Extra Tax and Fees just makes it a poor people tax, and rich assholes will carry on as if nothing changes. A straight-up ban makes them not appear at all.
This is the better option. But, if you’re gonna do that, there needs to be some kind of program that allows people to sell their banned vehicle to the government for above market value so they can afford to purchase a comparable, but more suitable vehicle instead. Otherwise, you’re gonna have a bunch of pissed off people with six-figure, three-ton lawn ornaments crying about how they couldn’t have known their vehicle would get banned and it’s now useless.
Americans are paying 100k for these fucking things now. Taking out 10 year long loans to pay for it. And then crying about gas prices on twitter. Not sure cost will stop people. People are idiots.
The solution then is to remove that loophole, by keeping the pollution laws applied there. And those who actually used such vehicles for work? Yeah, sucks, but they should complain at those car manufacturers.
Or alternatively, we classify them as trucks instead of as cars.
Close. I believe you’re referring to the EPA efficiency mandates passed in the 90s that carved out exceptions for “heavy duty” trucks and SUVs, which lead to the creation of “crossover” vehicles, which started as a way to deliver car-like efficiency and features, while still minimizing development and efficiency costs by still having it classified as a “truck.”
Close. I believe you’re referring to the EPA efficiency mandates passed in the 90s that carved out exceptions for “heavy duty” trucks and SUVs, which lead to the creation of “crossover” vehicles, which started as a way to deliver car-like efficiency and features, while still minimizing development and efficiency costs by still having it classified as a “truck.”
You can have an income- and wealth-dependent fine.
It could be as a % of your total income (bonus included) + wealth (including stocks, full ownership chain included).
1.5% of income, 5% of wealth in bank account, 10% of stock value. If any of these three exceeds 300x the median of the lowest 10%'s salary (let’s say that that’s 10k), then it’s 80% for all three. That would hit the ultra-wealthy more and so it’d be fairer.
For a poor person earning less than €10,000 a year and having €1,000 in bank and no stocks, that’d be €200.
For someone earning €40,000 a year, having €80,000 in bank and €10,000 in stocks, that’d be €5,600.
For a billionnaire who has 1 billion, let’s say €2,000,000 per year as “income”, €100,000,000 in “bank account”, and the rest of 1 billion in stocks. Then they’d be paying € 801.6 million.
Allow them, don’t ban.
BUT make owning one so expensive and annoying nobody wants to get one.
Extra taxes, extra costs, don’t let big gas guzzlers in city centres etc.
Nah, just ban them.
Extra Tax and Fees just makes it a poor people tax, and rich assholes will carry on as if nothing changes. A straight-up ban makes them not appear at all.
This is the better option. But, if you’re gonna do that, there needs to be some kind of program that allows people to sell their banned vehicle to the government for above market value so they can afford to purchase a comparable, but more suitable vehicle instead. Otherwise, you’re gonna have a bunch of pissed off people with six-figure, three-ton lawn ornaments crying about how they couldn’t have known their vehicle would get banned and it’s now useless.
Already a system done all across the world in everywhere but America, it’s called a Trade-in program.
Another solution is implementing a ban that will get into effect in 10 years, when the value of such cars would be lower anyway.
This prevents people from buying new big cars in the meantime anyway.
Americans are paying 100k for these fucking things now. Taking out 10 year long loans to pay for it. And then crying about gas prices on twitter. Not sure cost will stop people. People are idiots.
Agreed, wasn’t it a ‘work truck’ heavy vehicle tax break after the fuel crisis in the 70s that created these monstrosities?
(Please correct me if I’m wrong, I’m late for work.)
AFAIK yes, that’s the loophole. If a vehicle is heavy enough then the law assumes it must be for “work” and thus some pollution laws don’t apply.
Car manufacturers noticed this and thus the massive “Sports” “Utility” Vehicle was born.
The solution then is to remove that loophole, by keeping the pollution laws applied there. And those who actually used such vehicles for work? Yeah, sucks, but they should complain at those car manufacturers.
Or alternatively, we classify them as trucks instead of as cars.
Close. I believe you’re referring to the EPA efficiency mandates passed in the 90s that carved out exceptions for “heavy duty” trucks and SUVs, which lead to the creation of “crossover” vehicles, which started as a way to deliver car-like efficiency and features, while still minimizing development and efficiency costs by still having it classified as a “truck.”
No, you’re entirely correct (though it was one of many factors, that being the largest)
Close. I believe you’re referring to the EPA efficiency mandates passed in the 90s that carved out exceptions for “heavy duty” trucks and SUVs, which lead to the creation of “crossover” vehicles, which started as a way to deliver car-like efficiency and features, while still minimizing development and efficiency costs by still having it classified as a “truck.”
So, pass a ban that only applies to poor people and let the rich continue to do whatever they want still since they can afford the fine?
You can have an income- and wealth-dependent fine.
It could be as a % of your total income (bonus included) + wealth (including stocks, full ownership chain included).
1.5% of income, 5% of wealth in bank account, 10% of stock value. If any of these three exceeds 300x the median of the lowest 10%'s salary (let’s say that that’s 10k), then it’s 80% for all three. That would hit the ultra-wealthy more and so it’d be fairer.
For a poor person earning less than €10,000 a year and having €1,000 in bank and no stocks, that’d be €200.
For someone earning €40,000 a year, having €80,000 in bank and €10,000 in stocks, that’d be €5,600.
For a billionnaire who has 1 billion, let’s say €2,000,000 per year as “income”, €100,000,000 in “bank account”, and the rest of 1 billion in stocks. Then they’d be paying € 801.6 million.
There are ways to make fines hurt everyone, see how Finnish people handle speeding tickets
It’s a percentage of your income 😀