UNintended consequences, redux
A while back, I wrote about the law of unintended consequences. Today, the news brings us yet another example: hybrids may make highways unusable. Here's the thinking on it:
But don't fear! Our ever-loving government has a plan to fix this problem: They'll start taxing mileage instead. How? By putting a GPS unit in your car that will talk to the gas pump and add the tax on every time you fill up. And they promise that no detailed information will be kept [1] - but the unit may track when you drive so that rush-hour miles can be taxed at a higher rate than non-peak ones [2]. The system has already been tested in the state of Oregon, which is bragging that they are in the forefront of solving the problem.
- Highway improvements and repairs are paid for by gasoline taxes
- Hybrids use less gas to travel the same distance as less efficient cars
- Thus, as more hybrids take to the highways, there will be less tax revenue which means less money to pay for repairs to the highways
They are right that this is a potential problem. But I like the solution even less than the problem. Instead of GPS units, why not give every driver a RFID tag that links directly into an automatic deduction program [3]? Or have the toll tag linked to the central system that then tells the gas pump how much tax to add? And, even if the privacy concerns are fixed, do we really want to punish people by giving them a higher tax rate for having a more fuel-efficient car (which is what this will do)? I'm not against a useage-based tax per se [4], but this is a stupid way to go about it.
Think about it. In order to get the same gas taxes paid by a fleet of 50 Priuses (40 mpg) and 50 Hummvees (10 mpg) traveling 12,000 miles per year each, they would have to charge a penny per mile. Under the gas tax, a Humvee would pay
Sounds like a typical government solution to me!
John
[1] Any bets on that lasting more than six months? Once they "discover" that they can use the GPS to solve crimes [a], they'll say that only criminals would have anything to hide and make it mandatory for everyone. Soon it will give out automatic tickets for speeding, driving on the wrong day, and wearing funny colored socks.
[2] They claim that they will get rid of the gasoline tax [b], which means that your gas prices will decrease slightly. (But not by as much as the tax, as the oil companies will keep about half the difference.)
[3] We already have this technology installed and working on toll roads, so it wouldn't expand things too much.
[4] Though, like the flat tax, this ends up being a regressive tax.
[a] "Think of the children! Won't somebody think of the children?" [i]
[b] Does anyone believe them on this? Politicians seem consitutionally unable to get rid of taxes [ii], corruption, and useless bureaucracy.
[i] Geek points for the reference!
[ii] Even when they decrease some taxes, they raise others. It is a giant game of "Whack-a-mole" - and we're the moles!
Comments
Funny how Democrats are quick to point out that Republican ideas that are "designed" to track terrorism (e.g., PATRIOT Act, wiretapping, FISA, etc.) infringes on our civil liberties and now this from a Democrat.
Where's George Orwell when you need him?!
(But don't worry -- once the Reps find out how they can find terrorists via GPS, everybody will be on board.)
And the point about taxes. Once government gets a taste of the good life, they can never give it up when the well starts running dry.
Kind of like state and federal government suing the tobacco companies yet stopping short of completely shutting them down. The taxes were just too good...
John
My preferred solution would be to increase the gas tax every year to reflect the increase in average gas mileage. That encourages people to buy more efficient cars while still getting the taxes to pay for the roads.
John
When I lived in Europe, I'd never dream of owning a car. Ah, good public transport is so nice: have a nap, read a book...