▲ 128 ▼ The Deadly Rise of Giant Trucks and S.U.V.s (www.nytimes.com) submitted 1 month ago by Veserr@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world 26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] username968142@lemmy.world 50 points 1 month ago (7 children) Just make them pay double the taxes and eventually they will disappear. permalink fedilink source hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago (2 children) I feel like they should also require special licenses. Doesn't australia do that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago They need to have air brakes or be somewhere in the 12+ ton range to need special license. Certain States allow you to tow a RV trailer with an additional trailer for your boat – essentially tandem trailers. No license needed. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Maybe this is confirmation bias, but when I see a vehicle that can’t stay in its lane or can’t make a turn, it’s inevitably a full sized pickup or suv. There’s this one street corner near me that is admittedly a tight turn, it it’s near the elementary school and there are kids who walk. Every week or so in the winter, I’ll see tire tracks in the snow, on the sidewalk where kids walk to school, every day, from vehicles that didn’t make the turn and drive over the the corner of the sidewalk. It’s not like we have those tiny one lane paths the UK is famous for, it’s not that tight, any personal vehicle can make the turn, but some drivers can’t maneuver their vehicles well enough. I’ve actually been wondering about putting together a petition to install different accessibility to the sidewalks. Our town uses the really nice ones where the entire corner is a ramp to the street. That’s great for all of us, but there’s no protection from cars. I wonder if we can go back to the older style with a full height curb aside from a specific ramp. Still accessible even if less so for all of us, but if it’s better at keeping the cars off the sidewalk, it may be worth it permalink fedilink source parent [–] Fluffy_Ruffs@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (3 children) No politician would support it because of the votes it would cost them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago Exactly. In Canada, the right wing gained 30 points promising to kill the carbon levy (they called it a tax). Government had to kill it or get voted out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Also half the politicians are driving these monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) Maybe. If you pay by weight and distance, and focus it on EVs “paying their share”, you may get a lot of truck owners reacting in outrage over something they know nothing about. As an EV owner I would vote for it despite it costing me more, because it’s a fair way to do it, it might cut back in ridiculous trucks …. Although I might angle for the income to be dedicated to “transportation infrastructure “, not just roads Then again, my brother got one of those Silverado EVs. That battery is three times the size of mine and the car approaches 10,000 pounds. At some point there’s got to be a weight limit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) 80% of road damage are the semis that weigh 60,000 lbs. What do you think will happen to the price of goods if you ban the primary transportation of those goods? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago My bad, I took the shortcut of calling g pickups: trucks. Currently large trucks are treated differently from passenger vehicles and I’m sure that would continue As you say, if it were truly based on road damage, commercial vehicle would have to cover most of it. That may be fair, but yeah doesn’t seem economically sustainable permalink fedilink source parent [–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 11 points 1 month ago (2 children) I'm not sure. The insurance, fuel, and depreciation on these things already makes them really expensive. In my part of the country, the registration taxes are $60 per year or so, a laughably tiny fraction of the cost of owning a car. Even multiplying them 10x wouldn't make them a major expense compared to the insurance on a pickup truck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago They're more of a status symbol at this point anyway. Adding more fees just gives it more prestige. Bars permalink fedilink source parent [–] Botzo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago My insurance actually went down when I replaced my VW golf with an F150 lightning. Conversely, my tabs cost 7x more. But in CA, the value of the vehicle is very impactful and there's an additional $118 EV tax considered in registration fee calculation. permalink fedilink source parent [–] fpslem@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children) Taxing vehicles by gross vehicle weight and miles traveled is probably a good strategy, as more vehicles are BEV and the meager gas taxes in North America fall farther behind compared to escalating road maintenance costs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago This would be great for EVs, because fair is fair politicians would stop trying to charge excessively more people would realize the full sized pickups are more of a problem than EV s if it encourages lighter EVs, that’s great! permalink fedilink source parent [–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago and miles traveled As long as it is odometer readings and not GPS tracking permalink fedilink source parent [–] albbi@piefed.ca 5 points 1 month ago Insurance rates should be much higher as well. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 0 points 1 month ago The problem is you can't easily distinguish larger cars used for business and cars used to treat inferiority complex. Many business need larger trucks like delivery vans. If you try to tax them out of existence you will hurt pretty much the entire supply chain. You could try banning all pickup trucks but I think law is applied based on size and weight, not the specific body type. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago* Oh hell no. Canada had a carbon tax on fuel and trucks sales only increased. You can't fight fashion with taxes, people will just go into debt and then throw out the government when they are poorer. I have tiny nurses driving to work in F150s and all the do is whine about aFFoRdAbIlIty. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago (2 children) I feel like they should also require special licenses. Doesn't australia do that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago They need to have air brakes or be somewhere in the 12+ ton range to need special license. Certain States allow you to tow a RV trailer with an additional trailer for your boat – essentially tandem trailers. No license needed. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Maybe this is confirmation bias, but when I see a vehicle that can’t stay in its lane or can’t make a turn, it’s inevitably a full sized pickup or suv. There’s this one street corner near me that is admittedly a tight turn, it it’s near the elementary school and there are kids who walk. Every week or so in the winter, I’ll see tire tracks in the snow, on the sidewalk where kids walk to school, every day, from vehicles that didn’t make the turn and drive over the the corner of the sidewalk. It’s not like we have those tiny one lane paths the UK is famous for, it’s not that tight, any personal vehicle can make the turn, but some drivers can’t maneuver their vehicles well enough. I’ve actually been wondering about putting together a petition to install different accessibility to the sidewalks. Our town uses the really nice ones where the entire corner is a ramp to the street. That’s great for all of us, but there’s no protection from cars. I wonder if we can go back to the older style with a full height curb aside from a specific ramp. Still accessible even if less so for all of us, but if it’s better at keeping the cars off the sidewalk, it may be worth it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago They need to have air brakes or be somewhere in the 12+ ton range to need special license. Certain States allow you to tow a RV trailer with an additional trailer for your boat – essentially tandem trailers. No license needed. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Maybe this is confirmation bias, but when I see a vehicle that can’t stay in its lane or can’t make a turn, it’s inevitably a full sized pickup or suv. There’s this one street corner near me that is admittedly a tight turn, it it’s near the elementary school and there are kids who walk. Every week or so in the winter, I’ll see tire tracks in the snow, on the sidewalk where kids walk to school, every day, from vehicles that didn’t make the turn and drive over the the corner of the sidewalk. It’s not like we have those tiny one lane paths the UK is famous for, it’s not that tight, any personal vehicle can make the turn, but some drivers can’t maneuver their vehicles well enough. I’ve actually been wondering about putting together a petition to install different accessibility to the sidewalks. Our town uses the really nice ones where the entire corner is a ramp to the street. That’s great for all of us, but there’s no protection from cars. I wonder if we can go back to the older style with a full height curb aside from a specific ramp. Still accessible even if less so for all of us, but if it’s better at keeping the cars off the sidewalk, it may be worth it permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Fluffy_Ruffs@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (3 children) No politician would support it because of the votes it would cost them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago Exactly. In Canada, the right wing gained 30 points promising to kill the carbon levy (they called it a tax). Government had to kill it or get voted out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Also half the politicians are driving these monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) Maybe. If you pay by weight and distance, and focus it on EVs “paying their share”, you may get a lot of truck owners reacting in outrage over something they know nothing about. As an EV owner I would vote for it despite it costing me more, because it’s a fair way to do it, it might cut back in ridiculous trucks …. Although I might angle for the income to be dedicated to “transportation infrastructure “, not just roads Then again, my brother got one of those Silverado EVs. That battery is three times the size of mine and the car approaches 10,000 pounds. At some point there’s got to be a weight limit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) 80% of road damage are the semis that weigh 60,000 lbs. What do you think will happen to the price of goods if you ban the primary transportation of those goods? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago My bad, I took the shortcut of calling g pickups: trucks. Currently large trucks are treated differently from passenger vehicles and I’m sure that would continue As you say, if it were truly based on road damage, commercial vehicle would have to cover most of it. That may be fair, but yeah doesn’t seem economically sustainable permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago Exactly. In Canada, the right wing gained 30 points promising to kill the carbon levy (they called it a tax). Government had to kill it or get voted out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago Also half the politicians are driving these monstrosities. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) Maybe. If you pay by weight and distance, and focus it on EVs “paying their share”, you may get a lot of truck owners reacting in outrage over something they know nothing about. As an EV owner I would vote for it despite it costing me more, because it’s a fair way to do it, it might cut back in ridiculous trucks …. Although I might angle for the income to be dedicated to “transportation infrastructure “, not just roads Then again, my brother got one of those Silverado EVs. That battery is three times the size of mine and the car approaches 10,000 pounds. At some point there’s got to be a weight limit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) 80% of road damage are the semis that weigh 60,000 lbs. What do you think will happen to the price of goods if you ban the primary transportation of those goods? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago My bad, I took the shortcut of calling g pickups: trucks. Currently large trucks are treated differently from passenger vehicles and I’m sure that would continue As you say, if it were truly based on road damage, commercial vehicle would have to cover most of it. That may be fair, but yeah doesn’t seem economically sustainable permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rusticus@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (1 child) 80% of road damage are the semis that weigh 60,000 lbs. What do you think will happen to the price of goods if you ban the primary transportation of those goods? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago My bad, I took the shortcut of calling g pickups: trucks. Currently large trucks are treated differently from passenger vehicles and I’m sure that would continue As you say, if it were truly based on road damage, commercial vehicle would have to cover most of it. That may be fair, but yeah doesn’t seem economically sustainable permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago My bad, I took the shortcut of calling g pickups: trucks. Currently large trucks are treated differently from passenger vehicles and I’m sure that would continue As you say, if it were truly based on road damage, commercial vehicle would have to cover most of it. That may be fair, but yeah doesn’t seem economically sustainable permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 11 points 1 month ago (2 children) I'm not sure. The insurance, fuel, and depreciation on these things already makes them really expensive. In my part of the country, the registration taxes are $60 per year or so, a laughably tiny fraction of the cost of owning a car. Even multiplying them 10x wouldn't make them a major expense compared to the insurance on a pickup truck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago They're more of a status symbol at this point anyway. Adding more fees just gives it more prestige. Bars permalink fedilink source parent [–] Botzo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago My insurance actually went down when I replaced my VW golf with an F150 lightning. Conversely, my tabs cost 7x more. But in CA, the value of the vehicle is very impactful and there's an additional $118 EV tax considered in registration fee calculation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago They're more of a status symbol at this point anyway. Adding more fees just gives it more prestige. Bars permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Botzo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago My insurance actually went down when I replaced my VW golf with an F150 lightning. Conversely, my tabs cost 7x more. But in CA, the value of the vehicle is very impactful and there's an additional $118 EV tax considered in registration fee calculation. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fpslem@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children) Taxing vehicles by gross vehicle weight and miles traveled is probably a good strategy, as more vehicles are BEV and the meager gas taxes in North America fall farther behind compared to escalating road maintenance costs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago This would be great for EVs, because fair is fair politicians would stop trying to charge excessively more people would realize the full sized pickups are more of a problem than EV s if it encourages lighter EVs, that’s great! permalink fedilink source parent [–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago and miles traveled As long as it is odometer readings and not GPS tracking permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago This would be great for EVs, because fair is fair politicians would stop trying to charge excessively more people would realize the full sized pickups are more of a problem than EV s if it encourages lighter EVs, that’s great! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 2 points 1 month ago and miles traveled As long as it is odometer readings and not GPS tracking permalink fedilink source parent
[–] albbi@piefed.ca 5 points 1 month ago Insurance rates should be much higher as well. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 0 points 1 month ago The problem is you can't easily distinguish larger cars used for business and cars used to treat inferiority complex. Many business need larger trucks like delivery vans. If you try to tax them out of existence you will hurt pretty much the entire supply chain. You could try banning all pickup trucks but I think law is applied based on size and weight, not the specific body type. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago* Oh hell no. Canada had a carbon tax on fuel and trucks sales only increased. You can't fight fashion with taxes, people will just go into debt and then throw out the government when they are poorer. I have tiny nurses driving to work in F150s and all the do is whine about aFFoRdAbIlIty. permalink fedilink source parent