5 ms·
As for 1, I think it wouldn't be the fault of the drivers. They pay for using the roads. If the tax system isn't distributing it properly, how is it their fault
by 3rdgender 8y ago
As for 1, I think it wouldn't be the fault of the drivers. They pay for using the roads. If the tax system isn't distributing it properly, how is it their fault? You could argue they don't pay enough, but there is no info about amounts they pay in the article.
As for 2, i was assuming there are specific taxes for cars, or at least for petrol. That's the case in my country, don't know how it works in the US.
- lkbm 8y agoYou're right that this is a bad-tax-allocation problem, not a "rich people shouldn't commute through poor neighborhoods" problem. There are petrol taxes and car registration fees, but that mostly goes to funding road construction and maintenance. This makes sense at first glance, but the article illustrates that it's missing a lot of the costs of driving. Public education in the US is funded to a large extent by local property taxes. (The result is that rich neighborhoods have considerably better-funded schools than poor neighborhoods.) Commutes in the US are commonly long enough that it's entirely normal to find people end up driving through poor school districts, while their education-directed dollars go mostly to their own schools. If dealing with the pollution comes from the local district's property taxes (or simply leaves the students breathing polluted air), you've got an uncorrected externality.