Gas Tax Plan

[quote name='dbrev42']Deval Patrick is losing his mind, period. :wall::wall::wall:

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/state/x602817053/Gas-tax-proposal-gets-cold-reception[/QUOTE]

Since states actually have to balance their budgets, they can't do what the federal government does and mortgage our great-great-great-great grandchildren's future by taking on massive debt. Thus, they have to push through tax increases and it's harder to hide their irresponsibility and incompetence. But I'm sure they will find a way to raise the gas tax at least part of the way up to 50.5 cents.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Since states actually have to balance their budgets, they can't do what the federal government does and mortgage our great-great-great-great grandchildren's future by taking on massive debt[/QUOTE]

Obviously you're not from California.
 
I don't think this is as bad an idea as people have made it out to be. First, people were doing fine when gas was $4+ a gallon this summer they were just consuming less, which all told is a good thing. A tax increase won't raise prices to that level but might get people to consume less fuel, still a good thing. Granted it won't cover the $19 billion transportation gap in the state's budget but it will close it. So unless you want to tar a pot hole on your way to work everyday maybe a tax hike isn't that bad.
 
^Yeah a split wouldn't be as bad. But I hardly ever drive period. Let alone use the mass pike. So I'd rather they increase just the tolls.

To people not from Mass who think this is just for run of the mill road repairs and such. It's not. It's to pay for the overpriced big dig that no one but the contractors wanted. Which is why it's such a nuisance of a raised tax.
 
[quote name='HowStern']^Yeah a split wouldn't be as bad. But I hardly ever drive period. Let alone use the mass pike. So I'd rather they increase just the tolls.

To people not from Mass who think this is just for run of the mill road repairs and such. It's not. It's to pay for the overpriced big dig that no one but the contractors wanted. Which is why it's such a nuisance of a raised tax.[/quote]

Explain the "overpriced big dig".

Does Mass. hire private contractor/construction or don't they have their own road crew?

If it were just Tolls, then the rest of the people get a good break but if those same funds were to be used on all roads, bit unfair.
If it were just the gas tax and vise versa, unfair too.

Split would be a good plan.

And yeah each state is different. WI here has it's trans fund raped every year for everything else... so taxing it would be a good plan here that would affect everyone equally. We don't have Tolls.

This would be different than to just start taxing Service goods or Taxing the rich more... more opposition to certain complain groups, than just driving up a base tax.

I could see increasing sales tax to maybe .005 or .0025 to get a solid bumb in revenue.
 
Here check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig_(Boston,_Massachusetts)

The Big Dig was the most expensive highway project in the U.S.[2] Although the project was estimated in 1985 at $2.8 billion (in 1982 dollars, US$6.0 billion adjusted for inflation as of 2006[update]),[3] over $14.6 billion ($8.08 billion in 1982 dollars)[3] had been spent in federal and state tax dollars as of 2006[update].[4] A July 17, 2008 article in The Boston Globe stated, "In all, the project will cost an additional $7 billion in interest, bringing the total to a staggering $22 billion, according to a Globe review of hundreds of pages of state documents. It will not be paid off until 2038."[5] At the beginning of the project, Congressman Barney Frank asked, "Rather than lower the expressway, wouldn't it be cheaper to raise the city?" The project has incurred criminal arrests,[6][7] escalating costs, death, leaks, and charges of poor execution and use of substandard materials. The Massachusetts Attorney General is demanding that contractors refund taxpayers $108 million for "shoddy work".[8] On January 23, 2008, it was reported that Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, the consortium that oversaw the project, would pay $407 million in restitution for its poor oversight of subcontractors (some of whom committed outright fraud), as well as primary responsibility in the death of a motorist. However, despite admitting to poor oversight and negligence as part of the settlement,[9] the firm is not barred from bidding for future government contracts. Several smaller companies agreed to pay a combined sum of approximately $51 million.[10]
Click to expand...
 
First off, there's no way Deval is going to lose the next election. Last week's poll numbers had him at like a 50-60% approval rating, and as we all know MA is overwhelmingly Democratic.

I have to agree with increasing the gas tax over increasing tolls. Toll increases would just increase congestion on the side roads coming into the city from the west. Why isn't 93 tolled? Because it's already a fucking nightmare every morning both ways into the city. A gas tax distributes the cost across the entire state rather than just the people who take the Pike.
 
wow, that big dig... lost for words.

incurred criminal arrests, escalating costs, death, leaks, and charges of poor execution and use of substandard materials.
Click to expand...

I am surprised that the companies weren't barred.
 
I still don't quite understand why states don't tax and pay for their own road work. Why should someone in North Dakota help pay billions for highways in North Carolina?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I still don't quite understand why states don't tax and pay for their own road work. Why should someone in North Dakota help pay billions for highways in North Carolina?[/QUOTE]
Because America is good enough, America is smart enough, and gosh darn it, people like America.
 
North Dakota indirectly benefits from that highway in North Carolina -- we all do.

Regarding the gas tax, though I'm not too familiar with the Boston area I certainly support increases in consumer gas taxes. It's a luxury -- a luxury detrimental to everyone involved. No reason for it not to be taxed. We've had this discussion before, when I was proposing ludicrous gas taxes for areas with great public transportation -- just as I said then, the tax needs to be reasonable given the local transportation condtions. 25 cents is more than reasonable. It just needs to be spent wisely (on transportation alternatives and emissions reduction).


Edit: amazing how badly a sentence's meaning can be butchered by forgetting a "not"..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Koggit']North Dakota indirectly benefits from that highway in North Carolina -- we all do.
[/QUOTE]

Interstate highway's, yes. But in-state highway's, not really.
 
Well you'll love the fact that something like 11 cents of it is going to support the MBTA (subway/train/buses/etc), Koggit
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Interstate highway's, yes. But in-state highway's, not really.[/QUOTE]

Other states directly benefit from interstate highways, indirectly benefit from in-state highways.

Each state benefits from other states in the union being as strong as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top