Posted on 01/21/2020 9:25:48 PM PST by nickcarraway
Except I think it is going to be a broad-based tax. Because the argument is probably going to be made, that even if you don’t own or operate a car you almost certainly benefit from the transport of food and goods over the roads that get worn out by Motor Vehicles.
Have faith! It will be sold as being “for the children.”
Reducing 4 lane roads (2 in each direction) down to 2 lanes, a turn/contraflow lane, and 2 bicycle lanes (1 in each direction) increases congestion and traffic wear on the one lane that each car or truck can ride in.
For the children...for the children...for the children...
California provides a subsidy of up to $7,000 to buy an electric car.
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/lct/cvrp.htm
Plus federal incentives of up to $7,000 per vehicle
https://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/the-ins-and-outs-of-electric-vehicle-tax-credits.html
Plus local governments offer subsidies in the form of lower electric rates to charge electric vehicles
Eliminate the subsidies, fire the government employees administering it, and transfer the money to road repair work. Of course, the result would be that people would stop buying electric cars
ROTFLMAO!!!!!
I didn't see any actual cars that got $7K rebates. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are at $4.5K. Those cars would likely be eligible for the federal $7.5K tax credit as well. The federal tax credit is over for Tesla and GM EVs. California buyers still get the California $2K rebate. If Tesla and GM were to build the Hydrogen fuel cell cars, the $7.5K federal tax credit would start again for those cars.
You made my point.
The money was earmarked for roads but used for their pet projects.
It’s like giving money to a homeless person and they use it for drugs/booze.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.