[Oeva-list] paying for roads
lawrence_winiarski at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 12 00:55:19 PDT 2012
>the effects are already being felt and a weight/mile system is the best way to fund the roads. It's a>good thing that they're working on this now before our roads get even worse
First, we already have a weight mile system. It works great! It is for large trucks, because only large trucks cause enough force on the
to cause damage to a modern highway. Cars are far too light. Highway people have known this for thousands of years dating back to the Roman Roads.
My car weighs 2000 lbs. A dumptruck with 12 yards of rock weighs about 50,000 pounds. Normal dry soil can support about 1000 lbs/sqft .
You will realize this if you ever have a loaded dumptruck come on your property. It will literally sink into packed earth. My
car can literally pass on this same road without a trace. The weight mile system for trucks was was implemented by reasonable, scientific
people who understood the true nature of road damage. Trying to use a weight/mile system for lightweight cars is absolutely idiotic because it
Here is a website for pavement engineers. (notice the picture at the bottom of the pavement damage by bus)
Basically they make the point that virtually all wear is actually trucks and buses
and cars contribute very little....This might make a little sense when you think about it. Most things "break" when a "yield PSI" is exceeded. If you are below the yield strength it bounces back. If you exceed it, then you leave a permanent mark. Their data suggests wear is weight^4
So my 2000 lb geo compared To an 40,000 truck = 20^4 or 1/160,000 as much
This is science. Worrying about road damage caused by EV's is not science. It's politics and a revenue model.
If you read the documents on the road-user-task-force, you will see that they are arguing FOR using for-profit, private companies as "tax-collectors". This creates
a moral hazard. Suppose one of these "for-profit" tax collectors decides I owe more money than I do. (and of course the tax collector gets a percentage).
Exactly what am I supposed to do? Complain? To who? I had AT&T take out about $1000 out of my checking account for a disputed cell phone bill.
(They also refused to give it back unless I agreed to 2 years more of contract. I argued for at least 12 hours on the phone, I ultimately refused on principle
and lost the $1000 and switched providers I hate AT&T to this day.
But at least I could switch to another private company. But if some private road tax collector says I owe $1000 in road taxes, what the hell am I gonna switch
too? Another country? Do you think that everything is magically gonna "turn out all right"? Maybe sometimes, but sometimes, the company is going to try
and extort as much money as possible out of you, especially if they can ransom your ability to drive and they risk almost nothing. I've had some pretty bad things happen
to me in my life and perhaps that puts me in a unique position to warn people of the dangers of letting idiots implement poorly thought out ideas without appropriate checks and balances. Their is no way I'd ever accept a private -for-profit-tax-collector scheme. Anyone with a brain can see the moral hazard here.
Yet somehow the idiots in the Road User task force can't see anything wrong with it. Explain that?
And speaking of more moral hazard, do you see the list of "partners" on his website? These are the people who want to get in on the decision making process so they can make
schemes that are designed by private for-profit companies FOR private-for-profit-companies so they can make money at the public trough. Here's his list
3. Banc Pass
6. CS America
7. Drive Sync
16. Octo Telematics
You are being hopelessly naive if you think Verizon, or "Tollplus" or "tollink" is interested in this because they want to "build better roads"
Verizon is a damn phone company, not a road company. They want to collect taxes and sell tracking equipment.
And shouldn't the names "TOLLplus" and "TOLLlink" give you an idea of what they do?
The gas tax works great. It's not broken. Don't keep believing their lies. It's simple and you can easily adjust it to get whatever damn amount of money you want. If they claim they don't have enough money and there is a crisis, then just raise the damn rate. It's not the fault of a very few EV users that they don't have money right now.
We are being scapegoated.
Now for my final argument, which ought to be the nail-in-the-coffin to this ridiculous scheme.
You are claiming we need the money before our roads get "even worse". Now consider how ODOT is "really" spending it's money.
Have you read about the "road-to-nowhere" in eddyville? That's just down the road from you.
Basically they hired a private contractor to build a highway, but the bridges started falling over before it was even finished. Now the builder
has run out of town and given up DOT is giving up trying to get him to finish ..millions and millions of dollars lost and DOT is left with a falling down highway that
hasn't even been used. This has cost 188.5 MILLION dollars so far (48 million over budget) and still isn't finished. It's basically sat
unfinished for the last 2 years while litigation has been going on. The projected finish costs are $217 MILLION and since it's behind a mountain most
people don't even pay attention. (another source says $300 million before it's finished)
And yet, with this huge ODOT fiasco, going virtually unnoticed by the public, we keep hearing the story about them not having enough money to fix roads and bridges.
when the truth is that they can't even build brand new ones.
Now, I'm honestly not sure who is to blame for the technical problems. I'd personally blame the construction guys instead of ODOT. But from a management
standpoint, this ultimately ODOT's fault as they gave taxpayer money for bad bridges and are virtually letting them off the hook.
And yet you expect me to believe that their biggest problem is gonna be the pittance in tax from EV's? Good god man, you'd think they have enough to worry about
in just this one damn project. This project costs more money than all the electric cars tax for the next 1000 YEARS. Yep ONE THOUSAND YEARS
(at current projected EV tax rates) of $200,000 revenue/annum for 2011. And you expect me to believe that the answer is to throw more money at them?
I'd even wager the following: That they have spent more on lawyers fees for this one screwed up project, than they will ever get from
EV's for the next 10 years. Doesn't this suggest that ODOT could be saving more money if they just concentrated on building roads
that they've already started?
....Seriously it's over 1000 years of EV revenue in this project alone....check my math.
$217,000,000/$200,000 = 1085 YEARS.
The EV tax is going to fix itself someday. ODOT will gradually raise gas taxes, and get more money from the general fund when it's necessary. Maybe
they are going to have to cut some fat. There will undoubtedly be surtaxes at public charging stations.. This seems like a no-brainer. I can see most
employers will have charging stations too. I personally don't think the odometer reading thing is a good idea, because these things break all the time
I know of at least 4 cars off the top of my head that have broken odometers. The fact is that odometer along with other things, break all
the time, and IMHO it's unfair to punish people or reward them when things break. Then of course you have all the people in the Portland
Vancouver area who go back and forth between the states every day. It would be very unfair to expect them to keep track of every single
mile they spend in each state. It's best to just try and keep things simple. We already have an enforcement system for personal income taxes.
I personally think we will keep the weight/mile for trucks and the gas tax for cars and a public charging tax. We could even have a small
electric tax surcharge on the public utilities. I'd rather have my personal income taxes going to roads instead of some of the other things it pays for anyway
I believe about 1/3 of the ODOT fund comes from that anyway and 1/3 comes from the weight mile tax. So the gas tax only pays for 1/3 of
ODOT's budget, So even if everyone drove an EV tomorrow, ODOT's budget would only be cut by 1/3. That's a big loss, but its not like
they'd lose 100% of their money.
I don't see a big problem with this and I think the "toll" model is repressive and annoying.
It's damn nice to be able to drive around in Oregon without those damn Toll Roads and associated corruption you find back east.
Finally, there is a joy to life to feeling some sense of freedom. I'd rather have a few potholes, and some weeds, than yet another "user" tax.
If we don't halt population growth with justice and compassion, it will be done for us by nature, brutally and without pity - and will leave a ravaged world.
Nobel Laureate Dr. Henry W. Kendall 023934
From: Alan Batie <alan at batie.org>
To: oeva-list at oeva.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] paying for roads
On 6/11/12 7:08 PM, Lawrence Winiarski wrote:
> I wish I was just being paranoid...you can read their actual plans here.
That plan has three options to choose from, only one of which is the
tracker. People complained about the government tracking, now you're
complaining about corporate tracking. The fact is that the current
system *is* on the way towards failure - the effects are already being
felt and a weight/mile system is the best way to fund the roads. It's a
good thing that they're working on this now before our roads get even
worse - instead of paranoid ranting, we need to be encouraging it, while
making sure that the potential problems are avoided.
Key requirements I see are:
* option for monthly estimated payments, synced to reality when you
renew your registration
* gps option only charges miles in-state
* non-gps option allows for deducting miles out of state with light
proof requirements and heavy penalties for perjury
* money goes entirely to road maintenance fund
Oeva-list mailing list
Oeva-list at oeva.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Oeva-list