What is the social engineering aspect of this tax? With a gas tax you are telling people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles. With a mileage tax you are telling people fuel economy is not important and to just stay home.
I agree with you. The necessity of taxation is much like the necessity of heat dissipation in a machine. If you have to generate the excess heat anyway, you should try to harness the power of that heat as much as possible.
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
A mileage tax could encourage people to use more public transportation. I already exclusively use public transportation, so I would pay 0 dollars for a mileage tax.
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
A mileage tax could encourage people to use more public transportation. I already exclusively use public transportation, so I would pay 0 dollars for a mileage tax.
What about people that have limited or no access to public transportation? I would love to take the bus to and from work, but the schedule is so limited and the stops so far away from my work that it is virtually impossible unless I want to leave for work four hours before I need to be there and arrive home 2 hours after I leave work with a long winter walk to and from.
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
A mileage tax could encourage people to use more public transportation. I already exclusively use public transportation, so I would pay 0 dollars for a mileage tax.
What about people that have limited or no access to public transportation? I would love to take the bus to and from work, but the schedule is so limited and the stops so far away from my work that it is virtually impossible unless I want to leave for work four hours before I need to be there and arrive home 2 hours after I leave work with a long winter walk to and from.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
Our suburban sprawl lifestyle really doesn't lend itself to any type of public transit. I can't even get around the mall area without a car.
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
Personally I think taxes should be used to generate revenue only. Using them to try and effect one change or another has resulted in a hideously complex mess that many don't understand, and a few exploit.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
Our suburban sprawl lifestyle really doesn't lend itself to any type of public transit. I can't even get around the mall area without a car.
This is exactly correct. Even if you succesfully get public transportation installed, it is impossible to make it profitable with current technology if the population density is too light. The only way to get public transportation that works for everybody is to have everyone move in or near cities.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
Our suburban sprawl lifestyle really doesn't lend itself to any type of public transit. I can't even get around the mall area without a car.
This is exactly correct. Even if you succesfully get public transportation installed, it is impossible to make it profitable with current technology if the population density is too light. The only way to get public transportation that works for everybody is to have everyone move in or near cities.
Except many fo these towns revolve around business that can't be/aren't in cities.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
Our suburban sprawl lifestyle really doesn't lend itself to any type of public transit. I can't even get around the mall area without a car.
This is exactly correct. Even if you succesfully get public transportation installed, it is impossible to make it profitable with current technology if the population density is too light. The only way to get public transportation that works for everybody is to have everyone move in or near cities.
Why would anyone want to live in an area with a light population density?
Why would anyone want to live in an area with a light population density?
If you love trees more than people. Or if you have a vacation home. Or if you are retired, and don't need to go to work anymore. Or if you are a farmer. Or if your job requires being away from the city, like maybe you are a lumberjack? There are many reasons.
People who have limited or no access to public transportation should start lobbying their local political types right now for better access.
The problem with this argument is that it ignores the infrastructure that is currently in place. For the past 90 years or so, development in this country has been based on the automobile being the primary mode of transportation.
Public transportation is a great thing, and should be encouraged. However, its effectiveness has been substantially handicapped by decades of automobile based growth. Any public transportation development must be done in conjunction with development regulations designed to support the use of public transportation.
So just because public transportation may work for you does not mean that it will work for the majority of Americans. Don't think that the megalopolis between New York and DC is representative of the rest of the country. Public Transportation in DC, Chicago, New York, etc. is a no brainer. But what about Albany, Worcester, Eugene, Utica, Lubbock, Missoula, etc.?
Your typical American would have to drive to the train station, take the train, and then take a bus or two to their place of employment. For most people, this is a more time consuming process than just driving to work. It's also less practical since they can easily run other errands with the car.
Why would anyone want to live in an area with a light population density?
If you love trees more than people. Or if you have a vacation home. Or if you are retired, and don't need to go to work anymore. Or if you are a farmer. Or if your job requires being away from the city, like maybe you are a lumberjack? There are many reasons.
All of those things require little travel, so I'm not that sympathetic if they can't get public transportation and have to pay a lot in transportation costs.
All of those things require little travel, so I'm not that sympathetic if they can't get public transportation and have to pay a lot in transportation costs.
Public transportation is also not practical for many situations. I mean, even if you lived right next to the grocery store, how are you going to carry all those groceries? It's a pain in the ass? You either have to steal a wagon, or use your car. Maybe you are taking a trip to a friend's house across town. Maybe it's a short bike ride, but what if you want to bring a few board games? Suddenly you need the car again. Even in New York City, there are cars everywhere. People need to transport things, as well as people. They also need to travel to places where public transportation does not go. Even to get to the Javits Convention Center sucks if you don't take a cab. The bus that goes there is pretty bad, and the subway extension which they started yesterday won't be done until I think 2013. Heck, we take the train to work, but the last train leaves the city at 1AM and doesn't get us home until 3 or 4 AM. As a result, we can't stay in the city late unless we find a place to stay or drive in.
Even good mass transit in high population areas has its limits, and cars are needed.
Why would anyone want to live in an area with a light population density?
If you love trees more than people. Or if you have a vacation home. Or if you are retired, and don't need to go to work anymore. Or if you are a farmer. Or if your job requires being away from the city, like maybe you are a lumberjack? There are many reasons.
All of those things require little travel, so I'm not that sympathetic if they can't get public transportation and have to pay a lot in transportation costs.
Most of those things require a LOT of transportation and those people usually have limited incomes. Not to mention all of the service people that live in the area to provide services to the rural workforce.
All of those things require little travel, so I'm not that sympathetic if they can't get public transportation and have to pay a lot in transportation costs.
No one is asking you to sympathize. We're saying your idea that mass transit will fix all is naive at best. This country is setup for cars, FACT. We don't have the money to completely rip it apart and rebuild it right so we have to work with what we have.
No one is asking you to sympathize. We're saying your idea that mass transit will fix all is naive at best. This country is setup for cars, FACT. We don't have the money to completely rip it apart and rebuild it right so we have to work with what we have.
Even if we did rip everything up, our geography and technological limitations mean that anything other than personal ground-based vehicles would be impractical. Unless you want everyone to squish into one part of the country, or make every state its own country, it's just not going to happen.
All of those things require little travel, so I'm not that sympathetic if they can't get public transportation and have to pay a lot in transportation costs.
No one is asking you to sympathize. We're saying your idea that mass transit will fix all is naive at best. This country is setup for cars, FACT. We don't have the money to completely rip it apart and rebuild it right so we have to work with what we have.
I never said that mass transit would "fix all", but you're obviously right that it's a huge problem that doesn't really have a fix . . . at least not one that anyone is going to figure out on a forum.
Even if we did rip everything up, our geography and technological limitations mean that anything other than personal ground-based vehicles will be practical.
We basically need to do what Germany did and that is zone towns in such a way that everything is a little pseudo city with empty space in between. Then public transit works great. Problem is your country has to be completely destroyed and your government has to have forethought in order for such a plan to work. We have neither in this country.
Even if we did rip everything up, our geography and technological limitations mean that anything other than personal ground-based vehicles will be practical.
We basically need to do what Germany did and that is zone towns in such a way that everything is a little pseudo city with empty space in between. Then public transit works great. Problem is your country has to be completely destroyed and your government has to have forethought in order for such a plan to work. We have neither in this country.
Also, you country needs to be the size of Germany. This might work for individual States, but the Nation as a whole.... probably not. Particualrly not in the sparsely populated "bread basket" States.
Also, you country needs to be the size of Germany. This might work for individual States, but the Nation as a whole.... probably not. Particualrly not in the sparsely populated "bread basket" States.
Why not do some kind of taxi/carpool thing? You get a schoolbus, and when you need a ride you make a call. It rides to some preset locations while picking up and dropping off people. this way you can have a lot more busstops without it being impractical.
Why not do some kind of taxi/carpool thing? You get a schoolbus, and when you need a ride you make a call. It rides to some preset locations while picking up and dropping off people. this way you can have a lot more busstops without it being impractical.
Why not do some kind of taxi/carpool thing? You get a schoolbus, and when you need a ride you make a call. It rides to some preset locations while picking up and dropping off people. this way you can have a lot more busstops without it being impractical.
The answer is simple. There should be mid-range high speed mass transit from collection areas in sparsely populated residential areas to job centers in densely populated urban areas. There should be short-range mass transit from the urban ends of these transit lines throughout the greater metropolitan areas they service.
In places where both ends are sparse, there is no feasible option for mass transit. We should ignore these areas for the time being, as nothing effective other than a fundamental change in population patterns can solve the issue.
There should be short-range mass transit from the urban ends of these transit lines throughout the greater metropolitan areas they service.
Unfortunately, we've torn up all of the light-rail lines that used to run through cities. Now you have cities building light rail at the cost of billions of dollars, when light rail used to exist in those same places. Thus my point about automobile-centric development handicapping present day mass transit construction.
Why not do some kind of taxi/carpool thing? You get a schoolbus, and when you need a ride you make a call. It rides to some preset locations while picking up and dropping off people. this way you can have a lot more busstops without it being impractical.
How is that any different from taxis?
How is it different from the regular bus?
EXACTLY! You see, busses have to pass all the stops, regadless of whether there are people there or not. Meanwhile taxi's can go anywhere but can only carry up to 3 people (usually one). You get the best of both worlds
I find that it's much easier to make good friends in a rural environment. People tend to enjoy more leisure time when they don't commute 2 or more hours each day.
I find that it's much easier to make good friends in a rural environment. People tend to enjoy more leisure time when they don't commute 2 or more hours each day.
Only people who live outside of the city and work in the city have to commute. People who actually live in the city are the ones who have the real social advantage.
Comments
In the case of taxes, so long as we can maintain a constant source of governmental income, we should harness them to effect positive social and/or economic change.
Public transportation is a great thing, and should be encouraged. However, its effectiveness has been substantially handicapped by decades of automobile based growth. Any public transportation development must be done in conjunction with development regulations designed to support the use of public transportation.
So just because public transportation may work for you does not mean that it will work for the majority of Americans. Don't think that the megalopolis between New York and DC is representative of the rest of the country. Public Transportation in DC, Chicago, New York, etc. is a no brainer. But what about Albany, Worcester, Eugene, Utica, Lubbock, Missoula, etc.?
Your typical American would have to drive to the train station, take the train, and then take a bus or two to their place of employment. For most people, this is a more time consuming process than just driving to work. It's also less practical since they can easily run other errands with the car.
Even good mass transit in high population areas has its limits, and cars are needed.
In places where both ends are sparse, there is no feasible option for mass transit. We should ignore these areas for the time being, as nothing effective other than a fundamental change in population patterns can solve the issue.