by jb9152
Ken W2KB wrote:Except that the rural and more suburban areas have no transit and it would not be cost effective to provide it. There is no choice but to drive and distances will be long. From an environmental standpoint, cars creeping in city traffic for three miles wil spew out as much emissions as someone traveling on a rural road for 50 miles. A mileage-based tax would be grossly unfair. Use of gasoline is far more equitable, with a mileage tax there is little incentive for someone in densely populated areas to not drive since their tax would be nil.Actually, use of gasoline is not "far more equitable" (that's completely hyperbolic), because differences in MPG and driving style have an effect on how much gas one might use for a trip versus another person in another vehicle making the same trip. To say nothing of the fact that the gasoline tax has not been indexed to inflation, has not been raised in 20 years, and in no way is a "user fee" the way that highway advocates use the term. In fact, as wider acceptance of EVs takes hold (a *very* long-term prospect I understand - I'm not a Pollyanna believer in alt fuels and EV technology), revenues from the gasoline tax will fall yet more quickly. Think we have a problem maintaining roads now? Wait until the actual users of the roads are even *less* linked economically to the costs of driving.
A mileage-based fee, if you abolish the gasoline tax, is on the whole more equitable because it reflects actual usage, and it's applied on a consistent and equal basis across the board. It's not perfect by any means, but at least it links the user to the cost more closely than the current tax.
Last edited by jb9152 on Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:25 am, edited 2 times in total.