Lou B

https://www.autoblog.com/2024/05/26/...-miles-driven/

i definitely see this coming down the interstate system, of course varying by state.
WATCH OUT CALIFORNIA AND OTHER HIGH DENSITY EV STATES,,,

MBNUT1

Why should they watch out? Everyone should pay their fair share of the using the roads which fundamentally would be a function of miles traveled and weight of the vehicle. I have an EV and don't think that I should be subsidized by ICE cars for use of the roads and in Ohio I am not. I have to pay a higher registration fee which assumes a certain ICE MPG and miles driven. This proposal is actually fairer. I would probably lose because my wife is putting a ton of miles on our EV but that is what it is.

Mitch Alsup

The fact is that heavy trucks (80K pounds) do most of the damage (wear) to the roads by stressing the support structure near its plastic limits.
Even a 5K pound car is insignificant.

But somebody has to build and maintain the roads and someone else has to pay for them to build and maintain the roads.
With the total impasse in Congress to fund the building of roads, state governments have to obtain these funds elsewhere.
That elsewhere does not extend beyond their state boundaries.
Thus people have to pay via one mechanism or another.

When everyone drove petrol fueled vehicles, one could simple tax petrol.
Now a growing percentage of vehicles do not use petrol,
and yet they weight more and cause more wear,
so, it is only right that they pay their fair share.

The only question is the method of wealth removal.
Personally, I think it should be (mileage × weight).
The heavier the vehicle, the higher the tax.
The more miles per year, the higher the tax.

See, now everybody is unhappy !!

Lou B

You appear to have mistaken an alert for a warning about a danger.
I made no comment one way or another about the necessity or appropriateness of impending changes.

MB2timer

From each, according to their means. To each, according to their needs.
One of the biggest fair share problems, is that the makers pay more than their fair share, and the takers pay little to none.
Then, there is the problem of nepotism and favoritism, where the motto is, 2 guys having a conversation about taxes, and fees, and tariffs etc. Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that guy behind the tree.
Every time I turn around, I am the guy behind the tree.

Mitch Alsup

50% of our population has a net worth of $0.00 or less.
Just how much do you think you can take from someone who has NOTHING ?!?

Yes, we live in a world where the people that make $5,000 per hour have convinced the people that make $30 per hour that the problem is the people who make $10 per hour.

MBNUT1

Sounds like the weight factor should be non linear.

Tom in Austin

The similar but bigger $ question is who pays for extensive new electric generation and upgraded transmission lines.

If I drive an ICE car, I'm not adding any demand to the grid so shouldn't that cost be borne by those who use more electricity; e.g. data centers, BEVs, homes heated by electricity, etc?

Mitch Alsup

The very same people that stand to profit by selling the electricity.

The gas stations (on every corner) were paid for by the people that stood to profit by selling gas.
They made SOOOOO much profit that we now have one at every corner !!!

Donnymac

You want gas? Find the nearest convenience store that sells high margin beverages, junk food and bottled water. Cheap gas is the loss leader to get your *** in the door. and shop.

Gas stations are history.

JohnLane

Fixed that for you friend.

Service stations went went away due to modern cars not needing attention every time they get filled with fuel.
Better margins selling Tobacco/Weed/ booze fried foods and offering clean bathrooms.

As to OP’s point.... Once they start with $$$/mile it will never stop and it won’t just be the electric cars.

Agreed with the fellow above who states that electric cars need to pay their way tax wise.
Way the Feds and Commiefornia are pushing electric cars I bet it is a few years before they get a $$/mile tax done as they want more people buying them. Taxes are a disincentive. Many people pay attention to what a thing will cost all up as part of a purchase decision.

If I paid attention to what I spend on transportation I would have missed out on all the precious memories made in the wonderful cars I’ve had. Much better having spent that money rather than driving a soul-less appliance.

ygmn

So in other words all roads will end up being TOLL ROADS??

or how else do they figure mileage?

what happens when you cross state lines?

so CA is getting what they wished for more EVs but did not think f the unintended consequences...

go figure a law maker who does not think.

Mitch Alsup

Basically, if you build roads to safely carry 80K pound trucks for may years, that anything under 40K pounds is not wearing out the structure, but only the surface.

On the other hand, if you try to make trucks pay for the wear/maintenance they cause either::
a) prices for goods we want increase
or
b) good cease to be available.

So, the passenger vehicle owners end up paying for the roads.....

SW20S

MB2timer

The problem is not the people who make $10.00/hour initially. It’s the ones who stay there, like my brother in law.

SW20S

The world needs ditch diggers too...the problem isn't your brother in law lol

MB2timer

Mike Rowe says there are tens of thousands of “muscular jobs” requiring 6 months of training, and that pay $75,000.00/yr. That’s approximately $35.00/hr. That’s not nothing.
But it is something that my brother in law wouldn’t give the courtesy of considering. For him, it was 2 four letter words right in a row. HARD WORK!!
My Mom used to say that high paying jobs are hard, or dangerous, or both.
I don’t know why you are loling, but if it’s about my brother in law, he’s mine not yours. Find your own punching bag.

SW20S

I always say they don't give money away. People will pay you for your education or knowledge, your experience or skill...or your body. Not everybody can work a physical job like that, its very taxing on your body. Lots of people do it for a while and can't keep doing it.

I was loling at the concept that your brother in law is to blame for the country's financial woes. He's not. People making $1.5M+ a year and using loopholes to pay $25,000 in taxes are. Thats the whole "People making $5,000 an hour have convinced people making $30 an hour that people making $10 an hour are the problem". People are always complaining about spending and people who have little income or wealth not contributing tax dollars when in reality if we collected the same percentage of taxes from the country's top earners we collect from the middle and lower earners, we would have more revenue than we know what to do with.

MBNUT1

Glad to hear that you don't think that it is anything to be concerned about.

Lou B

I haven't a clue why what I think is important to you, or anyone, but it appears that you seldom are unwilling to jump to unwarranted conclusions.

The facts of life are that all government funds come ultimately from the people. The only role played by governments is how to access and use the people's funding.
But it's impossible to remove the influence of the voter upon governments. And in our country, that's the way it should be.
All the rest is minutiae - and there will never be a time when someone does not feel his ox has been unfairly gored.
The French sum it up in their dismissive phrase - C'est la vie!, said with a Gallic shrug.
Or, as some may prefer, Zut, alors!

MBNUT1

As I haven't a clue why you care about how I interpret your posts. You are free to clarify them.

MB2timer

We don’t have a revenue problem. We have an expenditure problem. Like politicians giving away billions in foreign aid, to get millions back as kickbacks. We have too many putting themselves first, their pet causes next, and the taxpayers last. The green new deal was budgeted at 80 trillion, as I recall. I didn’t get too worried about it, because it was so utterly preposterous, that it wouldn’t be taken seriously. But then I forgot that in politics, if the taxpayer resists, you just steamroll them, and then shove it down their throats.

kafklatsch

Just send a bill to EV owners based on thier miles, a bill that is the equivalent average to the pumped gas tax

due to the generation coming up that not only puts 100% of thier business in the street, but goes further and puts all their business on the cyber superhighway... this is part of allowing 100 percent of every breath you take to be monitored and eventually taxed..

95Sinned420

I think a "pay per use" is actually a fair deal. Bill us by the amount of miles driven.
The purpose of a gas tax, is for road maintenance, etc. right? So, why should I pay anymore for driving 100 miles on a road, vs. a more economic car driving the same 100 miles on the road? We both used the same amount of road, should pay the same amount towards maintaining that road. If my car takes more gas to drive the 100 miles, then I'm paying for it by needing to buy more gas to travel that amount of miles. I shouldn't need to pay more tax on the gas toward road maintenance. I'm all for pay per miles driven, as long as it equates to what we're already paying for in terms of gas tax, then no longer taxing gas. They should just calculate it it to something like, average MPG of cars divided by the tax per gallon, for example, say average MPG is 30mpg, and tax per gallon being $1.50, comes out to be $0.05 per mile.
The issue is the logistics of tracking the miles...there will be a cost for verifying mileages, say for example, a smog tech's fee having to verify annual mileage reports or something along those lines.

MBNUT1

An alternative to the green new deal would be to remove and charge for the removal of C02 emissions that are generated. Which would be likely in the form of a tax per unit of fossil fuel purchased.