[Oeva-list] tax issues

Lawrence Winiarski lawrence_winiarski at yahoo.com
Wed Jun 13 14:00:32 PDT 2012



I don't see why everyone else thinks that EV's not paying gas tax is some blatant affront to human rights and oppressive to gas drivers.   
 I have 2 gas cars and a diesel too!   I've paid plenty in fuel tax and I've never complained, because I guess I saw this as "buying gas"
....not as "purchasing my right to drive on the roads".    That was just a way to fund the roads and a clever idea.  

 But this is different.   You are proposing that for me to leave my front door  I must for "fairness", pay my "fair share" of the roads, every time I use them, (which I must
do in order to leave my house).  Never mind that I pay thousands of dollars in income tax every year, I've apparently never paid enough to  actually earn the right to 
walk across the street without paying another tax.   

Doesn't this just seem "wrong" to you at some level?   Shouldn't paying my normal taxes, for government services actually give me the "right" to actually enjoy at least
a minimum of those services without paying yet another fee? 

Think of it from a "logical" point of view.   Suppose you actually claim that it is illegal for me to use the roads without paying a fee.    Suppose I need to go
to the bank, in order to get the money to pay the fee, but I cannot go to the bank, because it would be illegal for me to use the roads without paying for them,
therefore I must break the law first in order to follow it.

You are creating a catch 22 situation with your "philosophy" of "fairness"

I see this as an incredible step backwards as far as freedom is concerned.    You are basically saying that I don't have the "right" to travel on public highways unless I 

continually pay for it?    Exactly then, what do you think the word "public", even means?   Because it's starting to seem like you are thinking a "public" highway, and a"private"
highway are virtually identical!

I'm sure some of you think that I'm being ridiculous, but this sort of stuff actually bothers me, because I disagree with your philosophy of "fairness" from the beginning.   

Consider the actual act of breathing.   The fact that I can breathe clean air is at least in part due to the EPA.   So by your logic of "fairness", I should pay at least something for 
every breath I take.     What then?   All living creatures are fitted with an electronic device to count every breath they take and then demand they travel to the IRS offices
to pay their mandated EPA clean-air-tax?

Once you start down this "fairness" road, you are going to have to face these issues, more and more, with more and more and more technology designed to make things "fair"
This is not paranoia.   The future is coming.   How we decide to face it will affect future generations.     I personally don't want to see future generations saddled with
more and more surveillance technology and ridiculous draconian penalties if this surveillance technology fails or is tampered with.   (because you will never really
be able to tell the difference)   And the odometer reading thing is going to be ridiculous for hybrids, or people who buy gas and electricity and live in places like
portland where they travel back and forth between Oregon and Washington all the time. It seems obvious to me that this is a completely orwellian and oppressive
 future and I can't see why other's can't see this.    The future is going to be here, whether we like it or not.

 The alternative is to stop being petty and accept the fact that life isn't completely "fair", and that trying to develop billions of dollars of technology with GPS tracking systems to
 make things "fair" is ludicrous.    We already have 3 methods in place to pay for the roads: Income Taxes,  Weight/Mile for Trucks and the Gas tax, none of which is ever completely going away, and none of which is extremely oppressive.   Just leave them for god's sake.

(I can see adding one more thing to the mix.   A public-charger tax which gradually fills some of the gaps in the gas tax.   That seems extremely reasonable, and as electric cars
start actually replacing gas cars on long distance drives, they can pay a tax too!   )



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: "patrick0101 at gmail.com" <patrick0101 at gmail.com>
To: Lawrence Winiarski <lawrence_winiarski at yahoo.com> 
Cc: "oeva-list at oeva.org" <oeva-list at oeva.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] tax issues.
 

Lawrence, 

The question is 'what is the best way to fairly tax for roads?'. You can argue that the money is not being spent in our best interest, but that is orthogonal to the question of what is the best way to determine a fair tax. I personally like having roads, police, fire departments, schools, and yes a government. I will gladly pay my fair share of taxes to support these things that make this a great country.

Regards,
Pat
Sunlight will never cost $4/gallon



On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Lawrence Winiarski <lawrence_winiarski at yahoo.com> wrote:

Why do some people feel this incredible urge to mess with something that has been working fine for 100 years?   
>
>and furthermore that the average person doesn't even realize he is paying...AND is only about 10% of the bill.
>
>
>ODOT is literally walking away from millions of dollars in the eddyville fiasco, and a bunch of people on this list are
>
>offering to start an EV tax system because they actually believe the propoganda that ODOT is desperately
>short on money for "potholes" and that the gas tax is obsolete and unfair and is impossible to raise.
>
>
>The reality is they have "shot themselves in the foot" and are now complaining about a "desperate lack of ammunition" and y'all are
>sending them more bullets....instead of demanding to know why they just paid a rich out-of-state construction firm $200 million dollars on
>bridge/highway that is falling down before it is even finished...and are virtually letting them off the hook.
>
>
>You should be running around with torches and pitchforks, but instead you are.....advocating more taxes??  
>
>
>I can't even begin to comprehend the confusion of ideas that provokes such a response
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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: Lee White <Lee at northwestmedia.com>
>To: john.p.christian <john.p.christian at gmail.com>; Alan Batie <alan at batie.org>; oeva-list at oeva.org 
>Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:26 AM
>
>Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] tax issues.
> 
>
>This is a great conversation; my suggestion rides on John's idea.
>Perhaps the suggestion of introduction and integration of a tax should
>be based on the percent or number of EV's registered in the state. The
>tax could be progressive and stepped up/revised as more vehicles hit the
>road. 
>
>As for how the tax is done, there is not clear answer, but for now
>perhaps EV members could track their EV mileage monthly and provide an
>annual report on usage. This average usage number along with the current
>gas tax amount could be used to figure out how much the state is missing
>in taxes.
>
>Lee
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org [mailto:oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org] On
>Behalf Of john.p.christian
>Sent: Tuesday,
 June 12, 2012 11:00 AM
>To: 'Alan Batie'; oeva-list at oeva.org
>Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] tax issues.
>
>OEVA members and friends,
>
>My 2 cents:
>
>I think all of us understand that going forward we need to pay our fair
>share to maintain the infrastructure. The primary issues are these:
>
>- In order to send a clear message that Oregon is encouraging the
>reduction
>in fossil fuel use - this tax plan needs to be delayed until a specific
>year
>or a specific percentage of non-polluting vehicles are in use.
>
>- We need to make it clear that the State of Oregon is not going to take
>advantage of us just because our numbers are small and no one will
>notice if
>we are unfairly treated, overly taxed, or we are forced to sacrifice our
>basic freedoms. 
>
>Best regards,
>
>John P. Christian
>
>
>
>Oregon Electric Vehicles
 Association -  Chairperson
>
>www.oeva.org 
>
>(503) 704-2155
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org [mailto:oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org] On
>Behalf Of Alan Batie
>Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:35 AM
>To: oeva-list at oeva.org
>Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] tax issues.
>
>This link posted on OEVA's facebook page makes a lot of good points:
>
>http://www.blueoregon.com/2012/06/gps-tax-terrible-horrible-no-good-very
>-bad
>-idea-just-wont-die/
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Oeva-list mailing list
>Oeva-list at oeva.org
>http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/oeva-list
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Oeva-list mailing list
>Oeva-list at oeva.org
>http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/oeva-list
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Oeva-list mailing list
>Oeva-list at oeva.org
>http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/oeva-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20120613/5811061f/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Oeva-list mailing list