Pay per Mile tax for Oregon

[StLucieBengal]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150520/us--oregon-charging_green_vehicles-eff38a74ea.html


Lol If this comes to Florida i will move

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2015, 07:37 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150520/us--oregon-charging_green_vehicles-eff38a74ea.html


Lol If this comes to Florida i will move

Is your objection the device that tracks mileage, or the premise of the tax in general?

[StLucieBengal]

(05-20-2015, 07:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Is your objection the device that tracks mileage, or the premise of the tax in general?

Both. They can track my movement for one thing.... There is already enough ways they are doing that now and violating us.

Plus I don't want any more taxes.

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2015, 07:58 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Both.   They can track my movement for one thing.... There is already enough ways they are doing that now and violating us.    

Plus I don't want any more taxes.

The tracking is something I can understand an objection to. The problem is that one of two things will have to happen: a per mile tax or an increase in the gas tax.

The funds for highway maintenance are not cutting the mustard any longer because of more fuel efficient vehicles. But the problem is that while people are driving slightly less than they used to, it isn't enough to make up for the lack of funding for keeping the roads in repair. So we're going to see an increase somewhere regardless.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-20-2015, 08:03 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The tracking is something I can understand an objection to. The problem is that one of two things will have to happen: a per mile tax or an increase in the gas tax.

The funds for highway maintenance are not cutting the mustard any longer because of more fuel efficient vehicles. But the problem is that while people are driving slightly less than they used to, it isn't enough to make up for the lack of funding for keeping the roads in repair. So we're going to see an increase somewhere regardless.

Taxes are always debatable. Some of us want to pay less and some of you don't Mind paying more so the gov can waste it .... (I would assume you don't mind paying more taxes) But tracking is a problem and this opens up to that.... When I was with progressive they had the little device to use for a discount .... So they could gather my data..... I refused that multiple times.

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2015, 08:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Taxes are always debatable.  Some of us want to pay less and some of you don't Mind paying more so the gov can waste it .... (I would assume you don't mind paying more taxes)  But tracking is a problem and this opens up to that.... When I was with progressive they had the little device to use for a discount .... So they could gather my data..... I refused that multiple times.

I'm okay with taxes for particular things, like this would be, especially on the state level. I want fiscal responsibility, but I recognize the need to actually pay for things, and at this point that we need to pay for the debt of prior years because there is no feasible way to balance the budget on cuts alone.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-20-2015, 08:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm okay with taxes for particular things, like this would be, especially on the state level. I want fiscal responsibility, but I recognize the need to actually pay for things, and at this point that we need to pay for the debt of prior years because there is no feasible way to balance the budget on cuts alone.

I don't necessarly mind paying for things. It's the waste and disregard they take when spending our tax money.

We pay for a lot that I do not think we should be paying ....

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2015, 08:27 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I don't necessarly mind paying for things.   It's the waste and disregard they take when spending our tax money.

We pay for a lot that I do not think we should be paying ....

I agree. We would probably disagree on some of the things we think are unnecessary, though most of the budget I think should be shifted to the states. Either way, there need to be a lot of cuts.

[Benton]

We encourage people to drive hybrids to use less gas, then complain because they don't use enough gas to support the taxes they require to continue.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-20-2015, 08:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I agree. We would probably disagree on some of the things we think are unnecessary, though most of the budget I think should be shifted to the states. Either way, there need to be a lot of cuts.

Yeah there has to be a reasonable compromise on cuts. I also agree about shifting to the states

[StLucieBengal]

(05-20-2015, 09:17 PM)Benton Wrote: We encourage people to drive hybrids to use less gas, then complain because they don't use enough gas to support the taxes they require to continue.

Yep..... Then want to track their whereabouts 24/7 on top of that .... Can't have it both ways

[Yojimbo]

I live in Oregon and I don't like this program. As of now it's voluntary, but just feels like a foot in the door to make it mandatory down the road. I'm pretty sure if this does go widespread, it will end up on the ballot and be voted down.

[StLucieBengal]

(05-21-2015, 01:50 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: I live in Oregon and I don't like this program. As of now it's voluntary, but just feels like a foot in the door to make it mandatory down the road. I'm pretty sure if this does go widespread, it will end up on the ballot and be voted down.

Man I hope it goes to a ballot and you all get a chance to vote this down. Good Luck

[Belsnickel]

(05-20-2015, 09:17 PM)Benton Wrote: We encourage people to drive hybrids to use less gas, then complain because they don't use enough gas to support the taxes they require to continue.

Well, they didn't really think it through. They hadn't raised the fuel taxes enough to compensate for the lower gas consumption and now their budgets are hurting. I mean, hybrids and electric cars cause just as much wear and tear as regular cars, so the funds are still needed, they just aren't getting the revenues anymore.

[Belsnickel]

(05-21-2015, 01:50 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: I live in Oregon and I don't like this program. As of now it's voluntary, but just feels like a foot in the door to make it mandatory down the road. I'm pretty sure if this does go widespread, it will end up on the ballot and be voted down.

I find it interesting that this is happening in Oregon since the first fuel tax in the country was in Oregon.

[SteelCitySouth]

Why not just have inspections (this may already occur in Oregon, not sure) and then have the odometer read and compared with the previous year, then the taxes need to be paid prior to updated registration being received. Not really sure why a separated device needs to be installed. Unless you are only trying to charge for miles done in Oregon...

[Belsnickel]

(05-21-2015, 09:54 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Why not just have inspections (this may already occur in Oregon, not sure) and then have the odometer read and compared with the previous year, then the taxes need to be paid prior to updated registration being received.  Not really sure why a separated device needs to be installed.  Unless you are only trying to charge for miles done in Oregon...

I was actually going to suggest this earlier but never got around to it. That was the purpose of my initial question. It is a simple solution that doesn't track movements but allows for a tax-per-mile solution. I think if they implement this, though, it should be universal and done in place of the gasoline tax. The problem is that they never replace taxes they just add to them.

[SteelCitySouth]

(05-21-2015, 09:59 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I was actually going to suggest this earlier but never got around to it. That was the purpose of my initial question. It is a simple solution that doesn't track movements but allows for a tax-per-mile solution. I think if they implement this, though, it should be universal and done in place of the gasoline tax. The problem is that they never replace taxes they just add to them.

Oh I get that...

[Benton]

(05-21-2015, 09:47 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, they didn't really think it through. They hadn't raised the fuel taxes enough to compensate for the lower gas consumption and now their budgets are hurting. I mean, hybrids and electric cars cause just as much wear and tear as regular cars, so the funds are still needed, they just aren't getting the revenues anymore.

I did a piece on it back during cash for clunkers. Basically, it's 'if this works (more fuel efficient vehicles on the road), then we aren't going to be able to meet the road fund in 10 years, unless everyone starts driving 3-4 times as much.'

But for the last decade or so I've been preaching reform to how we allocate road dollars, both at the state and federal level. Repaving roads that don't need paving, or building roads that don't need built, instead of building up funds to replace an infrastructure that in many areas was put in place in the 1930s-1940s is ludicrous.

[CKwi88]

(05-21-2015, 09:54 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Why not just have inspections (this may already occur in Oregon, not sure) and then have the odometer read and compared with the previous year, then the taxes need to be paid prior to updated registration being received.  Not really sure why a separated device needs to be installed.  Unless you are only trying to charge for miles done in Oregon...

I was about to post the same, as to why a device to monitor where people were driving was relevant.

After reading the article I assume is has to do with the fact that they want to tax people for the miles driven on public roads, as opposed to private. Now, I have no idea how significant the amount of private roads are, so I think that a compromise on this one would certainly be just ditching the tracker and going with a straight odometer reading.

Edit: Oh yeah, miles driven just in Oregon makes sense too.