4 ms·

Yet the usefulness to society of a vehicle is usually tied directly to its size/weight. An 18-wheeler isn't on a sightseeing trip; it's transporting something

Yet the usefulness to society of a vehicle is usually tied directly to its size/weight. An 18-wheeler isn't on a sightseeing trip; it's transporting something of value somewhere that can't get from A to B otherwise. Any given sedan on the other hand is typically transporting a single person that can either use different modes of transportation or simply opt not to go from A to B. Why should the 18-wheeler be taxed progressively higher? It ultimately generates more tax revenue already than the sedan, and there are no realistic alternatives at this point in time.

rootusrootus 9y ago
There is nothing altruistic about commercial shipping, it typically serves the needs of consumers. They could just as easily choose not to consume as they choose not to take a sightseeing trip from points A to B. It is most sensible to charge road users based on the wear and tear they cause to the road, and this means trucks would get charged quite a lot. Good. It's a business, and the cost of those roads absolutely should be communicated back to the wallet of the consumer benefiting from the ability to quickly ship product.
- ryandrake 9y ago
  Charge by a multiple of the number of unoccupied seats in the car. 2 seater with 1 person? 1x fee. SUV that seats 7 with one person? 6x fee. Motorcycle is free!
  - rootusrootus 9y ago
    I am not entirely comfortable with that. There are legitimate reasons someone may be driving a larger vehicle by themselves, and what you suggest seems a lot like trying to make it a moral punishment, assuming that everyone who has unoccupied seats is unnecessarily luxurious. Ultimately I like the idea of using weight. We have weigh-in-motion scales already, and the relationship between weight and road damage is well understood.
    - quotemstr 9y ago
      The price is there to reduce congestion, not road damage per se. You want to charge by congestion causes, which is probably proportional to vehicle size, not weight. More broadly, trying to figure out a priori what is and is not useful for society is pointless. Moralizing economic decisions never works. Just charge people for the costs they incur and the optimally beneficial configuration will emerge on its own.
  - jrs235 9y ago
    The overhead and transaction costs to calculate and collect the tax can't be overly burdensome. Once a year, at tab renewal time, the vehicle should be brought in for an odometer reading and the miles put one over the previous year should then be multiplied by it's weight or maximum rated hauling weight (or some formula using both) to determine the amount of tax owed.
  - im3w1l 9y ago
    With multiple people in the car you get to split the cost.

rootusrootus 9y ago

There is nothing altruistic about commercial shipping, it typically serves the needs of consumers. They could just as easily choose not to consume as they choose not to take a sightseeing trip from points A to B. It is most sensible to charge road users based on the wear and tear they cause to the road, and this means trucks would get charged quite a lot. Good. It's a business, and the cost of those roads absolutely should be communicated back to the wallet of the consumer benefiting from the ability to quickly ship product.

ryandrake 9y ago
Charge by a multiple of the number of unoccupied seats in the car. 2 seater with 1 person? 1x fee. SUV that seats 7 with one person? 6x fee. Motorcycle is free!
- rootusrootus 9y ago
  I am not entirely comfortable with that. There are legitimate reasons someone may be driving a larger vehicle by themselves, and what you suggest seems a lot like trying to make it a moral punishment, assuming that everyone who has unoccupied seats is unnecessarily luxurious. Ultimately I like the idea of using weight. We have weigh-in-motion scales already, and the relationship between weight and road damage is well understood.
  - quotemstr 9y ago
    The price is there to reduce congestion, not road damage per se. You want to charge by congestion causes, which is probably proportional to vehicle size, not weight. More broadly, trying to figure out a priori what is and is not useful for society is pointless. Moralizing economic decisions never works. Just charge people for the costs they incur and the optimally beneficial configuration will emerge on its own.
- jrs235 9y ago
  The overhead and transaction costs to calculate and collect the tax can't be overly burdensome. Once a year, at tab renewal time, the vehicle should be brought in for an odometer reading and the miles put one over the previous year should then be multiplied by it's weight or maximum rated hauling weight (or some formula using both) to determine the amount of tax owed.
- im3w1l 9y ago
  With multiple people in the car you get to split the cost.