6 ms·
> “I think it’s extreme and there should be a compromise. Everybody pays taxes — not just the people in the buses.” I would make the opposite argument actually
by mrpopo 7y ago
> “I think it’s extreme and there should be a compromise. Everybody pays taxes — not just the people in the buses.”
I would make the opposite argument actually. Car drivers pay the same amount of taxes despite taking up more space on the road, causing more accidents etc. It's an unfair subsidy loophole that is finally getting plugged.
- iron0013 7y agoNot to mention that the guy who said that doesn't even live in New York--he commutes in from New Jersey!
- perl4ever 7y agoSo? https://streeteasy.com/blog/live-in-new-jersey-work-in-new-york-taxes/ https://streeteasy.com/blog/live-in-new-jersey-work-in-new-y... https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/file/nonresidents.htm https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/file/nonresidents.htm
- zaroth 7y agoCars pay for the space they occupy through fuel, excise, and sales taxes. Buses, on the other hand, are a loss-leading and highly subsidized form of transport.
- rumanator 7y ago> Cars pay for the space they occupy through fuel, excise, and sales taxes. Your statement is absurd. You're arguing that something should have the right to occupy the public space and deprive others from using it just because the owner bought it and spends money on fuel.
- furyofantares 7y agoThe quoted text is meant to be read as “fuel taxes, excise taxes, and sales taxes.”
- esoterica 7y agoFuel, excise and sales taxes don't come close to covering the cost of car infrastructure, not to mention the environmental externalities generated.
- zaroth 7y agoIn 2016, state and local governments spent $175 billion on highways and roads [1]. Fuel taxes, sales taxes, and usage fees (tolls) generate roughly $150 billion per year. Excise taxes do not even have a good national accounting system and I can’t find a US total number. But, for example, just CA generates roughly $10 billion in revenue from these fees. Far from not covering the costs, the direct taxes and fees on cars are actually generating a profit. If you want to talk about externalities you have to account for both positive and negative externalities. [1] - https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/highway-and-road-expenditures https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiative...
- PeterStuer 7y agoSo, you are saying that even if you do not price in any of the huge negative externalities [1], cars barely cover even just the highway and road direct budgetary impact? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externalities_of_automobiles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externalities_of_automobiles Extremely conservative list on Wikipedia. Anyone that e.g. has looked at real-estate pricing before and after a street was made car free and has seen valuations go up by x2-x5 can attest even just the impact on direct livability.
- megablast 7y agoRoads are just one part of costs of cars.
- Sharlin 7y agoWhat, exactly, are the positive externalities of cars?
- megablast 7y agoThat doesn't even go to cover the deaths and injuries that cars cause, with 40,000 dead and 2.5 million injured or disables every single year in the USA.
- Spivak 7y agoBut that cost isn’t shouldered on the public, every driver is required to carry insurance and most people also have personal liability in addition to that. Driving carries risk and at scale that risk will 100% every time manifest as real harm. It’s not about whether the risk is there but whether the gain is worth it. A less politically charged example, ordering your steak rare. There is real risk, and people get sick, a smaller subset get really sick. And yet we do it constantly.