[TriLUG] [OT] TriLUGger on the news

[tomed at bellsouth.net]

I don't think tolls are a good idea, unless applied in some sort of coherent
way. Money collected by tolls could eventually be siphoned off to another
region, just like fuel taxes are.

It would help if fuel taxes were adjusted over the years for inflation. They aren't
because politicians are terrified that maintaining real inflation adjusted dollars
would be perceived as a tax increase, especially with everyone paranoid over rising
gas prices. Unfortunately, this means the Federal Highway Trust Fund is heading
for insolvency, since the fuel tax rate, and revenue, have been decreasing in real
terms for quite some time. I think it's due to bottom out around 2010.

Tom Ed

At Sat, 19 May 2007 10:16:39 -0400,
David McDowell wrote:
> 
--snip --
> 
> To further on TomEd's comments, NC is a donor state to the Fed.  We
> were promised to get 0.92 cents on the dollar back.  We are currently
> getting only 0.86 cents back on the dollar.  That hurts our road
> funding as well.  Thank you Feds.  I don't see the arguement for tolls
> in that, but there you have it anyway.
> 
> David
> No Toll on 540
> http://www.notollson540.org
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/18/07, Tom Eisenmenger <teisenmenger at charter.net> wrote:
> > David, Steve, Kevin, and others have all made some good points - now
> > if I might step in and offer a different perspective:
> >
> > I live in Roanoke Rapids which is in one of the poorest, least
> > economically-developed areas of the state.  It is this way because
> > good-paying jobs are scarce due in no small part to the lack of a
> > decent transportation infrastructure.  One way to attract relocating
> > businesses to this area is to revitalize our local highway system:
> > for eastern NC this means to widen US158 into a 4-lane divided
> > highway from Henderson to Kitty Hawk, complete the widening of US64
> > from Williamston to Manteo, likewise US70 from Smithfield to Morehead
> > City, and US258 running north-south from VA to SC.  Many of these are
> > proposed DOT projects that have been deferred for years or even
> > decades.  They are perpetually on the back burner because projects in
> > the state's metropolitan areas, especially the Triangle, routinely
> > take precedence over projects in more rural areas.  No wonder - the
> > seat of power is, after all, in Raleigh.
> >
> > So now we come to I-540, the last of several Triangle projects to
> > bump the widening of US158 and others from the DOT's priority list.
> > This project is not surprisingly over schedule and over budget,
> > whether due to a spike in construction costs or to "mismanagement" it
> > doesn't really matter.  Now, Wake County is informed that it will be
> > 2032 (!) before the new beltway will be completed unless additional
> > funding is forthcoming.  While I sympathize somewhat with your "free
> > roads" movement, I do think it unfair for you to expect the rest of
> > the state to continue to subsidize your road construction whilst
> > projects needed elsewhere are deferred yet again.
> >
> > (I would like to think that the DOT has recognized that its
> > priorities must shift else the economic divide between urban and
> > rural regions will continue to grow but the reality is probably not
> > as noble.  I would also suggest that it is largely this economic
> > divide funneling economic development into the urban areas that is
> > fueling your rapid growth and causing all sorts of other problems -
> > can you say "year-round schools"?)
> >
> > I think the choice before you is reasonable:  wait until the 2030s
> > for the project to be completed when time and funding allow as other
> > DOT projects are assigned priority or expedite the project by funding
> > it with tolls.    You could raise additional revenues through taxes
> > but that means a certain increase in the gasoline tax which is a
> > regressive tax that hits the poor particularly hard.  You don't have
> > to have tolls as long as you're willing to defer your own project for
> > a while - imagine that!!
> >
> > FWIW, while my local Chamber of Commerce is opposed to a toll I-95
> > corridor, I have supported the idea as long as its generated revenue
> > is applied to the projects noted above.  After all, what is more fair
> > than those who most benefit from the building of a thoroughfare -
> > those who actually use it - being the ones who pay a little extra for
> > it?
> >
> > If it makes you feel any better, I do object to just a portion of
> > I-540 being designated toll - if this plan is to be implemented then
> > the entire beltline should be a toll road until the beltline project
> > is completed.
> >
> > Oh, and to further get under your skin - I'm typing this up on a Mac
> > Mini running OS X ;-)
> >
> > Sheesh - guess I'll have to wear a paper bag over my head to the next
> > TriLUG meeting...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > On May 18, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday 18 May 2007 07:05, Kevin Otte wrote:
> > >> Jeremy Portzer wrote:
> > >>> Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> > >>>> How about a compromise?  Tolls for single occupant SUVs on 540?
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm sure hybrid vehicles would be excepted though.  :-)
> > >>>
> > >>> --Jeremy
> > >>>
> > >>> (David drives a hybrid SUV, for those wondering what the heck
> > >>> this part
> > >>> of the thread is about...)
> > >>
> > >> While I recognize the humor intended by Andrew's statement, the
> > >> problem
> > >> is the tolls aren't for environmental protection purposes.
> > >
> > > As a matter of fact, all the slowing down and speeding up burns
> > > more gas and
> > > pollutes more.
> > >
> > > SteveT
> > >
> > > Steve Litt
> > > Author: Universal Troubleshooting Process books and courseware
> > > http://www.troubleshooters.com/
> > > --
> > > TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/
> > > trilug
> > > TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> > > TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
> >
> > --
> > TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> > TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> > TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
> >
> -- 
> TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
> TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/