A new road charge mooted for electric vehicle drivers is based on a fundamental misconception.

A specific road use tax on EVs and hybrids makes no sense.

Given the harms caused by traditional vehicles, society should welcome the decline in fuel excise revenue caused by the transition to EVs – in the same way we should welcome declining revenue from cigarette taxes.

Vehicle registration fees make only a modest contribution to road costs. That’s why all motorists should pay a road-user charge. The payment should be based on a combination of vehicle mass and distance travelled

  • Not a replicant@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    3 hours ago

    So tax cyclists a nominal amount. $10/year.

    Hang on , though. Tell me - because I don’t know - who pays for cyclist injury compensation? e.g. Car and cyclist collide, cyclist is taken off to hospital where they <sadly> lose a foot. Those who pay the third-party personal injury component of vehicle registration are covered for compensation for that sort of injury. Where would a cyclist’s compensation come from?

    And if it comes from the same insurance pool as motorists, why aren’t cyclists contributing?

    FWIW I’m the most polite and respectful motorist when it comes to cyclists, but if they’re using the road, they should share the cost. Even a nominal amount would be good. Right now they get to use the road without contributing like other road users.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zoneEnglish
      1·
      1 hour ago

      For clarity: your idea of $10/year as a “nominal” amount is itself patently absurd. That’s an enormous cost, many hundreds of times more than the amount that would be proportional to how much damage they do to the infrastructure, compared to other vehicles.

      If you wanted a truly “fair” price, it would be measured in cents, if that. And at that point, the cost to administer the system would far outweigh the revenue brought in.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zoneEnglish
      1·
      1 hour ago

      So tax cyclists a nominal amount. $10/year.

      Absolutely fucking terrible idea.

      Where would a cyclist’s compensation come from

      From the driver. When bikes and cars collide, the driver is basically always responsible, so they’re the ones who pay.

      if they’re using the road, they should share the cost

      Cyclists don’t create a cost. More cyclists is literally a net positive economically, the exact opposite of car drivers. Cyclists cause negligible wear and tear on the roads, even once you account for the risk of crashes (which is actually a car’s fault anyway), they’re a lower burden on public healthcare, and they’re more likely to be spending money at local businesses.

      Literally everything about encouraging more people to ride rather than drive is positive. And by extension, putting up any barriers is a terrible idea. Even a “nominal amount” would deter huge numbers of people from cycling. And that’s not the effect we want.