3 ms·

Externalities on others should be taxed, yes.

robocat 4y ago
Your comment deeply upsets me. Perhaps you need to be taxed for your comments that upset others. We should also tax low-quality off-topic comments as well?
- formerkrogemp 4y ago
  Trying to take trucks or guns from old Americans is kinda like trying to pry sheep from New Zealanders. They'll be fighting for their extensive form of animal husbandry down to the last shagging body.
teakettle42 4y ago
This tax isn’t assessing externalities; that’s something you’d build into the gas tax. This is a yearly punitive sin tax assessed because someone feels a moral imperative to coerce the behavior of others. > “You can’t ban sales of these things,” says Mary Cheh, a D.C. councilmember who developed the new fee structure, “but you can make them pay their own way.” My 3 ton pickup truck is my sole vehicle, and has been driven a total of 19,000 miles over the past eight years. That’s an average of 2,375 road miles per year, over eight years. In absolute terms, I’m doing a lot less damage to the road and producing a lot less pollution than the individual commuting to work every single day, even if they’re driving an EV (charged by our existing non-renewable infrastructure!). My truck will also last me for at least another decade, further avoiding the massive carbon footprint inherent in building a new vehicle. It’s reminiscent of our sugar tax. I now pay an extra 60 cents for a diet, sugar-free soda when we go out for hamburgers, because restaurants are required to collect the tax if you could get a full-sugar soda at their soda fountain. In a city that was already the healthiest in the country, and has absolutely no obesity problem. Assessing the cost of externalities is fine. Useless laws that do nothing — other than soothing the anxiety and moral panic of their authors — externalize the cost of doing so onto the rest of us.
- imtringued 4y ago
  You don't seem to understand how road damage scales with vehicle weight. My car weighs somewhere between the smart and the prius so let's take the average which is 0.20 (wouldn't surprise me if this is 2x more road damage than I actually do). The Chevy Tahoe weighs less than your truck and is at 3.57 or 18 times worse. I have driven 100k miles over eight years which is five times more than you, what a coincidence 0.2 times 5 is 1.0 which means you did 3.57 times as much road damage as me. If we accurately weighed our vehicles I am sure that number could go up to 7 and higher. What really annoys me about your comment is all the virtue signalling you do. Ignorance is not a get out jail card. https://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/vehicle-weight-and-damage-chart.jpg https://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/w...
  - RobertWHurst 4y ago
    We already have rules and codes for automotive manufacturers, and well as road construction standards, that allow for a wide range of vehicles for the public to pick from. Yes one could get out their calipers and measure the impact of each individual persons vehicle, but that's not how by an large people want to live. People want to be free to choose the vehicle that is right for them. The way to deal with this is to focus on traffic as a whole - with average and median statical loads when creating said standards rules and codes. The reason people don't like you getting out your calipers is because you are discounting the value of freedom of choice, instead using road wear as an excuse to justify enforcing your opinion on others. Those who engineer infrastructure have no problem dealing with a range of vehicles. This is more to do with virtue politics.

Your comment deeply upsets me. Perhaps you need to be taxed for your comments that upset others. We should also tax low-quality off-topic comments as well?

formerkrogemp 4y ago
Trying to take trucks or guns from old Americans is kinda like trying to pry sheep from New Zealanders. They'll be fighting for their extensive form of animal husbandry down to the last shagging body.

teakettle42 4y ago

This tax isn’t assessing externalities; that’s something you’d build into the gas tax. This is a yearly punitive sin tax assessed because someone feels a moral imperative to coerce the behavior of others. > “You can’t ban sales of these things,” says Mary Cheh, a D.C. councilmember who developed the new fee structure, “but you can make them pay their own way.” My 3 ton pickup truck is my sole vehicle, and has been driven a total of 19,000 miles over the past eight years. That’s an average of 2,375 road miles per year, over eight years. In absolute terms, I’m doing a lot less damage to the road and producing a lot less pollution than the individual commuting to work every single day, even if they’re driving an EV (charged by our existing non-renewable infrastructure!). My truck will also last me for at least another decade, further avoiding the massive carbon footprint inherent in building a new vehicle. It’s reminiscent of our sugar tax. I now pay an extra 60 cents for a diet, sugar-free soda when we go out for hamburgers, because restaurants are required to collect the tax if you could get a full-sugar soda at their soda fountain. In a city that was already the healthiest in the country, and has absolutely no obesity problem. Assessing the cost of externalities is fine. Useless laws that do nothing — other than soothing the anxiety and moral panic of their authors — externalize the cost of doing so onto the rest of us.

imtringued 4y ago
You don't seem to understand how road damage scales with vehicle weight. My car weighs somewhere between the smart and the prius so let's take the average which is 0.20 (wouldn't surprise me if this is 2x more road damage than I actually do). The Chevy Tahoe weighs less than your truck and is at 3.57 or 18 times worse. I have driven 100k miles over eight years which is five times more than you, what a coincidence 0.2 times 5 is 1.0 which means you did 3.57 times as much road damage as me. If we accurately weighed our vehicles I am sure that number could go up to 7 and higher. What really annoys me about your comment is all the virtue signalling you do. Ignorance is not a get out jail card. https://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/vehicle-weight-and-damage-chart.jpg https://3kpnuxym9k04c8ilz2quku1czd-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/w...
- RobertWHurst 4y ago
  We already have rules and codes for automotive manufacturers, and well as road construction standards, that allow for a wide range of vehicles for the public to pick from. Yes one could get out their calipers and measure the impact of each individual persons vehicle, but that's not how by an large people want to live. People want to be free to choose the vehicle that is right for them. The way to deal with this is to focus on traffic as a whole - with average and median statical loads when creating said standards rules and codes. The reason people don't like you getting out your calipers is because you are discounting the value of freedom of choice, instead using road wear as an excuse to justify enforcing your opinion on others. Those who engineer infrastructure have no problem dealing with a range of vehicles. This is more to do with virtue politics.