On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 11:52:14 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 4/30/2017 11:11 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 09:35:40 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Oregon bike tax?
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/i...tax_lawma.html
1% on bike sales seems like a token to silence the cries that "they
don't pay their way." It couldn't generate much money, could it?

You mean like user fees? That's not the modern way. In California,
if you want to pay for a transportation improvement, you tax those who
do NOT choose to use it. For example, when it was proposed to install
a light rail system connecting Silly Clone Valley (where the jobs are)
to Santa Cruz County (where the homes are), it was determined that
selling tickets for rides would be too expensive. Therefore, the
automobile drivers who fail to appreciate the benefits of the light
rail system should be charged for the honor of supporting it. At the
public meeting where this was discussed, there was a near riot as
commuters voiced their objections.

VTA has a fare-box recovery of 10%. So for every $2 ride, the county
generously kicks in the extra $18. Of course other transportation is
also subsidized, but not to that extent. The existing light rail system
was NOT designed to move people from where the housing is to where the
jobs are, it was designed to bring people to downtown San Jose, where
the jobs aren't. The part of the system to move people quickly from
where the housing it to where the jobs are was planned, but they forgot
to build it.

What is infuriating is that so much transit infrastructure was removed,
including the rails to Santa Cruz. Map of what we used to have:
https://thegreatermarin.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/railways-of-the-bay-area-1937-final.jpg

My comments were in reference to the Eccles and Eastern Railway
proposal:
http://www.santacruztrains.com/2010/07/eccles-eastern-railroad.html
from Santa Cruz to Los Gatos:
http://bayrailalliance.org/files/library/Santa_Cruz-Los_Gatos_Rail_Corridor_study.pdf
The initial study recognized that most everyone (except the residents
along the right of way) wanted the railroad, but nobody was willing to
pay for it. Various methods of financing were proposed. The best
they could do was to tax the commuters and truckers, which would have
both generated the needed revenue, but also made automobiles and
trucks less competitive.

The Oregon bicycle tax propose has this problem, and others. I
suspect there will be mandatory registration of all bicycles, so that
the State knows whom to tax and whom to fine for not paying the tax.
If they follow the California tradition, this will require a large
bureaucracy skilled at spending money, which will be primarily
financed by fees and fines far in excess of the original tax. Strange
rules and regulations will need to be enacted to criminalize as many
bicycle riders as needed to support the bureaucracy. Eventually, the
bureau will be politicized, shortly after red and blue lanes are
established for Republican and Democratic Party bicycle riders. We
already have green (party) bicycle paths.

Anyway, if it looks like the Orgon bicycle tax might pass, I suggest
that the State legislature instead studies the situation and report
back in a few decades.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558