Would You Move? San Francisco Considers Taxing Drivers By The Mile

If this were to happen, along with all the other troubles California's having... I'd Definitely Move.

This will never take off on privacy grounds because people will make a case that they can then track where everyone is going, although the government will say they will not.

What does NDAA have to do with Privacy?

"What does NDAA have to do with Privacy?"

- Nothing. He's a shill.

The fact that so many object to what is the fairest way to tax for roads and discourage useless driving just shows how far the world needs to evolve. I might MOVE TO San Fransico!

Interesting idea, those that consume the most of shared resources pay more. Not entirely sure how I feel about this, but if they really wanted to tax people on consumption, they would have to tax more than just miles driven, specifically:

- Weight of car (heavier cars deteriorate the pavement faster)
- Size of car (larger cars take up more space on the road)
- Number of Miles driven
- Safety rating (less safe cars more likely to cause accidents and delay traffic)

While you're at it, you might as well tax based on the emissions of the car (this one I would go for, I'm tired of breathing brown air).

Don't forget the weight of the driver and go ahead and attach one of those monitors to gauge how aggressively they drive too.

Oh yeah, tax those in higher income tax brackets more so you can subsidize those that drive the guzzlers of welfare.

If you are going to tax why not reach for the brass ring?

Hurray for your good sense sir! The future feels brighter this morning because of your ideas.

zoomzoom.

Free education? Education is a right. That's why we have a public school system in which i'm sure you attended. Or should poor folks not be allowed to have an education and attend public schools?

I see ZoomZoom's post was deleted. Which makes the folks who deboosted me seem even more whacky. I guess they believe that a public education system shouldn't include poor people.

Seems like a good idea. Cost of building, operating, and maintaining roads are driven, primarily, by their length; no reason the people who use more shouldn't pay more.

If people had to bear the real costs of their choices we'd have fewer people making bad decisions that the rest of us have to pay for. (e.g. commuting 50 miles each way or eating at MacDonald's everyday).

I certainly wouldn't like this idea, but wouldn't it be easier to add the tax to the gas price (i wouldn't like this idea either). I mean the more you drive the more gas you'll use so it's the same concept without invading privacy and spending $$$ on a GPS device that will track your every move

I would move, isn't there already a gas tax? this should pay for the roads, I would never take transit, there are way too many weirdos on transit, and I would feel sorry for the working poor if this were done, this could financially bankrupt some people.

tiguan20,

Please turn off Fox News. It's poison. Can't you see what its doing to your brain? Fox news has you thinking that the NDAA has something to do with privacy. LOL!!

I watch Comedy Central for entertainment. Which is what you should be doing with FOX News.

You still think that the NDAA has anything to do with privacy?

And I've voted republican in the past. I don’t like to associate myself with any party. It divides the people as evidenced by your reply.

The problem is not only San Fran but California as a whole.They make the most money but spend like Obama (no limit) The Liberal states like California will be banckrupt soon.Many cities have filed already.The Republican states like Texas are kicking butt.Californai is doomed.

Will the last person leaving California please shut the door.