PDA

View Full Version : Question- should the government...


Fast_Eddie
09-10-2010, 12:59 PM
Hey Guys,

I have a question. Do you think the government should pursue a tax and incentive policy that directs how people commute to work?

We use taxes and incentives to compel people to do a lot of things. Just wonder if you guys think this is an appropriate policy for the U.S. government to pursue.

Thanks,


Ed

Boreas
09-10-2010, 01:16 PM
Hey Guys,

I have a question. Do you think the government should pursue a tax and incentive policy that directs how people commute to work?

We use taxes and incentives to compel people to do a lot of things. Just wonder if you guys think this is an appropriate policy for the U.S. government to pursue.

Thanks,


Ed

As a general proposition, I'd probably say yes but, with the state of our existing mass transit infrastructure, it's a non-starter.

John

d-ray657
09-10-2010, 01:47 PM
I have always lamented that the 70s energy crisis would have been an ideal time to push for investments in mass transit, but by then, the "Me" generation was in full force. People were not ready to make the sacrifice of not having their car with them at all times.

Regards,

D-Ray

piece-itpete
09-10-2010, 02:02 PM
Do any of us live in regular bus service areas?

I do, kinda.

Pete

d-ray657
09-10-2010, 02:21 PM
Do any of us live in regular bus service areas?

I do, kinda.

Pete

Nope, I live in suburban sprawl.

That's why I love visiting New York. We are able to get all over the place with the subway and buses.

Regards,

D-Ray

Boreas
09-10-2010, 02:29 PM
Do any of us live in regular bus service areas?

I do, kinda.

Pete

I do. The bus service is regular but far from frequent. I live in a pretty rural area so I guess that's to be expected. In this county the bus service is okay. There is a county-wide service and also a city service in Santa Rosa, the largest city, and a "jitney" service in Petaluma, the second largest. The county buses serve both these cities too.

Being located within the San Francisco commuting area, we also have two commuter bus services run by Golden Gate Transit and AmTrak. There is no light rail or subway service in the North Bay where I am but there is in the East Bay and South Bay, all the way down to San Jose. There's also a fairly extensive ferry system taking people into San Francisco from several points across the Bay.

When you look at the national picture, this area is probably a lot better than average. The trouble is, here as elsewhere, we have chosen our lifestyle based on the automobile. We don't really think about living near our workplace and even have a tendency to live pretty far away from work. As a result, it's hard to warm up to the idea of trading a half hour commute by car for an hour plus bus ride.

John

Fast_Eddie
09-10-2010, 04:01 PM
Good responses so far. Hoping to hear from a few more folks.

finnbow
09-10-2010, 04:12 PM
Yes, and the policy should be in the form of a $2 increase in gas taxes. The details would work themselves accordingly.

Boreas
09-10-2010, 04:20 PM
Yes, and the policy should be in the form of a $2 increase in gas taxes. The details would work themselves accordingly.

And the tax would fund infrastructure improvements? The problem with that is the tax would be in effect for a very long time before any improvement in infrastructure would be discernible. That's a very tough sell!

John

finnbow
09-10-2010, 04:24 PM
And the tax would fund infrastructure improvements? The problem with that is the tax would be in effect for a very long time before any improvement in infrastructure would be discernible. That's a very tough sell!

John

I think carpooling may increase to the extent that a lesser degree of public transportation may be necessary than currently envisioned. DC is among the most carpool friendly cities in the country and has one of the better public transportation systems. That said, the roads are clogged during rush hour with upwards of 80% of the cars on the roads with one occupant.

Boreas
09-10-2010, 04:39 PM
I think carpooling may increase to the extent that a lesser degree of public transportation may be necessary than currently envisioned. DC is among the most carpool friendly cities in the country and has one of the better public transportation systems. That said, the roads are clogged during rush hour with upwards of 80% of the cars on the roads with one occupant.

Given your observation that most cars are one-occupant and your statement that DC is already an extremely carpool friendly city, what leads you to believe that carpooling will increase? Is it just the burden of $5.00+ gasoline?

I'm thinking most people would just bitch like hell and pay it. Infrastructure first.

John

finnbow
09-10-2010, 04:56 PM
Given your observation that most cars are one-occupant and your statement that DC is already an extremely carpool friendly city, what leads you to believe that carpooling will increase? Is it just the burden of $5.00+ gasoline?

I'm thinking most people would just bitch like hell and pay it. Infrastructure first.

John

Build it and they will come? Probably not.

I think that the only way that things will turn around transportation-wise in this country is when people feel the pain in their pocketbook. And the $2 increase in gas taxes can fund the infrastructure. Funding infrastructure without changing commuting habits seems to be an exercise in futility, IMHO.

Boreas
09-10-2010, 05:01 PM
Build it and they will come? Probably not.

I think that the only way that things will turn around transportation-wise in this country is when people feel the pain in their pocketbook. And the $2 increase in gas taxes can fund the infrastructure. Funding infrastructure without changing commuting habits seems to be an exercise in futility, IMHO.

I agree that infrastructure alone won't do it but if it's there and if there's the added impetus of a $2.00/gallon tax to make people use it then it might work. With just one - either one - without the other I don't think it will.

John

BlueStreak
09-11-2010, 02:00 AM
I live thirty eight miles from work, and NO there is no public transit that runs out there.
Screw your $2.00 a gallon gas tax.

Dave

noonereal
09-11-2010, 04:53 AM
I agree that infrastructure alone won't do it but if it's there and if there's the added impetus of a $2.00/gallon tax to make people use it then it might work. With just one - either one - without the other I don't think it will.

John

it's not gonna work

we had a $2 a gallon "Bush for corporate profit tax" during much of boy George's
presidency and all it changed no driving habits. It simply did as it was designed to do, increased oil company profits while lowing the standard of living for the America middle class.

merrylander
09-11-2010, 07:16 AM
Purely rural, there is a bus service that runs into DC and I believe over toward Germantown, Rockville area. Problem with that and one occupant cars is the current working climate. There are no more 9 to 5 jobs, or even 8 to 5 for that matter. When I was still employed (have yet to stop working) it was a rare day when I left at a specific time. Then too, few if any of my coworkers lived anywhere near me.

One thing we should be working on is passenger rail. We subsidize tthe trucking industry (you pay for roads you will never use), the airline industry for whom we build airports. Apart from the north - south corridor in the east Amtrak does not own any track. Passenger trains are diverted onto sidings to let freight go through. Still, it is a much more civilized means of transport than flying.

Fast_Eddie
09-13-2010, 11:10 AM
Well I was sure someone would say no, but it looks like we scared all the right leaning folks off. My point in asking the question is that we *do* have tax and incentive policy that dictates how people commute, but it's all toward the oil/automotive industry. Think about it- how many of your tax dollars go to build roads and highways. When it snows, we expect public employees to be out there clearing the way. If you decide to move to the city and have a very short commute, your insurance rates subsidize the people who drive in from the suburbs. No break (or not commensurate to the saving) for the decreased likelihood of having an accident. And we haven't even gotten into direct subsidies for the oil companies.

What if, instead of bailing out GM to re-create them pretty much as they were we had converted them into something else? Use that money and those people to build alternatives to our current situation.

Anyway, you see where I'm going.

whell
09-13-2010, 08:11 PM
The idea of mass transit is great in densely populated metropolitan areas like New York or Chicago. There's lots of vibrant businesses in a downtown area that draws in commuters from the suburbs, and commuters from one side of the city to the other, to ride the transit system.

Then you have cities like Detroit. Detroit wants to build a mass transit system. I just wonder if anyone will pay to support it / use it. The population isn't there, and they drive to work in the wrong direction, by and large: from one side of the suburbs to the other. Some drive downtown to work, but as of right now, not in sufficient numbers to support a mass transit system.

I'd rather not throw tax dollars at a transit system to build it only to watch the buses/trains/streetcars/whatever tool around town 1/4 or 1/3 full.

BlueStreak
09-14-2010, 12:35 AM
The idea of mass transit is great in densely populated metropolitan areas like New York or Chicago. There's lots of vibrant businesses in a downtown area that draws in commuters from the suburbs, and commuters from one side of the city to the other, to ride the transit system.

Then you have cities like Detroit. Detroit wants to build a mass transit system. I just wonder if anyone will pay to support it / use it. The population isn't there, and they drive to work in the wrong direction, by and large: from one side of the suburbs to the other. Some drive downtown to work, but as of right now, not in sufficient numbers to support a mass transit system.

I'd rather not throw tax dollars at a transit system to build it only to watch the buses/trains/streetcars/whatever tool around town 1/4 or 1/3 full.

Don't they already have that stupid "people mover" in Detroit? I dunno, I last visited Detroit way back in the '70s (My Dad worked for Chrysler.) and it was a rat hole then. I would think the city of Detroit should concentrate on giving people a reason to want to live there first, then worry about enhancing infrastructure.

Dave