There does, and it does, but that doesn’t really seem to be the point of the story to me. This is very much a “loud exhausts correlate to dark triad personality traits” kind of story. Or perhaps more like how everyone knows they participate in actual atrocity and torture against vulnerable individuals but just keep buying their corpses.
You do realise the government can just ban cars above a certain size anytime they want right? Like I can’t buy a tank and drive it down the road, or a car that is wider than the size of a lane. All they have to do is adjust the limits to weed out the dangerous and inefficient models. Sometimes talking apes are far too stupid to allow their non-existent critical thought to self-regulate their actions.
With how popular huge SUVs seem to be, that would be a very unpopular measure. Then you also have the car manufacturer lobbies squeezing your balls if you try to pass something like that.
I’d like a middle ground where these cars have much higher insurance premiums and are heavily taxed in proportion to their space usage.
Want to drive around in a car that weighs 3x my city car, then you need to pay 3x as more.
Road damage caused by a vehicle is proportional to the fourth power of vehicle weight. That leaves out other externalities such as deaths and injuries caused to pedestrians, cyclists and people in other motor vehicles.
But taxes should reflect externalities, so a bit part of vehicle tax should also rise as the fourth power of vehicle weight. Double the weight, sixteen times the tax. I’d make enforcement simpler by setting a zero-rate mimimum of 1000 kg.
By the way, use of this formula also illustrates the imbecility of those demanding a tax on bicycles. If the base rate is, let’s say, £100 per annum for an unladen 1-tonne vehicle, then that for a bike weighing 20kg would be £100/100**4. That is, 1/10,000 of a pound, or 1/100 of a penny. And other bicycle-caused externalities aren’t much different in proportion to those caused by a motor vehicle.
Indeed, but have you ever seen the cars politicians drive? In the UK at least they are in SUVs to a man. I drove past King Charles not too long ago and there were two land rovers and four police motorbikes…
On a related note I was driving my wonderful electric Dacia Spring at the time… highly recommend those. Costs me £105 a month and perhaps £15 in electric.
There does, and it does, but that doesn’t really seem to be the point of the story to me. This is very much a “loud exhausts correlate to dark triad personality traits” kind of story. Or perhaps more like how everyone knows they participate in actual atrocity and torture against vulnerable individuals but just keep buying their corpses.
You do realise the government can just ban cars above a certain size anytime they want right? Like I can’t buy a tank and drive it down the road, or a car that is wider than the size of a lane. All they have to do is adjust the limits to weed out the dangerous and inefficient models. Sometimes talking apes are far too stupid to allow their non-existent critical thought to self-regulate their actions.
With how popular huge SUVs seem to be, that would be a very unpopular measure. Then you also have the car manufacturer lobbies squeezing your balls if you try to pass something like that.
I’d like a middle ground where these cars have much higher insurance premiums and are heavily taxed in proportion to their space usage.
Want to drive around in a car that weighs 3x my city car, then you need to pay 3x as more.
Road damage caused by a vehicle is proportional to the fourth power of vehicle weight. That leaves out other externalities such as deaths and injuries caused to pedestrians, cyclists and people in other motor vehicles.
But taxes should reflect externalities, so a bit part of vehicle tax should also rise as the fourth power of vehicle weight. Double the weight, sixteen times the tax. I’d make enforcement simpler by setting a zero-rate mimimum of 1000 kg.
By the way, use of this formula also illustrates the imbecility of those demanding a tax on bicycles. If the base rate is, let’s say, £100 per annum for an unladen 1-tonne vehicle, then that for a bike weighing 20kg would be £100/100**4. That is, 1/10,000 of a pound, or 1/100 of a penny. And other bicycle-caused externalities aren’t much different in proportion to those caused by a motor vehicle.
Indeed, but have you ever seen the cars politicians drive? In the UK at least they are in SUVs to a man. I drove past King Charles not too long ago and there were two land rovers and four police motorbikes… On a related note I was driving my wonderful electric Dacia Spring at the time… highly recommend those. Costs me £105 a month and perhaps £15 in electric.
Yesand? Perhaps you meant to reply to someone else.