still working but not living in NO any longer. He had moved to Mississippi.

Point is, no relief is better than piling on taxes and taxing the hell out of that relief.

[Seraphim]

Point is, no relief is better than piling on taxes and taxing the hell out of that relief.

Agreed... though as a collective society we need to finally learn how to quietly conceal all of life's burdens, otherwise you get sleazy politicians like Al Gore filling the air waves with new tax angles.

"There were repercussions Mr. Gore, repercussions that sunk your great nation into financial oblivion. But come on old boy, don't look so down, your legacy as the savior of mankind is still intact, and we'll still find a way to tax the bonfires. What do you say, pollution charts by Monday?"

[raoul]

Do you think there not exists alternative fuel? Ofcource it exists, gouverments know this. So in some time they will loose ther GIGANTIC income on taxing oil, fuel, with milage taxing, it doesnt matter what fuel you use...

welcome to the big climate HOAX