A few years ago the good voters of washington state said "no more!" to the state's crazy auto licensing program. At the time we were paying $500-600 easy for a basic cars annual tab fee. Not a luxury car, just a basic car. So the voters stuck it to the government and locked the fee in at $30/year! Whoa, power to the people. The politicians promptly started crying out that basic services would have to be discontinued bla bla bla. Over the next few years I saw absolutely zero change in any service that I have ever received from the government. The politicians lots that golden lining to their pockets.

The first step towards sticking it back to the people was a $3 "fee" tacked onto the $30 tab fee. No big deal right? Then I get my tab bill this year. $20 weight fee and a $20 new license plate fee. Ok, to be honest I don't mind paying the weight fee because I have a larger vehicle, I won't complain there. But they are charging $20 to every single citizen of the state every 7 years to replace our license plates. Because we know that those metal plates just rot away right? Talk about a bogus, piece of crap, hidden tax.

Am I grouchy today? Is the fee really all that much? I don't care. I'm tired of getting screwed and it seems like that's all that happens lately (but not in a good way). So here I am, yelling at the sky, clutching my rio red swingline and praying for fire.

Dave

Saw a story on TV on that topic. It seems the state of Washington calculated the weight of some vehicles as higher than they actually were. They were roughly 3750 pounds and WA said they were over 4000, which put them in a higher licensing bracket. These people took their vehicle to a state scale to check the weight. Supposedly the people owning this particular model will get some money refunded.

LyleH



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2006 05:57PM by LyleH.

MN was going to require more frequent license plate replacement due to some language inserted in some law written by a 3M lobbyist. 3M makes the reflective coating or something for the plate and it is a MN company. But it was caught or repealed, I don't remember which, before 3M got the big payoff.

The fairest tax is the progressive income tax. But use taxes for motor vehicles comes close to fairness because of the damage done by motor vehicles to people and society.

Whoa, the plate fee went up from $14 to $20? Uckerfays.

Good thing all my Buicks are liscensed for life. No more messing with that BS.

But the funny thing is that my cars are underweight on my titles.

The state also far overvalues cars' values to collect a higher tax. They depriciate maybe 10% a year on their scale. They think my sable is worth twice what it is. No recourse or appeals. They even acknowledge they have their own sliding scale and they don't care that it isn't based in reality.

My state decided to tax cars not on their value, but on how new they are. All the legislators made all kinds of noise about how much fairer this was going to be. So now a brand new Ferrari gets taxed the same as a brand new Kia.

Great deal for the rich. Rest of us get screwed.

S.Taylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My state decided to tax cars not on their value,
> but on how new they are. All the legislators made
> all kinds of noise about how much fairer this was
> going to be. So now a brand new Ferrari gets
> taxed the same as a brand new Kia.
>
> Great deal for the rich. Rest of us get screwed.

The Ferrari and Kia probably use exactly the same quantity of government services. Perhaps you could explain just what the rationale would be for taxing a Ferrari at a higher rate than a Kia other than that you like sticking it to people who have more money than you (not a justification in my book).

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

I think it should be based on the weight of the vehicle and the annual mileage. That is a reasonable representation of the actual wear and tear on the roads as caused by your vehicle.

If you have a 5 ton flatbed at your farm, and only use it for 500 miles a year, the taxes should be cheap. If I have a muscle car that only gets used 1500 miles a year, my taxes should be cheap. If I am a traveling salesperson with a Yukon who drives 100K a year, I should pay more.

Racer, in IN, we have farm plates for ag vehicles. But as per the comments about new plate fees, they've got to have something for all the inmates to do, right? ;)

No, they are actually printing on the plates now in Washington. Not stamped. Kinda weird having a 2D plate.

I got a new classic collector plate last year. It was assigned to me on Friday July 1st, and I had it mailed to me and in my hand Tuesday the 5th. That was over the 4th of July 3 day weekend too.

davemchine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A few years ago the good voters of washington
> state said "no more!" to the state's crazy auto
> licensing program. At the time we were paying
> $500-600 easy for a basic cars annual tab fee. Not
> a luxury car, just a basic car. So the voters
> stuck it to the government and locked the fee in
> at $30/year! Whoa, power to the people. The
> politicians promptly started crying out that basic
> services would have to be discontinued bla bla
> bla. Over the next few years I saw absolutely zero
> change in any service that I have ever received
> from the government. The politicians lots that
> golden lining to their pockets.
>
> The first step towards sticking it back to the
> people was a $3 "fee" tacked onto the $30 tab fee.
> No big deal right? Then I get my tab bill this
> year. $20 weight fee and a $20 new license plate
> fee. Ok, to be honest I don't mind paying the
> weight fee because I have a larger vehicle, I
> won't complain there. But they are charging $20 to
> every single citizen of the state every 7 years to
> replace our license plates. Because we know that
> those metal plates just rot away right? Talk about
> a bogus, piece of crap, hidden tax.
>
> Am I grouchy today? Is the fee really all that
> much? I don't care. I'm tired of getting screwed
> and it seems like that's all that happens lately
> (but not in a good way). So here I am, yelling at
> the sky, clutching my rio red swingline and
> praying for fire.
>
> Dave
Your driving is heavily subsidized in ways you can't even begin to imagine. Non-drivers are carrying your driving habit on their backs. Your attitude is disgusting.

---

I suffer from the same sensitivity that you do. A few nuggets of wisdom were shared with me and I'm "trying" to incorporate them into my life. First, remember that nobody can hurt your feelings unless you let them. You can always reject what is being forced on you emotionally.
Second, nothing changes unless you change it. If you don't want the behavior to be repeated then you need to take action. Otherwise the kid has learned that his behavior is the way to get things done, because everyone lets him get away with it.
In the meantime I sympathize because I've been there.
-beerman

And here's a hint for you:
If the word "government" is in your subject line your most just might be "political". Although it's definitely not "friendly", so I'm not sure where it belongs.

---

I suffer from the same sensitivity that you do. A few nuggets of wisdom were shared with me and I'm "trying" to incorporate them into my life. First, remember that nobody can hurt your feelings unless you let them. You can always reject what is being forced on you emotionally.
Second, nothing changes unless you change it. If you don't want the behavior to be repeated then you need to take action. Otherwise the kid has learned that his behavior is the way to get things done, because everyone lets him get away with it.
In the meantime I sympathize because I've been there.
-beerman

Racer X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it should be based on the weight of the
> vehicle and the annual mileage. That is a
> reasonable representation of the actual wear and
> tear on the roads as caused by your vehicle.
>
> If you have a 5 ton flatbed at your farm, and only
> use it for 500 miles a year, the taxes should be
> cheap. If I have a muscle car that only gets used
> 1500 miles a year, my taxes should be cheap. If I
> am a traveling salesperson with a Yukon who drives
> 100K a year, I should pay more.


I agree.

If annual taxes on vehicles were eliminated and the state gasoline tax increased by the appropriate replacement amount, wouldn't that approach it?

It would also serve the public function of encouraging people to drive more efficient vehicles and keep them in tune.

davester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The Ferrari and Kia probably use exactly the same
> quantity of government services. Perhaps you could
> explain just what the rationale would be for
> taxing a Ferrari at a higher rate than a Kia other
> than that you like sticking it to people who have
> more money than you (not a justification in my
> book).

You can apply this same logic to ask why a family of four with a household income of $250,000 is taxed more than a family of four with a $40,000 income. The $40k family will probably need government assitance, so they should actually pay more taxes.

<Perhaps you could explain just what the rationale would be for taxing a Ferrari at a
<higher rate than a Kia other than that you like sticking it to people who have more
<money than you (not a justification in my book).


I take back a few of the things I've said to or about you, davester...
When you're right, you're right.



Oh, and to some others in this thread;
[www.fairtax.org]

---

Paul F.
-----
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca c. 5 BC - 65 AD
----
Good is the enemy of Excellent. Talent is not necessary for Excellence.
Persistence is necessary for Excellence. And Persistence is a Decision.
--

--

--
Eureka, CA