Delicious LiveJournal Links for 11-16-2009

[andrewducker]

• Beyond Twitter - Woofer and Squeaker
  I'd read Woofer.
  (tags: twitter funny)
• Danish pupils use web in exams
  And about time too.
  (tags: education internet denmark computers learning)
• All of Britain's political parties are apparently behind high-speed rail in the UK.
  (tags: politics transport uk)
• Dutch approve per-kilometer tax for drivers
  Beginning in 2012 the law will abolish current road taxes and sales taxes for automobiles, cutting the cost of a new car by 25 percent, in favor of the pro-rated distance tax. Drivers will be charged 0.03 euros per kilometer (7 cents US per mile) in an attempt to reduce traffic jams fatal accidents and carbon emissions.
  (tags: law driving netherlands tax)
• The identity of Belle Du Jour is revealed
  (tags: prostitution blogging uk)

Comments

[matgb]

If implemented in the US, it'd almost certainly be a state tax, not a federal tax, so it'd be set at levels that wouldn't hurt rural drivers too much.

If it can be done effectively without intrusive monitoring, I'm theoretically in favour; in the UK, we have a massive cost PA just to own a car, including road taxes and insurance--if we could switch that towards usage, then light use becomes more cost effective, as it is I'm paying about £80 per month just to own the thing, so might as well use it constantly, which is the wrong incentive.

[call-waiting.livejournal.com]

I must admit I don't understand the reasons for taxation based on distance travelled. We already have a taxation mechanism which accurately encapsulates the pollution caused by a vehicle, and which rewards drivers for selecting a more fuel-efficient vehicle. It even tends to increase per-mile at peak hours, and approximates the wear and tear caused to the roads. That tax is simply fuel duty.

To the naive observer, it seems they should simply scrap vehicle tax and whack up fuel duty. While taxation per-mile achieves one of the goals, of getting people to cut out unnecessary journey, once a driver has decided that he *has* to nip down to the shops, what's to persuade him to take the Smart Car instead of the Hummer?

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

The idea behind is to try and build in an incentive to reduce congestion. Fuel costs are flat no matter wheere you live, but by charging people different amounts depending on where they drive, you can avoid penalising people who live in rural areas where there is probably no public transport and no congestion.

[call-waiting.livejournal.com]

Charging different rates based on location would seem to make sense -- reduce peak congestion and localised atmospheric pollution -- but the article only mentions a flat rate of €0.03 per km.

Driving a kilometre in the city is already generally more expensive than driving a kilometre in rural areas, due to traffic, traffic controls etc. I'm sure this effect isn't enough to normalise the system such that removal of vehicle duty will sufficiently compensate those in rural areas for the extra fuel costs, though!

Additionally, a non-constant tax rate would have to be carefully crafted in order to avoid encouraging people to travel further to save money: say, driving all the way round the city rather than straight through. If you happened to be driving a Prius or an Insight that wouldn't burn too much more fuel in city traffic, then the long way round could cause more pollution but still work out cheaper.