Obama floats plan to tax cars by the mile

Also, if I use the road for 1 mile, and you use it for 10 miles, you would then pay 10x as much as me. If me and you go both go to the doctor for the same thing, but I go 10x, and you go once, I would pay 10x mroe than you. So it does work that way. If I buy a Tri-Met pass every month, that money goes to help fund Tri-Met, so that is working as well.
And I'm assuming a portion of the income from ticket sales from the Timbers games goes towards the bonds from stadium renovation. I am not 100% on that. So yes, those who use it pay more. Glad we agree.

 

My point above is that our system is not setup this way. Sure it sounds nice, but you seem to only want this type of system when it taxes the "rich" more. The people who "use" more public education don't pay more for it. The people who use public legal defense don't pay more tax for it. The people who use more public healthcare don't pay more for it.

It seems like you support the "those who use it more, pay more" model only when it is convenient.

 

How exactly does it seem that way? When have I EVER given an opinion on those who use it more pay more for you to make the assumption that I only support it when it is convenient?

 

Does the food you eat drop magically from the sky into your house, or does it get to the store via roads?

 

This thread is one example.

Perhaps I am wrong though. Would you support a tax that only applied to families who send their children to public schools, that families who's children go to private schools don't have to pay?

 

Well, you'd notice that I mentioned that everyone should pay SOME, because everyone benefits from the roads. Are you not reading everything written, or just looking to pin assumptions and thoughts on people in the discussion. I recognize we all benefit, and thus, all should have a similar portion of general taxes, whatever, given towards the department of transportation. However, if I work from home, and someone else commutes from Salem to Portland every day, they seem to be using MORE of the roads than I am. Since I don't commute like that every day. So they should pay per the miles they drive.
I imagine this would find it's way into increased prices on stuff, as well, as companies like UPS, etc. would add in the mileage into the cost. You again seem to think my position is that it should be SOLELY funded. I already stated once that isn't the case.

 

This thread is an example of me supporting this one issue, and has nothing to do with anything else, so again, your assumptions are off base. Seems like you want to lump liberal positions or thoughts onto me for some reason. Sorry.

 

Do you want to answer my question?

Would you support a tax that only applied to families who send their children to public schools, that families who's children go to private schools don't have to pay?

 

The University of Oregon is a public University, which receives funding from me, indirectly. If I choose to use its facilities by going there, I pay more. I support that.

 

As it has been mentioned but ignored, there is a tax already in place, at least two and at times three. First is the feds, seconed is the state and the third is some citys have their own.

I have seen figures that the average profit per gallon is around 8 cents per gallon, that average tax per gallon of gas is like 48 cents. The taxes were to go to the roads, but have been included in the general fund last I knew.

 

Right, but as mentioned, an electric car would bypass that tax, and still do harm to the road

 

by the time electric cars filter down to the average person, believe me, the gov will hit them with a tax. The mistake that most people make is in believeing that if one tax goes into play it will replace another. That never happens.

 

I'm pretty sure that is for the actual gas station, not profit for the oil companies themselves. I could be wrong though, I just remember seeing a pie chart of where the revenue (so I guess not profit) goes. The gas stations take was barely a sliver.

 

How about elementary schools and high schools?

 

Sorry, I should have been more clear. By education, I meant education. Just the fact that you have "extracurricular" in your sentence makes it clear I wasn't talking about that.

 

I have no problem with the pay-to-play model for things like sports and band. I also wouldn't have a problem with the model of "those that use more pay more". But I do have a problem with picking and choosing when to use that model in a way that just ends up taxing the so-called "rich".

 

I have zero problem with toll roads. Where I have a BIG problem is the government being able to track where I go. It's not a revenue issue for me; it's a privacy issue.

Just as aside, how about we focus on lowering expenses before we look for more revenue?

 

how is it a tax on the rich? is there a statistic that shows the rich on average drive mroe than middle class or others?

Everyone picks and chooses rules they support. Because I support one rule does not mean I support everything similar. I support some taxes. I do not support ALL taxes, as I am sure you do as well. So we pick and choose ones we see as more worthwhile, no?