Mileage Tax

[Mags]

I know this guy that changes mileage's on cars...even the digital ones like on BMW's and Mercedes'....he's gonna come in handy if this ever goes through

[Genuine_Stud]

Gevo, let's move to Armenia....I haven't been there yet, but I'm sure it'll be better than this hell hole called California

Any place is better than the hell hole called Glendale.

JK.

Anyways... I seriously doubt that that mileage tax would fall through. Interesting concept, but unrealistic.

If it does, I'm moving to Armenia also.

Damn.. I miss "Voske Badarakagh".

[gevo]

Gevo, let's move to Armenia....I haven't been there yet, but I'm sure it'll be better than this hell hole called California

I dont know why i still live here, i hate california, especially the LA area.. infact i woudnt mind to move to armenia, i hear we can make good money just working as translators or something at the big hotels.. HAHHAA.. hey.. we can do that.. right Mags?? if we both work, make like 1500 a month, BAM we are good.. living is much cheaper there i heard..
maybe i should just dropp out of school and pursue tht idea.. ??
well mayb we should hope for this tax bill to go through after all

[nunechka]

this tax indrudes into the privacy rights of citizens and come ON! the original tax was put there to help with cleaning up the toxic emissions, the money went to the EPA, and if we really want to help with cleaning up the air, what is better then an electric car that is rechargable, or a hybrid which is also fuel efficient...

if this tax is passed it will only incurage people to not drive as much, but it will not discourage car manufacturers from making gas inhaling cars... the reason why the japanese have been so successful is because they have managed to make cars that get better miles per gallon, and not only was this good for the average driver's pocket, but it was good for the environment... so a milage tax will not save the environment, which what the original tax was for.

so lets compare the hummer vs. a toyota hybrid, WHICH CAR is more responsible for toxic emmissions, and which car is responsible for even having a tax like this (not directly of course)?
- hummer gets 9-10 miles per gallon on the road and 11-15 (or even up to 19, the highest number i found) on the freeway
- hybrid gets 40-60 miles per gallon on the road... LOL! LOL!

so if you drive 60 miles to go somewhere vs. 9 miles to go somewhere, you will emit the same amount of toxins... LOL! what is wrong with people??? seriously

anywho, this tax is PATHETIC in everyway... it is indrusive, and it does not help with the original intent and purpose of the tax. and thats my tree hugging opinion of the day...

[jilbagh]

this tax indrudes into the privacy rights of citizens and come ON! the original tax was put there to help with cleaning up the toxic emissions

also to transportation costs...

if this tax is passed it will only incurage people to not drive as much,

whats so bad about that? haven't you noticed the traffic in LA or California in general...pathetic and unneccessary.

anywho, this tax is PATHETIC in everyway... it is indrusive, and it does not help with the original intent and purpose of the tax.

Someone has to pay for the freeways, roads, repavings, road expansions due to growing population. tax and spend baby...tax and spend!!!

and thats my tree hugging opinion of the day

well put

[nunechka]

jilbagh you are so cute... i dont know if its fair to quote only certain parts of my post, but since i love your avatar and you are a sweet person... ITS OK!!!

paving and recontruction could be done by tolls... very LITTLE!!! tolls... like in colorado they have these toll roads, and they are really cheap but very effective

[jilbagh]

yeah, we had toll roads in Oklahoma too, smaller state, smaller population, less automobiles...and California being a larger state it would increase revenue.

But it would also slow down the pace of traffic, create more constintuent complaints and increase the cost of new equipment of structures to house the equipment to account for cars driving on the freeways. Too many cars to account for and try to even collect from.

The Bay Bridge and Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco have tolls, but commuters going there are not as high in numbers than in Southern California, and they are primarily workers that go into the city that have the "autopass". Most simply take BART into the city. The rest are tourists that don't even matter because there aren't high number of travelers that go across the Golden Gate to the other side.

There is water on both sides of the bridge of the same depth. But all must give into their equal effort to maintain the strength of the bridge.

[loseyourname]

If you've noticed, the city of New York has more miles of highway and more bridges than any other city in the country. Furthermore, these highways were all there before the Interstate system was even thought up. They were built with revenue from tolls, and traffic there isn't really any slower than it is here. They also managed to operate the port, the port police, and build any parks without using very much tax money, thanks to the public authorities that build them and operate as corporations do, relying on investment and user fees for funding. This system has worked for over fifty years and you can argue that transit and waterways in New York are the best of any major city. Of course, they are able to slow traffic on bridges and tunnels through the tolls largely because so many people use public transit, otherwise the roads would be overcrowded. A large public transit system has been resisted here primarily because it would not be used by enough people to make it profitable, and it would have to eat into state and local tax revenue, and no one wants to increase taxes for a system they will likely not even use.