Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Not sure it would replace the gas tax, but it would probably be an additional tax. The GPS is a little fishy. Will it stop at miles driven, or become a new way to fine speeders, track the movement of people, and become part of a Patriot Act in the distant or maybe not too distant future.

Strib Link

How about paying for roads and bridges by the miles you drive rather than the gasoline you burn?

Falling gas tax revenue from more fuel-efficient vehicles has driven the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to look for volunteers to experiment with technology that could lead to new ways of paying for highways.

About 500 urban and rural motorists will begin testing gear in July that contains GPS links to track distances traveled.

The experiment underscores Minnesota's need for new sources of revenue to pay for highway construction and maintenance.

The state is facing a shortfall of as much as $50 billion for highway work in the next 20 years. It relies nearly entirely on revenue from the gas tax, vehicle registration fees and motor vehicle sales taxes.

Those sources have flattened during economic hard times. Minnesota's gas tax is expected to rise from $823 million in 2010 to $878 million by 2015, but there is concern that increases won't keep pace with construction needs.

"The gas tax is really becoming less viable as a source of revenue to fund the transportation system," said Lee Munnich, who has researched miles taxes for the Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Minnesota. "Very shortly we're going to start running out of money."

A miles tax could capture revenue lost from more fuel-efficient vehicles while continuing the principle of using motorist fees to pay for most highway work. It's too soon to say whether a miles fee would eventually replace a gas tax, or merely complement it.

I will move from the state if this becomes a reality. It will become all those sinister things and more Gil. Thats the nature of intrusive and toleration governments and the focus of left wing politics: central control.

JBB wrote:I will move from the state if this becomes a reality. It will become all those sinister things and more Gil. Thats the nature of intrusive and toleration governments and the focus of left wing politics: central control.

The "Real" hippies of the 60's that I loved, were anti-big brother, not the left wing hippy want-a-be's are embracing big brother. Just might be what today's gneration wants, as Bush admin was, and Obama admin is of the same big brother ilk.

Gil Dobie wrote:Not sure it would replace the gas tax, but it would probably be an additional tax. The GPS is a little fishy. Will it stop at miles driven, or become a new way to fine speeders, track the movement of people, and become part of a Patriot Act in the distant or maybe not too distant future.

Strib Link

How about paying for roads and bridges by the miles you drive rather than the gasoline you burn?

Falling gas tax revenue from more fuel-efficient vehicles has driven the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to look for volunteers to experiment with technology that could lead to new ways of paying for highways.

About 500 urban and rural motorists will begin testing gear in July that contains GPS links to track distances traveled.

The experiment underscores Minnesota's need for new sources of revenue to pay for highway construction and maintenance.

The state is facing a shortfall of as much as $50 billion for highway work in the next 20 years. It relies nearly entirely on revenue from the gas tax, vehicle registration fees and motor vehicle sales taxes.

Those sources have flattened during economic hard times. Minnesota's gas tax is expected to rise from $823 million in 2010 to $878 million by 2015, but there is concern that increases won't keep pace with construction needs.

"The gas tax is really becoming less viable as a source of revenue to fund the transportation system," said Lee Munnich, who has researched miles taxes for the Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Minnesota. "Very shortly we're going to start running out of money."

A miles tax could capture revenue lost from more fuel-efficient vehicles while continuing the principle of using motorist fees to pay for most highway work. It's too soon to say whether a miles fee would eventually replace a gas tax, or merely complement it.

So, the government offers tax cuts to buy more fuel-efficient cars, but then is upset when gas tax revenue drops down as more people drive more fuel-efficient cars. This is astounding...however, it does seem fairer, except if they keep the gas tax.

Ahhh yes...the new "progressivism".

BTW and hot off the press, if you have an Iphone it is tracking you wherever you go.

Latest experiment by Progressive Insurance is where you sign up for their new target market program and they provide you with a device that tracks how and where you drive. The result is a completely customized and tailored insurance policy for you and that vehicle. Spose that can be good or bad.

Anyway there JBB, do you have an Iphone?

so only "urban" read darky, and "rural" read white trash are taking part? i wonder why?

Lost in this whole debate is the REAL issue: That Minnesota ALONE needs that much fucking money to spend on infrastructure.

The state is facing a shortfall of as much as $50 billion for highway work in the next 20 years. It relies nearly entirely on revenue from the gas tax, vehicle registration fees and motor vehicle sales taxes.

Those sources have flattened during economic hard times. Minnesota's gas tax is expected to rise from $823 million in 2010 to $878 million by 2015, but there is concern that increases won't keep pace with construction needs.

Lets do the math here:

$878 million x 20 years = $17,560,000,000. That's $17 BILLION. And they're facing a $50 BILLION shortfall??? So they're anticipating needing $67 BILLION over the next 20 years JUST for highway work?

I'm sorry, but Minnesota's 135,000 miles of roads can't possibly need an average of over $500,000 in work PER MILE....if so, this screams of government waste in the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

AZGrizFan wrote:Lost in this whole debate is the REAL issue: That Minnesota ALONE needs that much fucking money to spend on infrastructure.

The state is facing a shortfall of as much as $50 billion for highway work in the next 20 years. It relies nearly entirely on revenue from the gas tax, vehicle registration fees and motor vehicle sales taxes.

Those sources have flattened during economic hard times. Minnesota's gas tax is expected to rise from $823 million in 2010 to $878 million by 2015, but there is concern that increases won't keep pace with construction needs.

Lets do the math here:

$878 million x 20 years = $17,560,000,000. That's $17 BILLION. And they're facing a $50 BILLION shortfall??? So they're anticipating needing $67 BILLION over the next 20 years JUST for highway work?

I'm sorry, but Minnesota's 135,000 miles of roads can't possibly need an average of over $500,000 in work PER MILE....if so, this screams of government waste in the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

Quit making sense...

Wedgebuster wrote:BTW and hot off the press, if you have an Iphone it is tracking you wherever you go.

Latest experiment by Progressive Insurance is where you sign up for their new target market program and theyo provide you with a device that tracks how and where you drive. The result is a completely customized and tailored insurance policy for you and that vehicle. Spose that can be good or bad.

Anyway there JBB, do you have an Iphone?

JBB's brain is the size of an acorn. He's still trying to figure out how to work his VHS player.

Wedgebuster wrote:BTW and hot off the press, if you have an Iphone it is tracking you wherever you go.

Latest experiment by Progressive Insurance is where you sign up for their new target market program and they provide you with a device that tracks how and where you drive. The result is a completely customized and tailored insurance policy for you and that vehicle. Spose that can be good or bad.

Anyway there JBB, do you have an Iphone?

How does the Progressive Insurance tracker know when you are just a passenger and not a driver?

AZGrizFan wrote:Lets do the math here:

$878 million x 20 years = $17,560,000,000. That's $17 BILLION. And they're facing a $50 BILLION shortfall??? So they're anticipating needing $67 BILLION over the next 20 years JUST for highway work?

I'm sorry, but Minnesota's 135,000 miles of roads can't possibly need an average of over $500,000 in work PER MILE....if so, this screams of government waste in the Minnesota Department of Transportation.

If Minnesota did spend it's gas tax on roads, they would be okay, but they spend it on anything but. Just had a motor mount replaced in my vehicle. Second one in 3 years. Potholes are really really bad here after the spring thaw. Waiting for the potholes to get fixed before I get new tie rods.

Hey, we are getting a new train system, resurected from the 1950's street car era that Carl Pohlad of Twins fame transformed into a bus system.

SDHornet wrote:

Wedgebuster wrote:BTW and hot off the press, if you have an Iphone it is tracking you wherever you go.

Latest experiment by Progressive Insurance is where you sign up for their new target market program and they provide you with a device that tracks how and where you drive. The result is a completely customized and tailored insurance policy for you and that vehicle. Spose that can be good or bad.

Anyway there JBB, do you have an Iphone?

How does the Progressive Insurance tracker know when you are just a passenger and not a driver?

I think the gist of it all is that first you have to volunteer for the program, thus you may be required to switch on/off a toggle on your iphone to indicate whether or not you are driving. The idea being that if you think you are a good driver (i.e. don't speed) and perhaps don't travel very much in any given day then Progressive will lower your rate. But as OB said, there's a bad side to it as well...

Next Big Brother will have innocuous computer chips implanted under our skin when we go in for Obama care that will allow us to be tracked and complete financial transactions, so that they can stop printing money. Then they will be able not only to track us, but all spending to cut out tax evasion and the need for the IRS as we go from an income tax to a national sales tax. Eventually, a portion of the serial numbers will bleed through our skin leaving the indeliable impression of 666....

this plan is likely DOA - MNDoT was tasked by the legislature with figuring out POTENTIAL alternatives. most liberal types won't stand for this kind of invasive shit any more than libertarian conks... the problem here politically is the middle in this case... but I think there is very little public appetite for this - the only thing less popular in this state would be toll roads.

the problem in MN is that roads ARE more expensive per mile when they explode every single spring in the freeze/thaw cycle. we also spend an ASSLOAD on plowing/salting/sanding/treating our highways (all of which has broad support, ask any minnesotan who has traveled in other states and you'll get a torrent of complaints about how poorly they handle winter road cleanup).

more than that, we have system that requires new and expanded roads to keep up with traffic increases (one of the silver linings of the recession was the stopping of the growth in the exurbs, which was killing the infrastructure) so we have gridlock in the system (which, having been in LA, the east coast and Chicago... we really don't - but that's the perception) - we also have a TON of roads in outstate minnesota. many of which should be county highways at best... but, for political reasons are covered by the state (both parties are guilty of that in rural mn - fixing the highways is best way to ensure re-election)

the department itself is surprisingly well run all things considered. they stretch an unreliable budget pretty well, and they work hard on long term planning despite receiving any clear guidance on their funding.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:this plan is likely DOA - MNDoT was tasked by the legislature with figuring out POTENTIAL alternatives. most liberal types won't stand for this kind of invasive shit any more than libertarian conks... the problem here politically is the middle in this case... but I think there is very little public appetite for this - the only thing less popular in this state would be toll roads.

the problem in MN is that roads ARE more expensive per mile when they explode every single spring in the freeze/thaw cycle. we also spend an ASSLOAD on plowing/salting/sanding/treating our highways (all of which has broad support, ask any minnesotan who has traveled in other states and you'll get a torrent of complaints about how poorly they handle winter road cleanup).

more than that, we have system that requires new and expanded roads to keep up with traffic increases (one of the silver linings of the recession was the stopping of the growth in the exurbs, which was killing the infrastructure) so we have gridlock in the system (which, having been in LA, the east coast and Chicago... we really don't - but that's the perception) - we also have a TON of roads in outstate minnesota. many of which should be county highways at best... but, for political reasons are covered by the state (both parties are guilty of that in rural mn - fixing the highways is best way to ensure re-election)

the department itself is surprisingly well run all things considered. they stretch an unreliable budget pretty well, and they work hard on long term planning despite receiving any clear guidance on their funding.

This is all nonsense TTBF. Everyone knows government employees at all levels are just incompetent sobs...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:this plan is likely DOA - MNDoT was tasked by the legislature with figuring out POTENTIAL alternatives. most liberal types won't stand for this kind of invasive shit any more than libertarian conks... the problem here politically is the middle in this case... but I think there is very little public appetite for this - the only thing less popular in this state would be toll roads.

the problem in MN is that roads ARE more expensive per mile when they explode every single spring in the freeze/thaw cycle. we also spend an ASSLOAD on plowing/salting/sanding/treating our highways (all of which has broad support, ask any minnesotan who has traveled in other states and you'll get a torrent of complaints about how poorly they handle winter road cleanup).

more than that, we have system that requires new and expanded roads to keep up with traffic increases (one of the silver linings of the recession was the stopping of the growth in the exurbs, which was killing the infrastructure) so we have gridlock in the system (which, having been in LA, the east coast and Chicago... we really don't - but that's the perception) - we also have a TON of roads in outstate minnesota. many of which should be county highways at best... but, for political reasons are covered by the state (both parties are guilty of that in rural mn - fixing the highways is best way to ensure re-election)

the department itself is surprisingly well run all things considered. they stretch an unreliable budget pretty well, and they work hard on long term planning despite receiving any clear guidance on their funding.

Is MN the only state where it snows and freezes/thaws?

Grizalltheway wrote: This is all nonsense TTBF. Everyone knows government employees at all levels are just incompetent sobs...

Go fuck yourself in the ass. Hard.

93henfan wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote: This is all nonsense TTBF. Everyone knows government employees at all levels are just incompetent sobs...

Go fuck yourself in the ass. Hard.

Note to 93 - he was being sarcastic....

dbackjon wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Go fuck yourself in the ass. Hard.

Note to 93 - he was being sarcastic....

Go fuck a woman. Hard.

AZGrizFan wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:this plan is likely DOA - MNDoT was tasked by the legislature with figuring out POTENTIAL alternatives. most liberal types won't stand for this kind of invasive shit any more than libertarian conks... the problem here politically is the middle in this case... but I think there is very little public appetite for this - the only thing less popular in this state would be toll roads.

the problem in MN is that roads ARE more expensive per mile when they explode every single spring in the freeze/thaw cycle. we also spend an ASSLOAD on plowing/salting/sanding/treating our highways (all of which has broad support, ask any minnesotan who has traveled in other states and you'll get a torrent of complaints about how poorly they handle winter road cleanup).

more than that, we have system that requires new and expanded roads to keep up with traffic increases (one of the silver linings of the recession was the stopping of the growth in the exurbs, which was killing the infrastructure) so we have gridlock in the system (which, having been in LA, the east coast and Chicago... we really don't - but that's the perception) - we also have a TON of roads in outstate minnesota. many of which should be county highways at best... but, for political reasons are covered by the state (both parties are guilty of that in rural mn - fixing the highways is best way to ensure re-election)

the department itself is surprisingly well run all things considered. they stretch an unreliable budget pretty well, and they work hard on long term planning despite receiving any clear guidance on their funding.

Is MN the only state where it snows and freezes/thaws?

of course not, i never suggested such a thing. what i pointed out is - a city of 3.5 million - 150,000 miles of highways that get 6 months winter, a freeze/thaw cycle that is brutal, AND construction needs make roads here more expensive than average

93henfan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Note to 93 - he was being sarcastic....

Go fuck a woman. Hard.

93henfan wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote: This is all nonsense TTBF. Everyone knows government employees at all levels are just incompetent sobs...

Go fuck yourself in the ass. Hard.

Meant to say slobs. Fokkin Droid...

And yes, Jon is correct.

Grizalltheway wrote:

93henfan wrote:
Go fuck yourself in the ass. Hard.

Meant to say slobs. Fokkin Droid...

And yes, Jon is correct.

Hard I said.

93henfan wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:
Meant to say slobs. Fokkin Droid...

And yes, Jon is correct.

Hard I said.

You're gonna have to scream 'harder!' if you really want me to get into it.