3 ms·

> this will hurt most Californians much more than it helps I think you're vastly underestimating the positive externalities of high gas prices. It's annoying

> this will hurt most Californians much more than it helps I think you're vastly underestimating the positive externalities of high gas prices. It's annoying that this disproportionately hurts poorer residents but so do cars. Cars are just very very bad for society, while I think in an ideal world we would make public transit so good that it wouldn't make sense to own a car, going about it by making car ownership non-viable so that we're forced to invest more in public transit is also workable. At least this hits you a lot harder if you drive an SUV/truck. We should also do an odometer x weight based tax to adequately punish electric car owners.

Gibbon1 2y ago
People over estimate the contribution of gas taxes to total cost of ownership and under estimate all the others. That was my take away for the decade I was sick and broke and had to deal hard with my finances.
johnnyanmac 2y ago
People saying this seem to only watch a few walkable cities and then fail to realize that California by itself is 1. Larger than almost all EU countries 2. a lot of farmland 3. Have higher salaries (so bigger budgets) 4. Is extremely mountainous, more so than most US states. There's a reason it's a multi- decade long initiative just to make a high speed railroad and it's not just the politics of manging all that land. >We should also do an odometer x weight based tax to adequately punish electric car owners. California wants to be mostly FEV by 2045. That's a horrible idea unless you care more about road construction than the environment. And spoilers: we can build more robust roads. We don't becsuse the peope judged it cheaper to repave pavement than take that extra effort.
- thot_experiment 2y ago
  I'm aware, I've lived all around California for the last 25 years, the vast majority of those years without owning a car and yet I managed to get around via bus/train/bike okay, and not just in metropolitan areas. That aside, I'm curious about this point in response to my tax suggestion. > California wants to be mostly FEV by 2045. That's a horrible idea unless you care more about road construction than the environment. I'm not sure I follow how that shakes out, can you elaborate?

Gibbon1 2y ago

People over estimate the contribution of gas taxes to total cost of ownership and under estimate all the others. That was my take away for the decade I was sick and broke and had to deal hard with my finances.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

People saying this seem to only watch a few walkable cities and then fail to realize that California by itself is 1. Larger than almost all EU countries 2. a lot of farmland 3. Have higher salaries (so bigger budgets) 4. Is extremely mountainous, more so than most US states. There's a reason it's a multi- decade long initiative just to make a high speed railroad and it's not just the politics of manging all that land. >We should also do an odometer x weight based tax to adequately punish electric car owners. California wants to be mostly FEV by 2045. That's a horrible idea unless you care more about road construction than the environment. And spoilers: we can build more robust roads. We don't becsuse the peope judged it cheaper to repave pavement than take that extra effort.

thot_experiment 2y ago
I'm aware, I've lived all around California for the last 25 years, the vast majority of those years without owning a car and yet I managed to get around via bus/train/bike okay, and not just in metropolitan areas. That aside, I'm curious about this point in response to my tax suggestion. > California wants to be mostly FEV by 2045. That's a horrible idea unless you care more about road construction than the environment. I'm not sure I follow how that shakes out, can you elaborate?