Big one - eviltoast
  • force@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Yes, but not nearly enough. Those kinds of taxes are extremely low (especially compared to e.g. the EU) and form only a fraction of the costs of car infrastructure.

    All those hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars in infrastructure bills, all the regular car infrastructure maintanence costs, a large chunk is paid for by taxes that everyone gets regardless of how much they use a car. And all the extra non-tax costs (in both time and money) that non-drivers have to pay because car-dependent infrastructure fucks up transportation for everyone else, that is a massive charge.

    • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Even in the EU, car related taxes can’t pay for all the car related infrastructure. Building and maintaining roads is crazy expensive.

    • ugh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      People who don’t drive don’t pay any of those taxes that were used as examples. I’d love to see the numbers that you’re basing your argument on.

      • Square Singer@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        Let me google that for you: https://frontiergroup.org/resources/who-pays-roads/

        There are literally tens of thousands of articles like this one.

        TLDR:

        • less than 50% of car infrastructure cost is paid for by driving related taxes
        • An average of $1100 in general tax per household per year is used to subsidise driving
        • Car infrastructure receives more subsidies from general tax than transit, passenger rail, cycling and pedestrian programs combined.

        No, drivers pull their own weight in regards to car related taxes.