After talking to some people who are actually choosing between gas and food, this comes out in the news. I don't see how Americans will be able to get ahead or even keep up. Which I guess is why 1 out of 7 Americans are on food stamps. Since this is a auto website, it should be appropriate.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/159397-obama-floats-plan-to-tax-cars-by-the-mile
Looks like an inflammatory story to me...
the headline says, "Obama floats plan to tax cars by the mile"
but the story actually says, “This is not an Administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the Administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the Administration, does not taken into account the advice of the President’s senior advisors, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the President.”
Raising fuel taxes would be so much easier, but, noooo, the feds make up an excuse to monitor citizens. And, they want to spend $200 million to see if it's feasible.
For an administration desperate for a second term, this doesn't come across as a good campaign tactic.
stuart in mn wrote: Looks like an inflammatory story to me... the headline says, "Obama floats plan to tax cars by the mile" but the story actually says, “This is not an Administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the Administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the Administration, does not taken into account the advice of the President’s senior advisors, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the President.”
This. It is just an idea that was kicked around. We all have bad ideas. If it gets to Congress then it is time to panic.
Not really new. It's been proposed before and never seems to get any traction.
Here's an article from USA Today circa 2007.
I find it especially curious that this story pins the "idea" on Barry O, but contains the following quote.
“This is not an Administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the Administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the Administration, does not taken into account the advice of the President’s senior advisors, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the President.”
There's already a federal gas tax. Those that travel more miles are already contributing more taxes than those that don't. Travel more miles.... buy more gas. Not a hard concept.
Tom: That's not going to stop people from pinning it on Barry. He's the boogeyman, goddammit.
For some reason I'm craving flounder...
Tom Heath wrote: Not really new. It's been proposed before and never seems to get any traction. Here's an article from USA Today circa 2007. I find it especially curious that this story pins the "idea" on Barry O, but contains the following quote. “This is not an Administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the Administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the Administration, does not taken into account the advice of the President’s senior advisors, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the President.”
Right because it's an old idea and that the article pins it as an Administration-backed proposal.
Wrong because it's an idea already floated in Congress and recently sent to CBO for analysis.
It's a bad idea regardless of who came up with it. That it is still considered "plausible" is bothersome and plain stupid (in a political sense).
Hocrest wrote: For some reason I'm craving flounder...
For some reason I'm craving blonde.
And by the way, it wasn't a direct shot to any administration or side. I would be upset whether it was pushed by a D or R.
Next they'll want to tax each email! Oh wait they already wanted to do that...
Cute chick. And she can hold 10lbs of flounder in each hand?
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: There's already a federal gas tax. Those that travel more miles are already contributing more taxes than those that don't. Travel more miles.... buy more gas. Not a hard concept.
That's true BUT...........
If you drive a vehicle that gets 50% better mpg, you'll buy 50% less gas, and the gov't will see a subsequent drop in tax revenues.
Not a hard concept. 
In reply to z31maniac:
and yet they push and subsidize vehicles that use less fuel, then complain with fuel revenues might decrease
One of the "great" parts of this idea of taxing vehicle use per mile is that someone driving a huge gas-guzzler pays the same as some poor schmo in a Geo Metro.....AND, it avoids the "stigma" of voting to raise ANY taxes, especially gas taxes. Several states are considering this plan, and if for no other reason that it requires "Big Brother" to keep tabs on your movements, it should NEVER be allowed to pass.
When I moved to Texas in 1981 the amount you paid for a license plate was determined by vehicle weight/size (the SMALLER the vehicle, the cheaper the plate). This was changed in 1983 because it was thought that folks with small, fuel efficient vehicles weren't paying their fair share/enough when it came to fuel taxes so folks with small, fuel efficient cars suddenly had the HIGHEST fees for plates.
z31maniac wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: There's already a federal gas tax. Those that travel more miles are already contributing more taxes than those that don't. Travel more miles.... buy more gas. Not a hard concept.That's true BUT........... If you drive a vehicle that gets 50% better mpg, you'll buy 50% less gas, and the gov't will see a subsequent drop in tax revenues. Not a hard concept.
They should be rewarded for being smart. 
oldsaw wrote: Raising fuel taxes would be so much easier, but,nooo/>
Actually, that's done in Ct. The higher the price at the distributor, the higher the state's fee added to the price. No, not the sales tax, that comes later at the pump. Thankfully a motion to raise that fee was defeated. Cost enough to live in this state already. So, as the price at the distributor goes up, so goes the "fee" added to the cost of the fuel, and then we pay a sales tax on the total.
Does anyone know of other states that do this?
In reply to WilberM3 & 92Celica:
I'm with you, I completely agree. Take our tax dollars and refund it to those wealthy enough to buy a hybrid, then raise taxes on the gas we buy to offset the hybrid they just encouraged you to buy.
stuart in mn wrote: Looks like an inflammatory story to me... the headline says, "Obama floats plan to tax cars by the mile" but the story actually says, “This is not an Administration proposal," White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. "This is not a bill supported by the Administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the Administration, does not taken into account the advice of the President’s senior advisors, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the President.”
And we all know that the White House always tells the truth. Right. I didn't find anything inflammatory in the article. The title is no more misleading than your comment about it being an inflammatory article.
Tom Heath wrote:
This just goes to show that sometimes between all the flounders... there is something worth tapping.
We could do what England did (does?)? Car tax is dependant upon engine displacement. Bigger the engine, bigger the tax. Annnd watch the massive return or Morgan 3 wheelers. Much more than they are currently planning, also the return of kit cars.
Do the Amish pay a road tax???? Seriously, they do USE the roads. Should they not be taxed like a commercial trailer, and the horse like a car: so many hands high equals so much tax paid/year. I mean really.
Actually in the UK it's only split into two bands for older cars (pre-2001) - less than 1500cc and bigger than 1500cc.
New(er) cars are taxed based on their CO2 rating.
Germany used? to have car tax based on engine displacement which made your average SBC almost unafforable, but they may also have changed that to a CO2 based taxation.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: There's already a federal gas tax. Those that travel more miles are already contributing more taxes than those that don't. Travel more miles.... buy more gas. Not a hard concept.
But that's just way too easy.
Boxhead Tim: Thanks. I wondered if the displacemnt taxation was still in place, since it is/was mentioned on Top Gear. So, is there a pass/fail inspection, or a sliding scale on the amount of emissions? So, if you want to run a vehicle sans convertor, tuned to 700hp, if you paid the CO2 emission rating, it's legal? I don't think so, but, it's an interesting idea.
I can clearly see how the germans would base on CO2 ratings, due to the love of forests and environmental groups.
You'll need to log in to post.
