3 ms·

On the other hand, trucks are often speed-restricted and the tax might need to be on the order of $50k for a 60-foot truck (which would still equate to around $

On the other hand, trucks are often speed-restricted and the tax might need to be on the order of $50k for a 60-foot truck (which would still equate to around $50 for a car). The costs would be passed down to all of the things that trucks are used for, so I suppose the average person wouldn't really pay any less for combined transport+groceries+fuel+household goods, but it might incentivize the use of smaller trucks with lighter axle loads, but that would also mean more drivers/poorer fuel efficiency/more accidents per ton per mile. At the least we should be mindful of the way that motorists are providing a subsidy to the logistics industry (which we indirectly benefit from, as well).

diordiderot 4y ago
I'd rather pay costs where they're owed personally
AnthonyMouse 4y ago
It most certainly would not cost $50k for any size truck to travel down one road once, which is what matters if you're paying the cost to build infrastructure to track usage. It might cost a semi truck $50k a year, but this also points in the direction of not tracking specific usage even for trucks: Just check the odometer during the annual inspection and then distribute the highway funds to states proportionate to estimated use. Toll collection is stupid inefficient and privacy invasive.
- brippalcharrid 4y ago
  Yes, obviously I was talking about an annual charge ("a tax") based on vehicle road wear; I don't think anyone had suggested that we charge a truck driver $50k for driving down one road, once. It's very common for the odomoters of heavy goods vehicles to be checked and for mileages to be logged regularly (this is probably a legal requirement in many cases, if not just a standard industry practice). I agree that toll collection would be unsuitable. My point was that charges for the use of large goods vehicles would need to be orders of magnitude higher than they are now, but that the charges for cars would still be sufficient to more than cover the cost of collection. And if people wanted, the President of the National Cycling Federation could present the Secretary of Transportation with a $5 bill in an annual ceremony.

diordiderot 4y ago

I'd rather pay costs where they're owed personally

AnthonyMouse 4y ago

It most certainly would not cost $50k for any size truck to travel down one road once, which is what matters if you're paying the cost to build infrastructure to track usage. It might cost a semi truck $50k a year, but this also points in the direction of not tracking specific usage even for trucks: Just check the odometer during the annual inspection and then distribute the highway funds to states proportionate to estimated use. Toll collection is stupid inefficient and privacy invasive.

brippalcharrid 4y ago
Yes, obviously I was talking about an annual charge ("a tax") based on vehicle road wear; I don't think anyone had suggested that we charge a truck driver $50k for driving down one road, once. It's very common for the odomoters of heavy goods vehicles to be checked and for mileages to be logged regularly (this is probably a legal requirement in many cases, if not just a standard industry practice). I agree that toll collection would be unsuitable. My point was that charges for the use of large goods vehicles would need to be orders of magnitude higher than they are now, but that the charges for cars would still be sufficient to more than cover the cost of collection. And if people wanted, the President of the National Cycling Federation could present the Secretary of Transportation with a $5 bill in an annual ceremony.