Tesla Powerwall Can Increase Your Electric Bill

So what federal law requires any federal tax to be spent on any specific use?

--

Rick

None of them. The feds generally can't constitutionally require the States to spend in specific ways.

Instead the Feds tax the peeps, then offer the states some of the loot IFF the states jump through certain hoops.

There are loads of laws like that.

Cheers, James Arthur

So back to my question... What does "fair" have to do with fuel tax?

--

Rick

That seems "fair" to me. ;)

--

Rick

Ummm...

"The Governor appoints the five Commissioners, who must be confirmed by the Senate, for six year staggered terms. The Governor appoints one of the five to serve as Commission President." - That's political.

My old Cajun daddy-in-law was a sugar cane farmer, and he had his own gasoline tank and pump for the farm machinery. Being a Cajun, he was of course scrupulous against filling any of his (or my) road vehicles with that untaxed gas.

Fuel tax was designed as a way to place some of the road maintenance cost on the roads' users. That's a way to make the tax quasi-responsive to the need.

When (as today) the federal gov't requires states to use some of their federal highway money on high-speed f^Hrail, greenways and bikepaths, less money is available for roads. At which point the President complains there's not enough money for 'crumbling roads and bridges.'

"Fair"? When ordinary citizens are wiped out for not baking a cake and high officials jeopardize national security with impunity, what's this word "fair"?

What's plainly not fair though is if significant users of the road resource don't bear any portion of its cost.

Cheers, James Arthur

The politicians don't do the regulation. The commissioners are no more politicians than judges, sheriffs or any other appointed office. That is the point of having the commission rather than a political committee.

--

Rick

You just can't grasp the idea that gas tax does not pay for roads. We all pay taxes. Most of us avoid paying taxes we don't have to. Should there be a tax for people who are good at avoiding taxes? Should everyone pay the same tax? Should it be proportional to our incomes or wealth?

How about we drop the gas tax and have a flat tax per person whether you have a car or not? Everyone uses roads whether they have a car or even a driver's license. $1,000 per year federal road tax!

--

Rick

That already exists. Called the Alternate Minimum Tax.

Dan

for

use.

e.

You

e not

out

lity

g up

se of

e has

ough.

the Senate, for six year staggered terms. The Governor appoints one of the five to serve as Commission President." - That's political.

All the states regulate the utility rates within their state by commissions such as these. In your state it is the State Corporation Commission, SCC. If you don't think it's political then you missed the part about staggered /political/ appointments of the commissioners which is to prevent a single governor from loading the commission with appointees inline with his /polit ical/ agenda. The commission can be very political. You think these people are selected on the basis of their looks???

I can grasp it, it just isn't true.

"The Highway Trust Fund collects and distributes money dedicated to federal highway and transit projects. [...] The trust fund consistently spends more on highway and transit projects than it receives in FUEL TAX REVENUES and is expected to run a cumulative deficit of $180 billion over the next 10 years if current trends continue." (emphasis added for your edification)

Gas taxes do pay for roads.

There are good answers to all those questions, but a more fundamental question is "What is all this money being collected for, and how is it spent?" (Answer: about 2/3rds on FDR-started redistribution stuff.)

Proportionally taxing road users' road use adds price-signalling to all the users and processes that use, build, and maintain the roads.

That's a (very) good thing.

Cheers, James Arthur

"Congress has addressed past shortfalls with temporary patches and bailouts from the general fund, totaling $62 billion since 2008"

So the fund is $80 billion short until 2008 and looking forward is $180 billion short. Sure, gas taxes pay for the roads, along with tons of other monies.

So clearly the gas tax does NOT pay for our roads. Congress pays for our roads.

Except fuel tax isn't proportional to anything that matters. Heavy trucks do much more damage to the roads than cars. If they were only taxed by the miles driven or the fuel used they would NOT be paying their "fair" share if "fair" could even be determined with any accuracy.

Your idea that a fuel tax is inherently "fair" is bs. Your idea that anyone not paying a fuel tax isn't paying for roads is bs.

--

Rick

You'd said the gas tax isn't used on roads. The opposite is true.

"Where does the revenue from the fuel tax go?

"The revenue from the collected Federal fuel taxes are deposited into the Highway Trust Fund, which has several accounts. Though the percentages vary depending on the fuel type, the majority (approximately 83 to 87%) is deposited into the Highway Account, to be used on road construction and maintenance."

Right. /sarc

Wrong again. The fund was set up to be self-funding.

"Another important characteristic of the HTF is that it was set up as a pay-as-you-go fund."

Heavy trucks use more fuel. There's also a tax on their tires, another measure of road use.

I didn't say the fuel taxes were 'fair', that's your concern. I pointed out the advantages of having a need that is partially self-funding. Also, that it's manifestly *not* fair when heavy users contribute nothing.

Cheers, James Arthur

Split any hairs you wish, but I never said that. Read above.

This even says not all of the fuel taxes collected don't even go to paying for roads!

And you keep providing evidence that shows it isn't. Or maybe $260 billion is just pocket change?

So is that "fair". They do the lion's share of wearing out the roads, but don't pay taxes proportionally.

You mean the truckers? What "heavy" users?

--

Rick

You've misunderstood the whole issue. - Fuel tax, mostly, *is* supposed to pay for our roads. - Currently, it's not collecting enough. - Electric cars are contributing to that.

Thus, the controversy over electric cars using roads without paying.

Cheers, James Arthur

"> >>>> You just can't grasp the idea that gas tax does not pay for roads."

It /is/ used to fund roads. It /was/ designed to pay for them fully, but the formula is out of date.

I pointed that out long ago--Congress is diverting road funds to non-road uses. But ~85% does go to "road construction and maintenance," so your point is...hard to see.

Roads are supposed to self-fund through the gas tax. That's why it matters IF PEOPLE DRIVE CARS THAT DON'T USE GAS.

Did that make it clearer?

Cheers, James Arthur

On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 23:03:16 -0400, rickman Gave us:

Highways are predominately made from concrete now and the trucks do no damage to them.

You are truly stupid.

And for the load they carry, they use LESS fuel. Trains are point to point only on the tracks they run on, and there STILL has to be local disbursement and logistics and that .means TRUCKS, you stupid f*ck. Do you even know what "a truck" is?

I'm not sure where "rickman" lives, maybe where he is politicians don't regulate utilities, but in California they do. Also, he never explained why he thinks it's a good idea for EV owners to get a free ride when it comes to funding road maintenance. The fact that some of the fuel taxes fund things other than roads is not a valid reason.