Notice vehicle weight isn't part of the equation even though a full truck does as much damage as over 9,000 passenger cars. They're going to have you subsidize shipping companies.
Big polluters: One massive container ship equals 50 million cars.
That was my same argument against banning two stroke recreational vehicles in the early 00s; one round trip of one of those ships causes more pollution than every two stroke dirtbike in history, combined.
I still fell in love with my '03 CRF450, but it was the principle.
Well shoot, thanks for that. Time to save that one to mention to my tree-hugging acquaintances.
I actually thought that ships were "clean" in terms of overall pollution. Must be the PR they put out, as shippers and the raillines are always hawking how much more efficient they are than trucks. Whoops.
They're going to have you subsidize shipping companies.
Let's imagine they put a 9000x tax on container trucks per mile. Who do you think would pay that tax?
A. Some longnose oligarch
B. You, every time you buy something shipped in a truck
You can tell just by flipping a coin.
Heads: You pay it.
Tails: You pay it.
It wouldn't hurt to assume that they would catch the coin before it hits the ground. In that case: You pay it, and you're down a shekel.
Let's imagine they put a 9000x tax on container trucks per mile. Who do you think would pay that tax?
Guess what? We're already paying it. The roads are being maintained (sort of), right? That money is already being paid by us. The only question is who should pay. Arguing that people who don't use a service should pay for that service so it will be cheaper for the people who do use it is pure, unadulterated communism. It also prevents the free market from working. Goods shipped by truck need to have the cost of shipping by truck built in so the market can allocate shipping more efficiently.
That's fair. But these vehicle taxes aren't being used to maintain the roads, they're being earmarked for "green industries."
(post is archived)