SUVs should be heavily taxed

[Anonymous]

OP, I don't have a car. So by your logic, I think YOU should be heavily taxed because your car befouls the air I breathe and gets in my way as I walk around going about my business. All you car owners are the same to me - PURE ENVIRONMENTAL EVIL. Thank goodness I am so morally superior.

[Anonymous]

As a driver of a minivan, I think the appropriate way to tax for emmissions would be to tax gasoline. I may be wrong, but it seems like the vehicles that use the most gas, would also produce the most emmissions (again, I could be wrong).

I know I used to hate large vehicle drivers and think no one 'needed" them. While I certainly could exist without a minivan, I couldn't take both my child and our dog on trips and have them both be safe. And I admit, I enjoy the luxery of not worrying about if there is enough space - as I do with our small, economy car on trips. We can also fit the grandparents in the van with us when they visit or we visit them. All luxeries certainly, but important luxeries to us.

But I also don't drive as often as a lot of people. We don't always have a million errands all over the place. In warmer months we do a lot of walking to do errands and our cars are often parked for days at a time. So it would be unfair to tax me simply for the fact I have the minivan, but would be fair to tax something that is tied to its level of usage.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree with PP. Just raise the taxes on retail gasoline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I totally agree with PP. Just raise the taxes on retail gasoline.

Businesses will kill that idea fast.

[Anonymous]

To the OP, I could hug you! I HATE SUVs.
I could've written your post verbatim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about just increasing the tax on retail gasoline? Pay at the pump. That will hit heavy gasoline-consuming vehicles the hardest, less hard for light vehicles, and zero for those who ride bikes or take public transit.

BTW, I'm very curious about the political persuasion of the people posting here. Are the any anti-tax conservatives who are arguing for a tax on SUVs? Or is it all progressives/liberals?

This post bears repeating. I agree. Tax it the way other countries do and you will see behavioral changes. It is amazing how cheap people expect non-renewable and hazardous resources to be.

[Anonymous]

OP- Based on your logic, should we tax overweight people because they take up more room on the sidewalks, Metro, etc.? There are plenty of times when you're walking around downtown when you have to move out of the way because there is a slow, overweight person taking up the sidewalk. The average overweight person also consumes more food than the average thin person, thus, taking up more resouces. Or what about women pushing strollers? They take up more space and you have to move around them. Oh, and don't forget bikers. I hate having to move out of the way when there is someone riding their bike in the street and slowing down traffic. Let's just tax everyone more because I'm sure we can find something not to like about everybody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP- Based on your logic, should we tax overweight people because they take up more room on the sidewalks, Metro, etc.? There are plenty of times when you're walking around downtown when you have to move out of the way because there is a slow, overweight person taking up the sidewalk. The average overweight person also consumes more food than the average thin person, thus, taking up more resouces. Or what about women pushing strollers? They take up more space and you have to move around them. Oh, and don't forget bikers. I hate having to move out of the way when there is someone riding their bike in the street and slowing down traffic. Let's just tax everyone more because I'm sure we can find something not to like about everybody.

I think there is a clear difference between taxing cars for their emissions vs. taxing people for their weight or the number of children they bear (mentioned earlier). The former is a consumer choice. The latter is closer to a human right. The government can't tell you what size you should be (and you might not be able to control it, either) and the right to have children is considered a human right. Burning gasoline is not a human right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP- Based on your logic, should we tax overweight people because they take up more room on the sidewalks, Metro, etc.? There are plenty of times when you're walking around downtown when you have to move out of the way because there is a slow, overweight person taking up the sidewalk. The average overweight person also consumes more food than the average thin person, thus, taking up more resouces. Or what about women pushing strollers? They take up more space and you have to move around them. Oh, and don't forget bikers. I hate having to move out of the way when there is someone riding their bike in the street and slowing down traffic. Let's just tax everyone more because I'm sure we can find something not to like about everybody.

I think there is a clear difference between taxing cars for their emissions vs. taxing people for their weight or the number of children they bear (mentioned earlier). The former is a consumer choice. The latter is closer to a human right. The government can't tell you what size you should be (and you might not be able to control it, either) and the right to have children is considered a human right. Burning gasoline is not a human right.

Haven't you heard? This is America! Depletion of fossil fuels, cheaply and easily, is not only a human right, but a goal to work toward. Yee-ha.

[Anonymous]

I agree with taxing fatties. It's not a human right to eat a bunch of food and chub yourself up. Plus, I hate it when I'm riding the Metro and some chubster sits down next to me and encroaches on my seat.

[Anonymous]

They do already pay a tax. It is called a "higher monthly car payment." These people have decided to throw their income away on a huge status symbol and the gas it requires every month rather than put it into savings, college fund for their kids, retirement, house, etc. Their choice. I know a guy who drives in from West Virginia every day for work - between his car payment and gas, he pays $900 a month for his vehicle. $900 a month!!! My husband and I don't even pay that for our two cars combined plus gas! Barely even half that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with taxing fatties. It's not a human right to eat a bunch of food and chub yourself up. Plus, I hate it when I'm riding the Metro and some chubster sits down next to me and encroaches on my seat.

Just died of laughter. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With he number of kids (6) I drive in my HYBRID SUV-I am putting out less emissions than you and when I did not have a hybrid, I am sure I still have lower emissions that the four other cars that would have been on the road if I didn't carpool. Maybe you don't understand the carpool concept because you don't have nay friends who would ask you to join them?

As I said, for you it might make sense. But I'm sure you'll agree that with the $10,000 tax, it would still make sense, and it would encourage parents with 2 children to think twice about getting an SUV.

I understand there are people who need SUVs. In Europe, you will occasionally see them, because there will be a circumstance where someone needs one. But they are rare.
I can't drive down my own road. We have to take turns driving down my road because the SUVs that pass by cannot fit on the road with another car coming in the opposite direction.
Would you agree it would start to suck big time if everyone decided to drive an 18 wheeler? Would you begin to think, "Hey, we should do something so people with 2 children stop driving 18 wheelers!"?

It's policy. It's supposed to change incentives. People who really need SUVs will continue to get them, but it will discourage 90% of the SUV owners from getting them in the future. And that is good for the roads and good for the environment. And I'm sure you want your 6 little ones to have a nice environment to look forward to.

I just moved back from Europe and SUVs are not actually that rare there anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They do already pay a tax. It is called a "higher monthly car payment." These people have decided to throw their income away on a huge status symbol and the gas it requires every month rather than put it into savings, college fund for their kids, retirement, house, etc. Their choice. I know a guy who drives in from West Virginia every day for work - between his car payment and gas, he pays $900 a month for his vehicle. $900 a month!!! My husband and I don't even pay that for our two cars combined plus gas! Barely even half that.

The problem is that the tax does not pay for the environmental impact. Maybe we should tax the auto makers and so that "higher monthly car payment" will be large enough to pay for its impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree with taxing fatties. It's not a human right to eat a bunch of food and chub yourself up. Plus, I hate it when I'm riding the Metro and some chubster sits down next to me and encroaches on my seat.

Make all the fun you want, but I bet your friends (maybe you) don't meet the target body mass index, either. Do you want the government surcharging your premiums 20% for every ten pounds you are overweight? Your husband, teen age daughter?

Yes, your body is yours. The government shouldn't tell you what to do with it. The government SHOULD levy taxes to cover environmental externalities.