Around here, they actually dribble tar over the small holes...

Well, it's your thread so all's good.

"user pays" is the only legitimate economic model for road taxes and registration, etc.

If it's managed specifically by a factor of Engine capacity-mileage, or more SIMPLY by a straight tax on petrol use/consumption then there will be an 'interesting' tradeoff.....

People may see then that owning more than one car is more economical [than it was/is now - because you can only drive one car at any one time and thus the other isn't consuming fuel-ie. costing] and the Dodo of a US car manufacturing Industry might see an upturn.

No matter how you argue it...it's absolutely undeniable that the bigger the vehicle the more it SHOULD be paying for impacting on the civilization through which it blunders.

From resource use / waste in manufacture...all the way to how much hydrocarbon it contributes to global warming.

I like the fuel tax.  It's petroleum-based.   And guess who gets to breathe your car fumes.  Taxing it just like we tax tobacco and using it to maintain roads seems to me just fine.   There is no need to power-grab yet more with GPS BS when there are plenty of better ways to fair-tax.   How about the flat income tax?   That can be done and it has NOTHING to do with cars; and then the IRS wouldn't have to know your every financial transaction, either.  It's good that the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the requirement of a warrant.  Setting that precedent for the nation of 300,000,000 people easily far, far supercedes the importance of convicting one criminal of drug dealing when it's in question whether drugs shouldn't be legalized anyway.

Actually, I have favored heavily taxing gas for a long time--*IF* the government could show some propriety with the funds.  Ain't gonna happen, of course.  Gas prices rising give incentive for mankind to get with it on alternative energies.  And since we are so addicted to our cars, gas has to rise a LOT for it to happen--not a little.   Now:  note that I am by no means happy with petroleum companies limiting supply to raise the price of gas and they pocket the profits.  If the American people eat the cost of rising gas, then the American people need to reap the rewards. 

Oh....AUS source...so the red line denotes the Oz price - that's a June 2011 comparison.

Shocking.

Ya know, the word democracy is banded around like it is a given, but as time passes and government/law enforcement take more and more matters into their own hands, democracy, in its true sense, is dwindling away and soon it will be non-existent for we ordinary folk.

Nope, I will never, ever own a gun or allow one into my home.  Besides, there's already enough lunatics with guns, without adding any more to contribute to the chaos of dissatisfaction and frustration with the system.

myfist0...while you're comparing the tax paid by Australians vs the tax NOT paid by Americans....and factor in the reality BOTH countries are big and the mileage undertaken is equivalent....in Melbourne our primary freeway system 'Citylink' uses electronic tags to debit your Visa [or other ways]....not a GPS system but an electronic toll-gate system.

It's time the US woke up and smelled the roses...

Most US States have the exact same sort of system for frequent users of toll roads.

Statistically speaking, the bulk of Australia is an uninhabited wasteland; it's 3/4 the size of the US with less than 1/10 the population. You might be able to compare major metropolitan areas, but that's about it.

Most of the US population lives in suburbs and semi-rural outlying areas. Mass transit simply doesn't work in such areas where everyone lives more than a few miles from their jobs and they all need to go to different places.

Most roads in the US are maintained by local government, funded by property taxes. Fuel taxes only pay for state and federal roads. This is no small part of why our fuel taxes are lower than in smaller nations where subsidized mass transit is more feasible and/or the entire road system is maintained by the national government.

Yes, Kryo...but in the case of Australia a third of the fuel price is taxes.

WHEN the US pays the equivalent price for petrol it's true 'cost' to the environment will more clearly hit their pockets.

Once upon a time 'gas-guzzling US cars were a global joke for their wallowing like drunken cows and a performance to match.  By the advent of the stupidity of the 'urban truck' one or two started to wake up but lost the plot and bought Priuses instead....an even greater burden on resources negating any claimed fuel saving.

......

As for 'poor drivers' affected while the rich are not.....well....what makes petrol so magical that it's exempt from the realities of commerce?

....other than its finite nature? ...

Ah, yes...but we now have a 'carbon tax', being one of the few countries that appreciates the realities of global warming [nay-sayers not withstanding].

And 8% higher per capita is one thing...but what is it per any other 'equalizer'...ie...per country...per acre...in toto?

300 million x 100% is gonna be bigger than 23 million x 108%, ain't it?

It's inequitable that the world's largest consumer of fossil fuel also pays just about the least for it.

There's no....'oh but we are big' that excuses it....other than 'we are big and make the rules....the rest of you can go heave'...

Yes, there's mitigating argument re decentralised living... and imbued acceptance of a lifetime of vehicular commute....

...but that is all symptomatic of the fundamental unsustainability of the US form of existence...and, if one were to poke more closely - possibly behind much of the US monetary woes.

Sadly the whole world is on the same lifeboat.... and many don't paddle as well as they should be...

Never mind, myfist0 ....you'll shortly wake up with a jolt and realise it was all just a bad dream ...

AustraliA  has massive resources of brown coal....and thus sadly little incentive [without FORCE] to switch to better alternatives...and they are ALL better, including Nuclear.

Australia also has about 2 thirds of the world's Uranium....and the most stable geology to support waste disposal.

Were we 'clever' we'd be nuclear NOW and selling disposal to others.

Instead we have Gina Rinehart raping WA's resources and flogging them to the Chinese..... she now has a PERSONAL worth of 20 BILLION ...and pays fuck-all taxes.

But starkers' most hated pollie is actually fixing that....as I said...we're on the 'right track' with taxing carbon to incentivate change.

The US would need to add about $2 per gallon in taxes to catch up to what most other countries pay 'for petrol' at a pump.  That price would create a LOT of incentive to do things differently/better....

...but I'm certain that the Nascar belt would just grab their M16s and shoot the crap out of anyone who tried...

Australia...with its mile or two of asolute nothingness has already understood the issues of urban sprawl....and the very real unsustainability of having the LARGEST average house size on the planet...yes, about 200sq ft. more so than the US...and a full DOUBLE the size of England.

It doesn't work....and the more population you get...the more dire the need to change.

Cost of infrastructure is inversely proportional to population density.