Should GPS be installed inside vehicles in order to charge mileage taxes

Jerry said:

Not only do we not need them, we can't aford them.

Click to expand...

Yet we can afford to continue spending enormous sums of money to fill the coffers of Venezuela, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia?

Jerry said:

Obama is proposing massive infrastructure 'investment' while we're in a depression, so the money to pay for these programs, despite the fact that they will fail, has to come from somewhere.

No one who voted for Obama has the moral authority to bitch about this. This is what you supported when you supported Obama.

Punishing private transportation will encourage the use of the proposed public transportation. The plan will fail in the long run because the government can't make a return on an investment.

Bearly enough money to ride a buss to work....that’s the "change" we weed :roll:

Click to expand...

Jerry said:

Exactly right.

The mileage is noted on the bill of sale, so all you need to do is bring the vehicle with you, or the gov could set up a way for a technician to certify the mileage and produce a certificate you could bring in when you do your taxes.

No GPS required.

And I like how the Gov used private industry, like OnStar, to develop the technology before they tried to introduce this intention.

Click to expand...

Are you saying Obama is a time traveler? He isn't (As Far As I Know) President yet so he can't have been involved in the decision to develop the technology unless he traveled back through time and started the process so he could then singlehandedly decide this GPS system would be used.

Ikari said:

We have a fascination with driving our own asses places. Also, I've met several people from Europe whom are well surprised at how seriously Americans take their traffic laws. We stop for pedestrians and such, and they claim that doesn't happen oft where they're from (though I've known a disproportionately large number of Germans...maybe they're just crazy there). We don't have a lot in the ways of public transport, maybe that should change. But we have cars and roads and people seem to be able to handle it; so let them take care of themselves.

Click to expand...

That on the other hand is a SERIOUS problem in Europe, the drivers and their "ethics".. Its worst in Belgium for sure, but French drivers arent exactly polite, and generally I believe European drivers are worse than US drivers..

In Belgium for example I watched a lady with a child trolly trying to cross the pedestrian lines on a road.. She had to wait for 4 speeding cars that just passed her, even way above speed limit. Shameful. Cars dont care about pedestrians and bikes and such in many European cities, its completely shameful to watch those selfish bastards in their cars.
Personally I prefer to walk and run, but when I can do that I prefer public transport, and when I cant do that I just have to choose a car, because I do not yet have a helicopter license.

Jerry said:

Not only do we not need them, we can't aford them.

Click to expand...

Yes you do.. Flying is a hazzle. Taking a train is just wonderful in comparison. IN France for example the longest route take 5 hours by train, from one side to another of the country. In comparison if you take a place, you have to check in beforehand, go through security, wait and all these things before you actually get in the air.. Total saving of time is perhaps 1 hour of those 5 hours to travel the same distance. And the hazzle and comfort factors are also important.

The US is larger yes, but it makes sense to link the cities with trains going 350 km/h or more like they have in France.
Meglev however is the future, they can speed up to 600 km/h as of today and the future potential of those railways with different trains are 1500 km/h.

Flying is overrated. Even a big country like the US needs alternatives.

Kandahar said:

Yet we can afford to continue spending enormous sums of money to fill the coffers of Venezuela, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia?

Click to expand...

Nope, can't afford that either.

Infinite Chaos said:

Are you saying Obama is a time traveler? He isn't (As Far As I Know) President yet so he can't have been involved in the decision to develop the technology unless he traveled back through time and started the process so he could then singlehandedly decide this GPS system would be used.

Click to expand...

rof The government is not a single person.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Yes you do.. Flying is a hazzle. Taking a train is just wonderful in comparison. IN France for example the longest route take 5 hours by train, from one side to another of the country. In comparison if you take a place, you have to check in beforehand, go through security, wait and all these things before you actually get in the air.. Total saving of time is perhaps 1 hour of those 5 hours to travel the same distance. And the hazzle and comfort factors are also important.

The US is larger yes, but it makes sense to link the cities with trains going 350 km/h or more like they have in France.
Meglev however is the future, they can speed up to 600 km/h as of today and the future potential of those railways with different trains are 1500 km/h.

Flying is overrated. Even a big country like the US needs alternatives.

Click to expand...

Flying? Where did I support flying? I'm talking about local transit; a few blocks to a couple dozen miles.

Maglev is the poster child of failed public transit, costing millions per mile. It's imposable to charge the average maglev rider a fee reflective of the costs because that fee would be so high that hardly anyone would ride it.

The only way to keep the system running is to secure government subsidy, which is my point exactly. These systems are a drain on public funding and should be left to the private sector to develop if at all.

Jerry said:

rof The government is not a single person.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that was my point too. If you read back to your "anyone who voted Obama has no right to complain" post you'll see why we agree.

Jerry said:

Flying? Where did I support flying? I'm talking about local transit; a few blocks to a couple dozen miles.

Maglev is the poster child of failed public transit, costing millions per mile. It's imposable to charge the average maglev rider a fee reflective of the costs because that fee would be so high that hardly anyone would ride it.

The only way to keep the system running is to secure government subsidy, which is my point exactly. These systems are a drain on public funding and should be left to the private sector to develop if at all.

Click to expand...

All new technologies are expensive and difficult to manage. With time meglev will become a "normality".. Why not start installing the tracks? Its the train sets that need further development.

If we think only profits all the time, like we currently do in the west, we can just as well hand over the future to countries like China and just sit around with a white flag.
Subsidies is a good alternative to not doing anything great anymore.

Infinite Chaos said:

Thanks, that was my point too. If you read back to your "anyone who voted Obama has no right to complain" post you'll see why we agree.

Click to expand...

Well, we don't agree because supporting Obama™ is not supporting the man alone, but the entire administration, party ideals, and all related policies.

Perhaps a more precise way for me to have worded my claim would have been "anyone who voted Democrat has no right to complain".

I assumed that since Obama was the Democrat nominee that "vote Obama" = "vote Democrat" would have automatically been common knowledge. It appears that I was mistaken.

To my point, though, Obama has surrounded himself with Clinton appointees of the past. This is nothing more than a continuation of previous policies and long term goals, not Change® at all.

Maximus Zeebra said:

All new technologies are expensive and difficult to manage. With time meglev will become a "normality".. Why not start installing the tracks? Its the train sets that need further development.

Click to expand...

The monorail is cost prohibitive. That money would be better spent maintaining existing systems which cost less even though they are also failures.

Maximus Zeebra said:

If we think only profits all the time, like we currently do in the west, we can just as well hand over the future to countries like China and just sit around with a white flag.

Click to expand...

Profit is not an end, it is a means to an end because of what profit does, like atract investors and create jobs.

You speak of acquiring profit as though the money is simply stashed away in some rich white man's vault, never to be seen again. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Subsidies is a good alternative to not doing anything great anymore.

Click to expand...

Subsidy = debt; debt = economic slowdown, reduced tax revenue, increased inflation, fewer jobs, higher cost of living. To support subsidy is to oppose a strong economy, categorically. This is true for public transit, public education, public health care, etc.

Profit = capitol; capitol = increased flow of money, higher tax revenue, decreased inflation, more jobs, lower cost of living. To support profit is to support a strong economy, categorically. This is true for private transit, private education, private health care, etc.

***
Not doing anything great anymore is the preferred alternative then subsidies because when you do nothing, you do not go into debt.

I, however, do not support doing nothing.

I don't see the issue as "subsidize or do nothing" as you apparently do. I see another option: Capitalism, which works every time it's tried.

There is no need for the monorail, and even if there were a need, the cost is too high. I can't in good conscience support a high-tech Amtrak.

Jerry said:

Well, we don't agree because supporting Obama™ is not supporting the man alone, but the entire administration, party ideals, and all related policies.

Perhaps a more precise way for me to have worded my claim would have been "anyone who voted Democrat has no right to complain".

I assumed that since Obama was the Democrat nominee that "vote Obama" = "vote Democrat" would have automatically been common knowledge. It appears that I was mistaken.

To my point, though, Obama has surrounded himself with Clinton appointees of the past. This is nothing more than a continuation of previous policies and long term goals, not Change® at all.

Click to expand...

I see what you did there. Clever bastage you!

Shewter said:

I see what you did there. Clever bastage you!

Click to expand...

I still have no idea what your objecting to, or what you think I just did

Jerry said:

I still have no idea what your objecting to, or what you think I just did

Click to expand...

No objections. I just like how you worded the post. I'm positive you "know what you did there" as well :lol:

Jerry said:

Profit is not an end, it is a means to an end because of what profit does, like atract investors and create jobs.

Click to expand...

No point having jobs if your country stinks and is ston age like. Say 50 years from now, all of China is connected with super meglev, super metroes in the cities, they have had urban renewal making cities in Europe and the US look like relics of the past, they have spent huge amounts on space research and manned the moon and several planets, all their energy is renewable or nuclear, all their cars and small aircraft are electric and so fourth..

Then we are in the west the same as we are now, with minimal progress, driving the same cars, just slightly changed, having no urban renewal, rather decline, taking old iron trains on rusty railways, no public transport and have finally managed to put another few men on the moon with help of the Chinese, our oil is running out and we only produce 10% of whats needed with renewbles while spending enourmous sums to find more oil, we wage wars in desperation because the military is now the only thing that keeps our economies going and so on and so on..

Thats what happens if we only think profit, I promise you that. The decline of the west will come because of capitalism and profit merging, lack of ambitions, lack of huge prestige projects, lack of government investments and so on... Companies only look for profits.

Jerry said:

Subsidy = debt;

Click to expand...

What? Are you MAD? Thats just not true, except for in badly managed economies with no fiscal responsibility, like say the US, the UK and Italy.

Jerry said:

debt = economic slowdown, reduced tax revenue, increased inflation, fewer jobs, higher cost of living. To support subsidy is to oppose a strong economy, categorically. This is true for public transit, public education, public health care, etc.

Click to expand...

True, just look at the UK and somewhat the US as well. Debt isnt all those things if countries do not take on TOO MUCH debt.

Jerry said:

I don't see the issue as "subsidize or do nothing" as you apparently do. I see another option: Capitalism, which works every time it's tried.

Click to expand...

Please point me to the post where I said that. I didnt.. I just think all economies would react well to some subsidies and huge government projects. Like for example China is doing so well.. They hardly built the tree georges dam out of love for profit, rather they built of for need and the benefit of their society. Georges dam is just one great example of Chinese willingness to think different. Capitalism as it is, is failing btw...

Another example is state funded meglev trains being built and running on the Chinese east coast.

Maximus Zeebra said:

No point having jobs if your country stinks and is ston age like. Say 50 years from now, all of China is connected with super meglev, super metroes in the cities, they have had urban renewal making cities in Europe and the US look like relics of the past, they have spent huge amounts on space research and manned the moon and several planets, all their energy is renewable or nuclear, all their cars and small aircraft are electric and so fourth..

Then we are in the west the same as we are now, with minimal progress, driving the same cars, just slightly changed, having no urban renewal, rather decline, taking old iron trains on rusty railways, no public transport and have finally managed to put another few men on the moon with help of the Chinese, our oil is running out and we only produce 10% of whats needed with renewbles while spending enourmous sums to find more oil, we wage wars in desperation because the military is now the only thing that keeps our economies going and so on and so on..

Thats what happens if we only think profit, I promise you that. The decline of the west will come because of capitalism and profit merging, lack of ambitions, lack of huge prestige projects, lack of government investments and so on... Companies only look for profits.

Click to expand...

Since Capitalism brings the improvements you're looking for, and socialism (which is what subsidy is) doesn't, never has and never will, I have no idea why your objecting to my argument.

Maximus Zeebra said:

What? Are you MAD? Thats just not true, except for in badly managed economies with no fiscal responsibility, like say the US, the UK and Italy.

Click to expand...

Um, we're in the US and talking about the US economy :doh

Maximus Zeebra said:

True, just look at the UK and somewhat the US as well. Debt isnt all those things if countries do not take on TOO MUCH debt.

Click to expand...

The idea is to have no debt of any kind. Businesses that cannot turn a profit are a drain on the system and should be allowed to fail.

See, if the monorail is not turning a profit, this means that no other business that the monorail delivers people to is receiving any benefit at all. It means that no individual’s cost of travel has gone down, or that they can now make more money with the same amount of time.

If the general public is receiving no benefit, then there is no need for the system to exist.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Please point me to the post where I said that. I didnt.. I just think all economies would react well to some subsidies and huge government projects. Like for example China is doing so well.. They hardly built the tree georges dam out of love for profit, rather they built of for need and the benefit of their society. Georges dam is just one great example of Chinese willingness to think different. Capitalism as it is, is failing btw...

Click to expand...

I included the word "apparently" precisely so that you wouldn't assume I was quoting you or claiming that you made that argument directly.

Your argument gave only 2 options and made a choice between those 2. If you know that there are other valid options then leaving those options out is highly suspicious. Therefore, you either didn't know about the other options or you being dishonest. I chose to give your character credit and assumed you simply didn't know of the other options.

It seems that you are correcting me, that you did know and were making a dishonest argument. If that's the case please say so.

Maximus Zeebra said:

Another example is state funded meglev trains being built and running on the Chinese east coast.

Click to expand...

I need to know 3 things:

1. What is the monorail's annual cost to operate?
2. How many passengers does it carry annually?
3. What is the fair?

Jerry said:

Nope, can't afford that either.

Click to expand...

Well afford it or not, we have to spend money on one or the other. I'd rather spend it on improving our infrastructure and public transit instead of giving it to petrocrats.

Kandahar said:

Well afford it or not, we have to spend money on one or the other. I'd rather spend it on improving our infrastructure and public transit instead of giving it to petrocrats.

Click to expand...

If those are our only 2 options on how to spend the money, then since the money will be wasted either way, I'd rather let the American public keep it.

I don’t understand how ‘the left’ can complain about people not being able to afford healthcare when it’s ‘the left’ who keeps taking money out of their income to waste either on doomed public works or thrown away overseas.

The problem is caused by government spending; therefore more government spending is the solution? That doesn’t follow, and is why I’m a Conservative.

why GPS?

Give the odometer the ability to broadcast information and positioning isn't even required.....one less thing to be abused

ARealConservative said:

why GPS?

Give the odometer the ability to broadcast information and positioning isn't even required.....one less thing to be abused

Click to expand...

Very true, a simple download from the car's computer would do, even.

The fact that they positioning is highly suspicious, especially given all the unintended data which results from positioning data.

Truckers currently pay mileage tax.
Look up IFTA if you are interested.
It's all done on paper with drivers marking their mileage down as they cross state lines.
It works fine.
No reason it wouldn't work for everyone else. Especially since most people will only have mileage in one state.

Ikari said:

We have a fascination with driving our own asses places. Also, I've met several people from Europe whom are well surprised at how seriously Americans take their traffic laws. We stop for pedestrians and such, and they claim that doesn't happen oft where they're from (though I've known a disproportionately large number of Germans...maybe they're just crazy there). We don't have a lot in the ways of public transport, maybe that should change. But we have cars and roads and people seem to be able to handle it; so let them take care of themselves.

Click to expand...

I know when we visited Italy they always told us not to look at drivers when crossing the road, they assume you have seen them and take the right of way.

Kandahar said:

Why do you think that infrastructure investment will fail? The Interstate Highway System worked out pretty well. What is your alternative? Let our highways, bridges, levies, and power grids decay into a state of total disrepair?

Click to expand...

Several reasons.
The first of which is that about half of economists believe that FDRs government programs actually DELAYED the depression instead of shortening it.
The next is even if you believe his programs helped to end the depression we were building NEW infrastructure that would be used to promote growth via faster transit, etc. Fast forward to now and Obama isn't going to build NEW infrastructure but repair existing infrastructure. Since that is already in place and working we can't expect to see any increased productivity because of repairs.
FDR's repeal of the 18th amendment did more to promote economic rebound than anything else. Obama should legalize MaryJ. That will help get the country back in economic shape.

Just think we could charge Taco Bell a windfall profits tax.:lol:

Jerry said:

Well, we don't agree because supporting Obama™ is not supporting the man alone, but the entire administration, party ideals, and all related policies.

Click to expand...

The point goes beyond that - unless the US govt system is completely different from any other democratically elected govt in the world?

My point is that some processes and policies have a "rollover" - some policies may go beyond one political party and there is development rather than re-invention after a Govt is replaced by another.

Perhaps a more precise way for me to have worded my claim would have been "anyone who voted Democrat has no right to complain".

I assumed that since you lived in a democratic country you might understand the unspoken concept "the King is dead" = "long live the king" would have automatically been common knowledge. It appears that I was mistaken.

Jerry said:

This is nothing more than a continuation of previous policies and long term goals, not Change® at all.

Click to expand...

Which is sort of my point. When one administration changes I highly doubt that everything the previous administration did was absolute rubbish or is abandoned - some elements continue beyond the lifetime of left or right, conservative or centrist or liberal etc.

Anyhow, thanks for the discussion.

Jerry said:

If those are our only 2 options on how to spend the money, then since the money will be wasted either way, I'd rather let the American public keep it.

Click to expand...

Well that is just foolish. Not only is our reliance on oil bad for our economy (due to the negative effect on our balance of payments), it is also bad for our environment and national security.

Jerry said:

I don’t understand how ‘the left’ can complain about people not being able to afford healthcare when it’s ‘the left’ who keeps taking money out of their income to waste either on doomed public works or thrown away overseas.

Click to expand...

We could save a lot of money overseas with one simple act: Withdraw from Iraq. Health care is irrelevant to this debate; there is no reason we can't spend money on both health care and our infrastructure. And the people who would be receiving government health care are, for the most part, not the same people who would be paying the bulk of the taxes on infrastructure improvements, so your logic about "taking money out of their income" is flawed.

Once again I've yet to see you present any explanation as to why public works projects are "doomed," or present any alternative to fixing our infrastructure.

Jerry said:

The problem is caused by government spending; therefore more government spending is the solution? That doesn’t follow, and is why I’m a Conservative.

Click to expand...

Well personally I'm practical enough to see that it is in our nation's economic interests to have a functioning infrastructure system that can move people and freight from Point A to Point B quickly and cheaply, and that the private sector simply cannot do that on its own. That's why I support infrastructure improvements, and is why I'm a liberal. (Not to say that rational conservatives can't support that as well.)