Title text:
‘They really shouldn’t let those small cars drive in traffic. I worry I’m going to kill someone if I hit one! They should have to drive on the sidewalk, safely out of the way.’
Transcript:
Transcript will show once it’s been added to explainxkcd.com
Source: https://xkcd.com/3167/
They already cost more and considering they have worse gas mileage, they paying more taxes on fuel as well.
I agree with the parking though, back of the lot with ya.
in reality most (all?) states in the US don’t charge progressively more for vehicle registration based on weight, and even when they do, the thresholds are really high. So a F-150 weighing over 5000 lbs may pay the same as a Honda Civic weighing half of that.
The F350 is the smallest vehicle where they charge by weight. Unfortunately they don’t check for how much you use it, so for the 6 times a year I use mine I’m paying $.10/mile - while someone else who uses it for hauling as a job is paying $.01/mile.
Texas used to, maybe still does. You made me try to look it up and couldn’t find a simple source. Plenty of states use MRSP or some measure of the vehicle’s value.
Back in the day (Tulsa, OK) my friend had a 2-ton dump truck with antique tags (over 25-yo), paid $20. Meanwhile, someone buying a super-light Corvette was paying $650. (early 90s money)
I say go on weight, maybe some factoring of value. Registration fees are paying for roads, if your monster vehicle is doing more damage, you pay more.
Honestly i’m fine with the value of the vehicle not affecting tax (beyond VAT upon purchase), because there’s not much harm in someone having an expensive vehicle as decoration or collector’s piece.
In fact i wish more people would do that, rather than actually driving the vehicles around on a daily basis.
Fuel taxes are paying for roads.
Subsidies are paying for roads.
Right but the comment you’re replying to is talking about sticker price and gas, not registration.
the original (my) comment mentions tax
Which they already pay, the sales tax would be higher and they’re paying more in gas taxes.
and yet, people keep buying these things to buy groceries and drive on asphalt, so just fuel inefficiency is clearly not enough
Yeah, but I’m with the OP here. It should cost significantly more tax wise than it does to disincentivize it
I like the idea of just having a tax linked directly to how much wear a vehicle causes to roads, because the wear goes up exponentially with weight. Not only would this make oversized cars (and cars in general) much more expensive, it would also provide the funds needed to repair roads that get completely annihilated by trucking companies.