Thursday February 16, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Oregon looks at taxing mileage instead of gasoline

World Jan. 03, 2009 - 05:30AM JST ( 13 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

13 Comments

0

neverknow2Jan. 03, 2009 - 09:59AM JST

How about polititions take a pay cut?
0

likeitisJan. 03, 2009 - 12:11PM JST

GPS? Have these people ever heard of an odometer? Yeah, I know some people with tamper with theirs, but it seems to me cheaper to make them tamperproof, or at least more difficult and not worth the risk of being found out.

What is more is that a higher tax on gas would seem to be the smarter way to go. Treat gas guzzling vehicles as the luxury they are. Reward those who use less gas.

Then their is the idea of the weight tax used in Japan.
0

bebertJan. 03, 2009 - 02:01PM JST

The irony of this is it is another Democratic proposal to raise revenue that will fall most heavily on the working poor and middle class.

Much of the middle class can't afford to live in wealth centers where the jobs are. They live outside of these areas (New York City, San Francisco, etc.) and commute long distances, sometimes an hour or more each way, to their jobs. They drive low-cost, fuel efficient compact cars that lack features like a comfortable "ride" performance - so they feel every pothole and tar strip impact, and are physically worn out when they get to work. Now, because they can't afford to live near their jobs, they will be punished for driving long distances to get to work. Bravo Democracy!
0

AlphaapeJan. 03, 2009 - 06:08PM JST

bebert, to add to your point:

Much of the middle class can't afford to live in wealth centers where the jobs are. They live outside of these areas (New York City, San Francisco, etc.) and commute long distances,

If something like this takes hold, you will see a more wide scale "gentrification" of inner city areas greater than it is now. In my hometown back in the States, wealthy people have moved out of the downtown area to the suburbs, but probably like Oregon, the road infrastructure has not matched that move. So what will happen, is that property taxes and rates will start to climb in the inner city areas, forcing the long time residents to have to move. Then with the vacant houses, and money being hard to find to build (but it costs less to rebuild) you will see a more influx of the "liberals" (some right wingers will do it to) move back into the inner city, and come up with names like "histroic old town, etc." I have seen it happen in my hometown, and this is probably what will be happening in bigger cities if this passes.

Just like the cigarette and liquor taxes, those with the least amount will be asked to pay the most.
0

LIBERTASJan. 03, 2009 - 06:59PM JST

I'm just waiting for some constitutional lawsuit to shoot this crazy idea down.
0

BadseyJan. 03, 2009 - 07:01PM JST

Portland Oregon doesn't really have suburbs. One of the best mass transit systems also. -a model city. There is a designated city area (a wall) --> then it's all farm land.

Raise the gas tax (and lower mass transit costs). People need to buy the most efficient cars for commuting + less road wear. +slowly force people to use mass transit. Mass transit is the future for American cities, but they are reluctant.
0

BetzeeJan. 03, 2009 - 10:38PM JST

Cost of commuting to work probably ranks as a secondary consideration when deciding where to live. Far more important is quality of local schools (which tend to be better outside urban centers). Even if you don't have kids, it will affect the value of your home.

I do like the idea that mileage is being recognized in calculating costs to road maintenance. It's certainly not for auto insurance purposes (which is based on your community of residence). This means those making long commutes from the suburbs pay less than center city residents, and I was one, who put far fewer miles on their cars.
0

DXXJPJan. 04, 2009 - 12:43AM JST

Again burocratic BS

"We need clean fuel efficiant cars" OK so we get them and they want to tax us even more for that. When is enough enough. By the way its not the eco cars tearing up the roads in oregon its the trucks with 3 trailers pulling heavy loads. GET A GRIP OREGON.
0

BetzeeJan. 04, 2009 - 01:48AM JST

Though this letter was not written in response to Oregon's proposed change, but a national gas tax, the issues are essentially the same ones:

It’s unrealistic to expect our elected officials to risk getting voted out of office by imposing tough choices that we are unwilling to make ourselves. But our political leaders can ask us: Are we serious about energy independence?

Do we want to reduce the military burden of protecting our oil supplies? Do we want to free our foreign policy to deal with nations and nonstate actors who don’t like us? Do we want to bring Iran to the bargaining table from a position of strength? Do we want to make alternative fuels competitive, reduce our carbon emissions and protect the environment?

Merely talking about those goals will not be enough. We have to be willing to act to achieve them, and that means endorsing incentives to change our own behavior.
0

30061015Jan. 04, 2009 - 02:11AM JST

A very stupid idea. They already get their bloody tax when you fill up!

Just another way for big govt to grow even bigger and make you pay the tab to keep an eye on you.
0

Taka313Jan. 04, 2009 - 04:16AM JST

This is not a good idea in my opinion. By taxing mileage, you discourage travel tourism. I am far less likely to take a trip across America if I have to pay for my gas (gas mileage while pulling a camper is pretty bad) and my mileage to boot.
Traveling the country with a pop-up Starcraft camper was how I discovered America and is one of the things I want to do with my children as well.
In doing so, not only do I show America's future her past, I also spend a lot of money on souvenirs, stimulating a lot of small local economies.

Taka
0

Suzu1Jan. 04, 2009 - 04:54AM JST

This proposed system would replace the gas tax for those cars with the GPS device - they would not be double billed. The pumps at the gas station would have to be programmed to add a gas tax to those vehicles without the device. I am against the proposal since the gas tax is an efficient method that costs the state little to administer and this mileage scheme would take away the incentive people have now for more fuel efficient vehicles. It will also result in another state bureaucracy when Oregon is already falling into a budget crisis.
As far as an earlier poster claiming that Portland has no suburbs, that is so untrue - there is Beaverton, Gresham, Milwaukie, Gladstone, Clackamas, Lake Oswego, Wilsonville, Hillsboro, Tigard, Tualatin, Vancouver, Camas and other bedroom communities that send their citizens into Portland everyday. Public transportation accounts for a very small percentage of those commuters. Even the much heralded MAX light rail system carries less than 1% of the daily commuters in Portland.
0

VORJan. 04, 2009 - 06:57AM JST

You get what you vote for. The people in Oregon seem to like their Democrats. They have very little to complain about when their elected officials hit them up with new taxes.

The middle class suburbanites are going to be hit the hardest as they probably have the longest daily commutes.