Quote :

"In case anyone is wondering, most of the damage done to roads is due to trucks, followed by weather. Passenger vehicles cause virtually no damage to the road."

Indeed, let's use the bigoted "share the road = share the tax"

All rural residents should be paying several times what urban residents are, because there are long stretches of roads with little traffic that the state is still paying to maintain.

5/22/2013 8:40:00 AM

they should just tax tire sales in NC (and any tires shipped to NC from an out-of-state seller)

it should be pretty easy to come up with a formula that takes into account the size of the tire and its tread lifetime

BAM. done.

5/22/2013 8:47:55 AM

But that won't compensate for the higher per capita road maintenance due to weather wear in rural areas.

Now I'm angry about those hillbilly moochers

[Edited on May 22, 2013 at 9:06 AM. Reason : ]

5/22/2013 9:05:56 AM

Quote :

"we already have this. registration costs more for heavy vehicles."

For commercial vehicles, not consumer vehicles. Joe Schmoe's 5000lb SUV doesn't have higher registration costs than my 2700lb sports car.

Quote :

"Hybrid vehicles don't run on electricity while operating on the highway. Most switch over to gas anytime the car is going over 45mph. The benefit of driving a hybrid is realized on city roads where the battery is actually used. "

Sure but they get better gas mileage from an increased emphasis on aerodynamic efficiency, so they use less gas. But, they're still heavier than a conventional car, so put more wear on the road itself. I'm not sure why you don't understand this.

[Edited on May 22, 2013 at 10:23 AM. Reason : k]

5/22/2013 10:21:51 AM

Quote :

"For commercial vehicles, not consumer vehicles. Joe Schmoe's 5000lb SUV doesn't have higher registration costs than my 2700lb sports car. "

http://www.ncdot.gov/dmv/fees/default.html?s=VF

not what it says here

[Edited on May 22, 2013 at 10:57 AM. Reason : SUVs are in a loophole. that's why so many folks tow their boats with Excursions and such]

5/22/2013 10:56:57 AM

Well I just said SUVs, lol

5/22/2013 11:01:10 AM

Quote :

"Sure but they get better gas mileage from an increased emphasis on aerodynamic efficiency, so they use less gas. But, they're still heavier than a conventional car, so put more wear on the road itself. I'm not sure why you don't understand this."

We can play this game many different ways. First of all, hybrids, while HEAVIER than a comparably sized car, are likely to be less heavy or about the same to the average car on the road, unless you want to completely ignore America's love of the truck and SUV. The typical hybrid owner has gone from a bigger car to a smaller car, while some of the road benefits are offset by battery weight, I suspect there is still a benefit.

5/22/2013 11:06:04 AM

Why would weight be more important than tire friction? If it's more aerodynamic then that means there is less forward force from the tire. Surely that factors into road wear (as well as tire wear).

5/22/2013 11:19:11 AM

i feel like y'all are debating effects that tally up to, at most, less than a dollar's worth of road wear every 100,000 miles

5/22/2013 11:31:29 AM

Quote :

"Sure but they get better gas mileage from an increased emphasis on aerodynamic efficiency, so they use less gas."

So we should also tax all aerodynamic cars? There are plenty of non-hybrid cars who get equal or better highway mileage as a hybrid. Guess we better tax them too

The weight argument is ridiculous, as hybrids weigh less than most trucks, vans and SUV's that Americans are so fond of.

The whole argument is bullshit.

5/22/2013 12:34:17 PM

^ clearly, penalties should be higher as efficiency goes up...pedestrians should pay the most, as they're not using any gas whatsoever...i have walked on a road, before, and i'm betting sidewalks are frequently paid for using money for road development

5/22/2013 12:42:10 PM

If you don't want to pay taxes for walking then you should pony up and buy all of the land you plan to walk on.

5/22/2013 2:23:36 PM

but then i have to pay taxes on THAT

gosh.

5/22/2013 2:33:06 PM

^^^^Good Lord man, how can you be so obtuse

Quote :

"We can play this game many different ways. First of all, hybrids, while HEAVIER than a comparably sized car, are likely to be less heavy or about the same to the average car on the road, unless you want to completely ignore America's love of the truck and SUV. The typical hybrid owner has gone from a bigger car to a smaller car, while some of the road benefits are offset by battery weight, I suspect there is still a benefit. "

My apologies for not spelling it out. Yes, a hybrid is lighter than an SUV. But a Civic hybrid weighs more than a regular Civic. And (for you SUV lovers) an Escalade hybrid weighs more than a regular Escalade. I wasn't comparing a hybrid to an SUV. I'm comparing cars of the same size classifications (which is common sense).

[Edited on May 23, 2013 at 4:18 PM. Reason : k]

5/23/2013 4:17:52 PM

I always thought taxing bicyclists was fucking retarded. Why? Because

a) Other motorists seem to forget that most cyclists also do own cars and pay all the required state fees/gasoline taxes/etc. for our vehicles. We just don't feel the need to drive as much and clog up the road.

b) Every time we bike, we save some wear and tear on the road.

c) It's not like the money I save biking just goes up into the stratosphere. It goes back into the local economy
through more disposable income at bars, retailers, etc.

d) The bicycling and pedestrian lobby presses for more livable and enjoyable cities. Why? All those bike lanes and sidewalks calm traffic and make it safer for everyone to get around.

e) Everyone always bitches about how fat the South is. More bike and walking infrastructure makes it easier for people to participate in fitness.

/endrant

5/24/2013 2:24:02 PM

Quote :

"In case anyone is wondering, most of the damage done to roads is due to trucks, followed by weather. Passenger vehicles cause virtually no damage to the road. This is why I support tolling I-95. Let all those interstate trucks who destroy our roads pay for them! "

yep.

We should want more hybrids and EVs. They already come with advantages and disadvantages--we shouldn't unnaturally negate any of their advantage.

Quote :

" "fuels for non-highway use are not taxed like the fuel you pump into your car at a gas station" "didn't know that." "

I assume he was talking about red diesel. There is no off highway gasoline that I've ever seen.

NRR is saying that you can file for money back on state taxes if you used taxed fuel for off highway purposes and can prove it.

Quote :

"But a Civic hybrid weighs more than a regular Civic. And (for you SUV lovers) an Escalade hybrid weighs more than a regular Escalade."

Pat, whatever weight difference is there is negligible in terms of road wear. Hell, normal size cars are approaching negligible in general, let alone some 50-100# weight difference.

At any rate, my Insight weighs about 2700 lbs. That's about 150 lbs more than a Fit, and hardly road-bruising weight.

A Prius is about 150# or less heavier than a Civic. A Civic Hybrid is about 100# heavier. Totally negligible.

Quote :

"We just don't feel the need to drive as much and clog up the road. "

Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa. Whoa.

Whoa.

Bicyclists cannot lay claim to helping out with traffic congestion.

[Edited on May 25, 2013 at 10:03 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on May 25, 2013 at 10:05 AM. Reason : ]

5/25/2013 9:47:47 AM

in some cases it's not large, and in some it is. A Volt weighs around 700lbs more than a Cruze. That wasn't really the point though, which is they're still using the road more or less the same but are paying a reduced share of the gas tax, which maintains the roads.

[Edited on May 28, 2013 at 8:58 AM. Reason : ahuh]

5/28/2013 8:57:51 AM

Quote :

"in some cases it's not large, and in some it is. A Volt weighs around 700lbs more than a Cruze."

700lbs is still comparatively insignificant

5/28/2013 10:10:01 AM

Quote :

"Bicyclists cannot lay claim to helping out with traffic congestion. "

Actually, there has been a considerable amount of research that suggests that they do. The common perception a lot of people have is that they cause more congestion because they are slow. Research doesn't really back that up.

Several studies have quantified an estimate of how much bicycles contribute to congestion relative to passenger cars.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856408000839 suggests that bicycles cause congestion equivalent to 0.28 cars.

AASHTO suggests that bicycles have a lower congestion contribution than cars at lane widths greater than 11 feet:



So, if a bicycle trip is replacing a car trip, it is definitely lowering congestion (although an astute engineer or planner may point out that congestion is rarely truly lowered due to induced demand; over the short run any increased capacity will be filled by people who are making new trips or taking a different route than they would before, which is why highway widening to reduce congestion is rather silly).

5/28/2013 10:26:04 AM

19% of the curb weight is not insignificant

5/28/2013 10:27:09 AM

as noted, passenger cars aren't really the problem

what's a semi with an empty trailer weigh? 40k? so yeah, i don't consider less than 2% to be that significant (and that's against an empty trailer, not one that's upwards of twice that when full)

5/28/2013 10:45:50 AM

I fully agree with you. But cars do pay gas taxes that go towards road maintenance. So why should they pay less?

5/28/2013 11:43:39 AM

Why not fix the taxing system then and just charge larger yearly fees, or by mile, or whatever?

5/28/2013 3:43:26 PM

I was told florida taxes the vehicle based on weight and miles driven every year. Could be the best solution.

5/28/2013 4:35:36 PM

Florida considered a VMT tax a few years ago but nothing came of it. I'm not aware of anywhere that has a VMT tax yet. Some cities have done pilot programs to test the idea out, and the state of Oregon has as well. I'm not sure if any other states have tested it.

5/28/2013 4:41:25 PM

^^^How would you differentiate between miles driven in NC and miles driven outside of NC? If its a state tax (for state roads) then only the miles driven in NC should be taxable.

5/29/2013 8:57:15 AM

Quote :

"I fully agree with you. But cars do pay gas taxes that go towards road maintenance. So why should they pay less?"

you could argue that as they use less fuel, they are less responsible for the amount of wear and tear on roads caused by trucks moving tanks full of gasoline

Quote :

"How would you differentiate between miles driven in NC and miles driven outside of NC? If its a state tax (for state roads) then only the miles driven in NC should be taxable."

six of one, half-dozen of the other...it's "unfair" to someone (whether others are paying less or more than they should)

5/29/2013 9:18:36 AM

Quote :

"How would you differentiate between miles driven in NC and miles driven outside of NC? If its a state tax (for state roads) then only the miles driven in NC should be taxable."

The gasoline tax doesn't do this either, and it's certainly better than an EV flat tax that taxes a hybrid taxi that drives hundreds of miles every day the same amount as a hybrid that sits in a garage and only drives 100 miles in a year.

5/29/2013 11:50:53 AM

Quote :

"The gasoline tax doesn't do this either"

while true in the strictest sense, i think it's fairly reasonable to assume that overwhelming majority of fuel purchased in the state is used by cars in the state

personally, i'd rather they increase fuel taxes and leave the hybrids/EVs alone (btw, i don't own a hybrid or EV)

OR they toll every major highway/interstate to their heart's content...as long as the fuel taxes are reduced significantly

truthfully, though, they'll just increase fees and taxes for hybrids/EVs because only filthy liberal hippies drive them and a conservative congress won't want to pay more to use their luxury cars or gas-guzzlers

5/29/2013 12:51:39 PM

Sounds like we should tax the weather.

5/29/2013 1:07:45 PM

Quote :

"i think it's fairly reasonable to assume that overwhelming majority of fuel purchased in the state is used by cars in the state"

I don't think that's true at all. Many people live in one state and work in another, and many more use state roads to cross from one state to another.

5/29/2013 1:54:20 PM

Quote :

"I don't think that's true at all."

you think MORE of the fuel purchased by NC residents is obtained from out of state?

the only place i think you might have a point is around charlotte, since it's so close to SC, but i think common sense dictates that most NC residents purchase the majority of their fuel in NC

5/29/2013 1:58:25 PM

Quote :

"In case anyone is wondering, most of the damage done to roads is due to trucks, followed by weather. Passenger vehicles cause virtually no damage to the road. This is why I support tolling I-95. Let all those interstate trucks who destroy our roads pay for them!"

Unless you are only going to toll the 18 wheelers your argument can be applied more strongly against installing tolls than for. Passenger vehicles probably outnumber 18 wheelers 10-to-1 on I-95. Why should 10 passenger cars, that you admit do virtually no damage to the road, have to pay a toll to pick up the slack for all the damage done by 18 wheelers?

To add to the debate, the passenger cars are more likely to have to stop in our state to buy overpriced fuel due to the smaller fuel tanks, limited range, and less knowledgeable drivers. The professionals in trucks already know to wait until they're across the state line to fill up

Sounds like you're admitting that people in passenger cars aren't the problem and then saying you're passing the bill on to them anyway. You should be a politician.

Filled up in VA for $3.19 yesterday. Spotted $3.44 on the pumps once I got back in Raleigh. Take the money from the huge gas tax to keep the roads maintained.

[Edited on May 29, 2013 at 2:16 PM. Reason : l]

5/29/2013 2:12:22 PM

Quote :

"you think MORE of the fuel purchased by NC residents is obtained from out of state?"

It's not just NC residents who should pay the tax, it's anyone who uses our roads, and many of them fill up elsewhere.

Quote :

"Unless you are only going to toll the 18 wheelers "

We do that now in weigh stations.

5/29/2013 3:26:23 PM

Quote :

"personally, i'd rather they increase fuel taxes and leave the hybrids/EVs alone (btw, i don't own a hybrid or EV)"

Assuming gasoline taxes pay for road maintenance, why are you in favor of this? Why should they get a free (or almost free) pass?

5/29/2013 4:33:38 PM

Quote :

"We do that now in weigh stations."

Fair enough. No need to add tolls at all then.

5/29/2013 4:38:13 PM

^^For me, it's because there are a number of reasons why we should be incentivizing hybrid and electric card ownership. I don't particularly care if the playing field is level. Plus, it's not like they aren't paying for road costs, since the majority of those costs come from general revenue.

5/29/2013 4:44:10 PM

also, his point started with a bad assumption

5/29/2013 4:45:49 PM

^lol, well doesn't the gas tax pay for roads?

^^they already get incentives, lots of them.

5/30/2013 8:24:59 AM

As has already been discussed, the gas tax and other user fees pays for on average about 32% of road costs nationwide. North Carolina performs better than almost every other state, with user fees covering 46% of road costs. So, the other 54% is out of general revenue that everyone is paying for.

The more incentives the better as far as I'm concerned. And this would be adding a disincentive, which makes no sense and is inconsistent with the transportation policies that we are (and should be) pursuing at the federal level.

5/30/2013 9:31:13 AM

furthermore, it's not just folks who use the roads who benefit from them...you may never drive or ride in a vehicle your entire life, but you quite likely benefit from the infrastructure

penalizing hybrid/EV owners is not the solution to the problem of road construction and maintenace costing money...it's really just a right-wing nut-punch to the dirty liberals who support a decreased dependence on oil (whether foreign or domestic)

5/30/2013 10:10:46 AM

Quote :

"they already get incentives, lots of them"

And this makes you jealous or angry for some reason? I would think you'd be happier that as the demand for gasoline goes down the price will go down and begin to subsidize your own fuel consumption.

5/30/2013 10:30:38 AM

I'm not jealous or upset. I don't think any of my previous comments would lead anyone to assume that?

I don't view this as "punishment" by the "right" on the liberals. Looks more like making it more "fair" to me. Equaling things out, which seems to be something the "left" wants these days anyway.

5/30/2013 2:17:24 PM

Quote :

"I don't view this as "punishment" by the "right" on the liberals. Looks more like making it more "fair" to me. Equaling things out, which seems to be something the "left" wants these days anyway."

how is it equaling things out if you target only a small subset instead of making an across-the-board adjustment to address the whole of the issue?

for example, those who drive SUVs pay more taxes to support road construction/maintenance because they get crappy mileage...so if they were being FAIR, they'd start with the lowest common denominator and adjust ALL of the fees/taxes paid by vehicle owners to equal it out...the better fuel economy you get, the larger the penalty fee are assessed annually to compensate for your decision to invest in a more fuel efficient vehicle

5/30/2013 2:50:58 PM

I do wonder if some people have actually failed to internalize the concept that fossil fuels are finite.

Think about someone in 2100 reading this thread... to find users concerned about the fairness to people driving conventional ICEs. How could you possibly hold you head high while understanding this reality? How?

5/30/2013 2:59:38 PM

need to start tolling the sidewalks, I do not pay taxes so free loaders can just walk around safely on pavement for free

5/31/2013 1:03:53 AM

Make things equal?!?!?

Go fuck yourself in the head

I was trying to add an example but Tketeg just made me stupid with his stupid.

[Edited on May 31, 2013 at 8:29 AM. Reason : Hhhhh]

5/31/2013 8:27:44 AM

Quote :

"I do wonder if some people have actually failed to internalize the concept that fossil fuels are finite."

i feel like a great number are at least aware of it but have chosen to believe it's one of those things that won't happen in their lifetime and as a result, won't affect them

5/31/2013 8:28:33 AM

Quote :

"I do wonder if some people have actually failed to internalize the concept that fossil fuels are finite."

Not gonna happen in our lifetime, or our children's lifetime. As superior technology is developed the world will rely less on fossil fuels. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if we never run out, as demand diminishes for it over time.

Quote :

"Make things equal?!?!? Go fuck yourself in the head I was trying to add an example but Tketeg just made me stupid with his stupid. "

lol, some of you guys are so defensive and easily pissed off. Just put aside your beliefs in the "evils" of the automobile for a few minutes and try to look at this objectively. Now of course there is a big problem in paying for road maintenance. The revenue doesn't match the costs at all. I really don't see how a $50-100 fee for cars that pay a lower amount (via gas taxes) really upsets anyone that much. It's the evil republicans here doing it! But you probably don't call the politicians in Oregon evil for doing something quite similar I bet.

[Edited on May 31, 2013 at 10:28 AM. Reason : k]

5/31/2013 10:24:31 AM

Quote :

"Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if we never run out, as demand diminishes for it over time."

WTF?

Quote :

"I really don't see how a $50-100 fee for cars that pay a lower amount (via gas taxes) really upsets anyone that much."

It's just dumb. It's the opposite of what every other modern country is doing. You want to discourage green energy development.

[Edited on May 31, 2013 at 10:47 AM. Reason : ]

5/31/2013 10:46:59 AM