Ravenwood - 06/06/05 07:15 AM
British lawmakers want to start charging drivers by the mile; as much as $2.50 a mile. Using GPS technology, they will know exactly when and where the loyal subjects drive.
Drivers will pay according to when and how far they travel throughout the country's road network under proposals being developed by the Government. . .Lawmakers are promising to reduce fuel taxes so that it doesn't seem like a "war on motorists". Similar proposals in the United States have angered environmentalist wackos, who think the per mile tax ruins the incentive to drive more fuel efficient cars.The rapid uptake of satellite navigational technology in cars is helping to usher in the new "pay-as-you-drive" charge much sooner than had been expected. Figures contained in a government feasibility study have suggested motorists could pay up to �1.34 for each mile they travel during peak hours on the most congested roads.
Category: Fall of Western Civilization
Comments (6) top link me
Hm.
Any of you secret agent types want to sell me an anti-satellite missile?
Fortunately, this bullshit is defeated by a layer of foil around the transmitter box (Faraday cage)
I'd suspect its also defeated by refusing to purchase new cars. Heck, old sports cars are more fun anyway.
Of course, according to the liberals you don't need a missle, simply a .50 caliber rifle to take care of this system. Maybe the gunnies and the enviro fund raisers can work together to defend the right to own a .50 caliber rifle :)
I know I've mentioned it before, but I expect the used car and repair parts markets to boom when things like this are implemented.
Plus, expect huge resistance from motorists when they realize that those of us in pre-factory-installed-GPS vehicles aren't paying anything.
$2.50 per mile? At 40 miles per day of commute, I'd be paying an extra $100 per day, or about $2,000 per month.
Sure, this will work out just fine. One question though - Didn't Great Britain endure a pretty big peasant revolt a couple hundred years ago that had excessive taxation as one of the noted reasons?
How soon we forget.
Posted by: roger at June 6, 2005 9:22 AMA quick illustration of why this is stupid:
My drive to work at Ft Lewis (when I get there in a couple months) is almost entirely on I-5, the most important and most congested freeway in the area. However, I could make almost the entire drive on secondary roads.
It would be a longer drive, both in terms of time and mileage, and it would use more fuel. But it would lower the tax bill if this system were implemented here.
Is that really the result they want?
Posted by: Heartless Libertarian at June 6, 2005 3:32 PMHow hard can it be to disconnect the power or ground the antenna?
Posted by: Billll at June 6, 2005 11:22 PMBillll: If they pass this, then they'll need to send out thousands of cops on patrol with radio receivers to detect those cars that aren't transmitting. So in the UK, where the cops already seem to be unable to do anything about crime besides arresting people who defend themselves, there will be thousands more cops not chasing actual, possibly dangerous, criminals. Who's proposing this, the police union, organized crime, or both?
Posted by: markm at June 7, 2005 12:09 PM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
