<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Back in the Air Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ti.org/antiplanner/?feed=rss2&#038;p=6502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502</link>
	<description>Dedicated to the sunset of government planning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 18:08:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288255</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 10:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sarcasm, dear sucksmetro, sarcasm.

I&#039;m glad you recognize the flaws of this scheme.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarcasm, dear sucksmetro, sarcasm.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad you recognize the flaws of this scheme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288254</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 10:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[metrosucks:

Road congestion is a result of a very free market at work.  Anyone can use almost any road at any time they please, and almost every business is free to set any working hours it wants without distraint.

If everyone wants to work roughly between 8a and 5p, resulting in congestion between 7a and 9a and 3:30p and 5:30p that&#039;s just the way things are.

The solutions being bandied about on here of &quot;encouraging&quot; businesses to change their working hours and &quot;incentivizing&quot; drivers not to use the roads at certain times are just another form of government force being bandied about by faux-Libertarian statists, with the intention of handing over the use of public assets paid for equally by all and which should be open to all to those with the most means.

Frankly, its the usual sort of Communistic prescriptions you typically find coming out of the so-called &quot;right&quot;.

People are perfectly capable of sorting out their own desires in a rational way.  If they really didn&#039;t want to be stuck in traffic every day, they would change their job, business, or lifestyle.  If they are stewing in congestion, its only because that is their choice.  Its not like there are not other options open to them today without various new complex tolling schemes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>metrosucks:</p>
<p>Road congestion is a result of a very free market at work.  Anyone can use almost any road at any time they please, and almost every business is free to set any working hours it wants without distraint.</p>
<p>If everyone wants to work roughly between 8a and 5p, resulting in congestion between 7a and 9a and 3:30p and 5:30p that&#8217;s just the way things are.</p>
<p>The solutions being bandied about on here of &#8220;encouraging&#8221; businesses to change their working hours and &#8220;incentivizing&#8221; drivers not to use the roads at certain times are just another form of government force being bandied about by faux-Libertarian statists, with the intention of handing over the use of public assets paid for equally by all and which should be open to all to those with the most means.</p>
<p>Frankly, its the usual sort of Communistic prescriptions you typically find coming out of the so-called &#8220;right&#8221;.</p>
<p>People are perfectly capable of sorting out their own desires in a rational way.  If they really didn&#8217;t want to be stuck in traffic every day, they would change their job, business, or lifestyle.  If they are stewing in congestion, its only because that is their choice.  Its not like there are not other options open to them today without various new complex tolling schemes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: the highwayman</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288177</link>
		<dc:creator>the highwayman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 05:23:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;re funny metrosucks, you preach ultra capitalism, though you depend on ultra socialism.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re funny metrosucks, you preach ultra capitalism, though you depend on ultra socialism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sandy Teal</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288142</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandy Teal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 03:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I understand the academic benefits toward moving to a mileage tax rather than a gas tax.  But outside of academia and think tanks, there is one gigantic hurdle.

Eighty percent of the population will never support a mileage tax unless the gas tax is entirely removed and promised to never be replaced.  And the other twenty percent will want to impose a new carbon tax on gas.  People are not so stupid as to support a new tax without getting rid of the old one.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand the academic benefits toward moving to a mileage tax rather than a gas tax.  But outside of academia and think tanks, there is one gigantic hurdle.</p>
<p>Eighty percent of the population will never support a mileage tax unless the gas tax is entirely removed and promised to never be replaced.  And the other twenty percent will want to impose a new carbon tax on gas.  People are not so stupid as to support a new tax without getting rid of the old one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: metrosucks</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288063</link>
		<dc:creator>metrosucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 19:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;But the gas tax isnâ€™t perfect either. I think another problem on the horizon for the gas tax is the inevitable and ever-increasing popularity of fuel efficient cars. Wouldnâ€™t a mileage based system be better equipped for this change?&lt;/i&gt;

Agreed. It&#039;s just a matter of the particular implementation, I suppose.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But the gas tax isnâ€™t perfect either. I think another problem on the horizon for the gas tax is the inevitable and ever-increasing popularity of fuel efficient cars. Wouldnâ€™t a mileage based system be better equipped for this change?</i></p>
<p>Agreed. It&#8217;s just a matter of the particular implementation, I suppose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: metrosucks</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288062</link>
		<dc:creator>metrosucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 19:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288062</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With all the monies going to fund high speed rail, right? I suppose the Orwellian world of checkpoints everywhere doesn&#039;t offend you, but only because it&#039;d be done to &quot;evil&quot; car drivers, of course.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With all the monies going to fund high speed rail, right? I suppose the Orwellian world of checkpoints everywhere doesn&#8217;t offend you, but only because it&#8217;d be done to &#8220;evil&#8221; car drivers, of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: metrosucks</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288060</link>
		<dc:creator>metrosucks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 19:39:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288060</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Though if your train was late, you&#039;d be pissed. No one is arguing for a God-given right to 70mph 24 hours a day. But if there are solutions that can smooth out traffic flows or encourage shifting commuting patterns, why not pursue them? Assuming these solutions don&#039;t somehow offend you, of course.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Though if your train was late, you&#8217;d be pissed. No one is arguing for a God-given right to 70mph 24 hours a day. But if there are solutions that can smooth out traffic flows or encourage shifting commuting patterns, why not pursue them? Assuming these solutions don&#8217;t somehow offend you, of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288051</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288051</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CPZ:

You could force everyone to have their odometer read at each annual inspection, and then pay a tax based on miles travelled on the spot.  Or even better, based on ton-miles travelled.

So say the rate was 2Â¢ per ton mile and you have a 2 ton vehicle that was driven 20,000 miles.  You would owe $800 = 80Â¢ per gallon @ 20 mpg.

And if you don&#039;t want to pay the tax because you have no money, a system of vehicle seizure and impoundment could be implemented.  This would also be a great time to collect unpaid parking, speeding, and moving violation tickets as well as check on mandatory insurance coverage.  You could even run a check for outstanding arrest warrants on the driver.

Just imagine the possibilities.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CPZ:</p>
<p>You could force everyone to have their odometer read at each annual inspection, and then pay a tax based on miles travelled on the spot.  Or even better, based on ton-miles travelled.</p>
<p>So say the rate was 2Â¢ per ton mile and you have a 2 ton vehicle that was driven 20,000 miles.  You would owe $800 = 80Â¢ per gallon @ 20 mpg.</p>
<p>And if you don&#8217;t want to pay the tax because you have no money, a system of vehicle seizure and impoundment could be implemented.  This would also be a great time to collect unpaid parking, speeding, and moving violation tickets as well as check on mandatory insurance coverage.  You could even run a check for outstanding arrest warrants on the driver.</p>
<p>Just imagine the possibilities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bennett</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288049</link>
		<dc:creator>bennett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288049</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Bennett, how would one handle out-of-state driving under an inspection/check odometer regime?&quot;

I guess you wouldn&#039;t.  Maybe the &quot;permanent residency&quot; state or where the car is registered gets the dough.  It&#039;s not perfect, I&#039;ll give you that.  I suppose it&#039;s harder and would have heavier administrative costs.

But the gas tax isn&#039;t perfect either.  I think another problem on the horizon for the gas tax is the inevitable and ever-increasing popularity of fuel efficient cars.  Wouldn&#039;t a mileage based system be better equipped for this change?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Bennett, how would one handle out-of-state driving under an inspection/check odometer regime?&#8221;</p>
<p>I guess you wouldn&#8217;t.  Maybe the &#8220;permanent residency&#8221; state or where the car is registered gets the dough.  It&#8217;s not perfect, I&#8217;ll give you that.  I suppose it&#8217;s harder and would have heavier administrative costs.</p>
<p>But the gas tax isn&#8217;t perfect either.  I think another problem on the horizon for the gas tax is the inevitable and ever-increasing popularity of fuel efficient cars.  Wouldn&#8217;t a mileage based system be better equipped for this change?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502&#038;cpage=1#comment-288047</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=6502#comment-288047</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;traffic flows exceed maximum roadway capacities&lt;/i&gt;

By definition, traffic flows cannot exceed maximum roadway capacity.

If X cars per hour actually move along a road, then the road has the capacity to handle at least that much traffic.

I would imagine you are really talking about capacity at a given speed.  However, we all know that maximum speed is not the point of maximum capacity.

You really seem to be arguing for a god given right to drive at 70+ mph unobstructed by traffic 24-7.  The investment to make this possible is simply not worth the cost, as most of that new capacity will be idle 22 hours per day 7 days per week, and the whole day on weekends.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>traffic flows exceed maximum roadway capacities</i></p>
<p>By definition, traffic flows cannot exceed maximum roadway capacity.</p>
<p>If X cars per hour actually move along a road, then the road has the capacity to handle at least that much traffic.</p>
<p>I would imagine you are really talking about capacity at a given speed.  However, we all know that maximum speed is not the point of maximum capacity.</p>
<p>You really seem to be arguing for a god given right to drive at 70+ mph unobstructed by traffic 24-7.  The investment to make this possible is simply not worth the cost, as most of that new capacity will be idle 22 hours per day 7 days per week, and the whole day on weekends.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
