> > The question is really should the use of private cars be encouraged at
> > the expense of the environment and human health?
> Actually, I think you have to make the case that the use of the car *is*
> being encouraged. There are many taxes and fees that go along with owning
> and operating a car. The gas tax in California is pretty high here. It
> comprises at least 20% of the price. Perhaps that is too low, but taxing
> something is not how you go about encouraging something, to do that you
> offer a subsidy.
> Steve
john here:
Yes but many of those taxes and fees cover road construction, maintenance,
etc., and do not cover ecological costs at all. The principle should be to
devote taxes to cover some of the ecological costs and provide subsidies to
alternative forms of transportation such as public trains, buses, bicycle
paths,etc. This has been done in Sweden with great success.
A no regrets policy would result in no significant disadvantage for people
who chose to use an alternate form of public transportation, but a
disadvantage for people using private cars, not car pooling or pleasure
driving.
In Canada over 50 % of the cost of gas consists in taxes. We are paying
$0.67 per litre which is about $2.50 per gallon, which is less than half
what gas costs in Great Britian, and nearlhy twice the cost that is paid in
the US, yet Canadians are one of the three greatest per capita users of gas
in the world, probably because of the great distances we travel. Small
population, lots of space.
john
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|