Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / April 2007
Do RVer's really pay their fair share?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Rusty Warrick - 05 Apr 2007 16:25 GMT I've noticed many going on about RVer's paying road taxes. There is no denying they pay road taxes when they purchase fuel and in some cases pay a lot of taxes. But let's compare them to commercial tractor trailers. The big rigs pay much more in taxes and they perform an essential function that everyone benefits from. RVing is a self indulgent activity. Yet they pay little or no tax compared to commercial truckers and still use as much of the road.
Then there is driver licensing. Tractor trailer drivers undergo intense instruction and training. RV drivers don't compare. If you can read an eye chart and keep it between the lines most of the time you can pilot an RV. Not all RV drivers are bad, many are very good. But wouldn't RVing have a much better image if the bad drivers were weeded out?
I am proposing higher taxes upon RVers to bring them into parity with commercial truckers and higher standards/qualifications for drivers. Only a few of the RVers will be disallowed from RVing, but overall it will enhance the image of RVers and give them a bit more clout in dealing with governments since they pay more taxes. RVers will be less hamstrung by the manufacturers and certainly have priority over average citizens in the use of the road.
The additional driver qualifications would result in lower insurance premiums offsetting the increased taxes. By having less RVers the cost of fuel may decline as a result. In terms of expense there should become a net zero or decline in aggregate costs, less bad RVers on the road and an overall increase in the quality of the RV experience for participants and non participants alike.
Rusty Warrick Peconic, NY
Timothy Lange - 05 Apr 2007 16:47 GMT Rusty,
Based on my observations of RV'ers and truckers, I would say yes, RV'ers pay more than their fair share. Trucking is a business, they are allowed on the road 11/12 hours of every 24, per driver? If you are not moving you are not making money. They can haul up to 80,000#?
Compare that to me that goes out about 30 days a year for 8 hours or less a day with my 10,000# rig.
Who puts more wear on the roads?
I think everyone needs more stringent licensing.
Tim.
Steve Barker - 05 Apr 2007 18:54 GMT Well when we (RV'ers) get paid 44 to 75 cents a mile, then we'll pay higher taxes. You have to remember those truckers you refer to are making a living doing what they do. 12 hours a day , 5 to 7 days a week. You are comparing apples with turnips.
 Signature Steve Barker
> I've noticed many going on about RVer's paying road taxes. There is no > denying they pay road taxes when they purchase fuel and in some cases [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Rusty Warrick > Peconic, NY Shad O'Shay - 05 Apr 2007 20:03 GMT > I've noticed many going on about RVer's paying road taxes. There is no > denying they pay road taxes when they purchase fuel and in some cases [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Rusty Warrick > Peconic, NY Let it be known right up front I'm against higher taxes or any sort of "user fee" for anybody, even RVers. It's not fair to single out a particular group for higher taxes or fees. If the taxes actually went toward services and better roads that would be one thing but it seems most of the tax revenue disappears into the general fund to be used for higher salaries for politicians and other government perks.
But, I am all for increased education and perhaps an RV endorsement similar to a motorcycle endorsement. If you have to take a written and driving test to be able to legally operate a motorcycle, it stands to reason a much more hazardous to the public vehicle like many of the RVs larger than Volkswagen camper van should have increased licensing requirements. Vehicle license plates for RVs should be limited to those who can pass the endorsement testing. This would go a long ways toward removing ignorant, unskilled bullies from the roads.
I would also like to see RVs that are large such as the bus-type RV and definitely the tractor trailer sized RVs be required to stop at all weigh stations to get their papers and weight checked. Who knows what some RVs are used for. Smuggling illegal aliens? Drug smuggling? Illegal contraband such as liquor and cigarettes? I've even heard of some RVs being used as brothels at truck stops. This type of illegal use needs to be stopped in its tracks.
I often ride in the "team bus" which is really just an RV set up for cycle racing support and my team would also be subject to the above so I'm not advocating something for the "other guy." Rather, I'm suggesting enhanced safety, especially the education part. Among the questions on the RV endorsement would be a couple about bicycles being as legal on the roadways as RVs.
Shad O'Shay
Volt - 06 Apr 2007 00:03 GMT >> I've noticed many going on about RVer's paying road taxes. There is no >> denying they pay road taxes when they purchase fuel and in some cases [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > > Shad O'Shay I am all for increased education and perhaps a bicycle endorsement similar to a motorcycle endorsement. If you have to take a written and driving test to be able to legally operate a motorcycle If you cannot read an eye chart and keep it between the lines most of the time you cannot ride a bicycle. Not all bicycle riders are bad, many are very good. But wouldn't bicycle riders have a much better image if the bad riders were weeded out other than by big trucks? Since bicycles are ridden on the roads they should be inspected and taxed like all other vehicles on the road.
GILLETTE'S PRINCIPLE: "If you want to make people angry, lie. If you want to make them absolutely livid with rage, tell the truth."
 Signature Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Jud Hardcastle - 06 Apr 2007 16:15 GMT > But, I am all for increased education and perhaps an RV endorsement > similar to a motorcycle endorsement. If you have to take a written and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > requirements. Vehicle license plates for RVs should be limited to those > who can pass the endorsement testing. Watch the terms folks--I take it that by "RV" people here really meaning "motorhome". RV also includes Class B vans and 5th wheel and bumper tow trailers and popups. If you add a license requirement to travel trailers then you also have to require it for ALL trailers including utility trailers, lawn mowing trailers, horse and livestock trailers, and most especially U-Haul trailers (whose drivers often know NOTHING about trailering). For that matter how is a motorhome different than a large U-Haul truck or van? That kind of requirement would be a nightmare to understand and manage. Existing requirements for "commercial" drivers is specific--as is the air brake endorsement a few states have.
Fair share? The average RV is driven far less miles per year than the average car--based on mileage the RV'ers should get a rebate! And comparing MH's to OTR trucks mileage and weight-wise is just plain ludicrous.
As for lowering insurance premiums--bull. I seem to recall reading that motorhome drivers are ALREADY in the lowest bracket. MH drivers, and RV drivers in general, tend to be much more careful than the average automobile driver--they are very aware that the MH is big and harder to stop. Plus MH drivers are usually in an age bracket that is already statistically "more careful". I think you'll find that RV accidents of any kind are rare and ones caused by the MH driver even rarer.
In conclusion....the word TROLL comes to mind.
 Signature Jud Dallas TX USA
Shad O'Shay - 06 Apr 2007 17:07 GMT >> But, I am all for increased education and perhaps an RV endorsement >> similar to a motorcycle endorsement. If you have to take a written [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > comparing MH's to OTR trucks mileage and weight-wise is just plain > ludicrous. Not as ludicrous as your statement directly above. Based on mileage, indeed. How about based on miles per gallon? And, everybody know most RVers drive their RVs IN ADDITION TO their automobiles. Some even tow their cars behind reducing their mpg even more. Also most RVs get quite low fuel mileage. One mile driven in the average RV probably uses more fuel than ten or twenty miles driven in a Prius. So, no! RVers don't need a rebate. They don't deserve a rebate. They need to just realize how biased their views are. Biased and unrealistic.
Shad O'Shay
miles - 07 Apr 2007 16:07 GMT > Not as ludicrous as your statement directly above. Based on mileage, > indeed. How about based on miles per gallon? And, everybody know most > RVers drive their RVs IN ADDITION TO their automobiles. Some even tow > their cars behind reducing their mpg even more. Also most RVs get quite > low fuel mileage. One mile driven in the average RV probably uses more > fuel than ten or twenty miles driven in a Prius. So everyone should be city dwellers with families packed into tin can Prius huh? You've also incorrectly used the term RV when you meant Motorhome.
Shad O'Shay - 07 Apr 2007 21:35 GMT >> Not as ludicrous as your statement directly above. Based on mileage, >> indeed. How about based on miles per gallon? And, everybody know most [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Prius huh? You've also incorrectly used the term RV when you meant > Motorhome. A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh!
Shad O'Shay.
miles - 08 Apr 2007 15:44 GMT > A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh! You specifically referred to an RV, but what you meant was Motorhome. Do your statements apply to all RV'ers or just Motorhomes? Say what you mean.
Ted Bell - 08 Apr 2007 16:07 GMT >> A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh! > > You specifically referred to an RV, but what you meant was Motorhome. > Do your statements apply to all RV'ers or just Motorhomes? Say what > you mean. I did say what I meant. And I said it correctly, unlike you who are ignorant about a term you use regularly . . .
Here: http://www.rvamerica.com/rvtypes/ That should explain it so even an imbecile RVer should comprehend. It's even got pictures for those of you who never learned how to read beyond the second grade level. It's from RV America, the home of the RV industry on the Internet.
As you can see, among the other types of RVs, a motorhome is also listed. So, as I correctly stated, a motorhome is a type of RV.
Shad O'Shay
miles - 09 Apr 2007 14:50 GMT > I did say what I meant. And I said it correctly, unlike you who are > ignorant about a term you use regularly . . . [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > As you can see, among the other types of RVs, a motorhome is also > listed. So, as I correctly stated, a motorhome is a type of RV. Geez guy!! We all know a motorhome is a type of RV. You used the term RV. I am asking if your rants are against ALL RV types or just Motorhomes to which you meant. Got it now? Some peoples kids! Too funny.
Shad O'Shay - 09 Apr 2007 22:12 GMT >> I did say what I meant. And I said it correctly, unlike you who are >> ignorant about a term you use regularly . . . [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Motorhomes to which you meant. Got it now? Some peoples kids! Too > funny. I must have misunderstood your question, then. Mostly it's the larger motorhome type RVer that is the ignorant bully. Especially the ones that look like large busses like the Holiday Rambler Admiral, for example. The little modified vans seem to not be too obnoxious. But some of the larger towed trailer type usually are bullies, too. You know, the ones towed by those duallies(sp?) pick up trucks. Airstream trailers seem to be rude and dangerous quite often.
Shad O'Shay
miles - 10 Apr 2007 01:18 GMT > I must have misunderstood your question, then. Mostly it's the larger > motorhome type RVer that is the ignorant bully. Especially the ones that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > towed by those duallies(sp?) pick up trucks. Airstream trailers seem to > be rude and dangerous quite often. I see quite the opposite here in the SW states where RV'ers are some of the more courteous drivers. The worst are the truckers along I-10 between Phoenix and Los Angeles. Some days there are more trucks than cars and they choke up all lanes especially up hills.
Ted Bell - 08 Apr 2007 16:12 GMT >> A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh! > > You specifically referred to an RV, but what you meant was Motorhome. > Do your statements apply to all RV'ers or just Motorhomes? Say what > you mean. Oh, don't be confused by "Ted Bell". I'm across the border in Belgium using another friend's internet connection.
Shad O'Shay
Steve B - 08 Apr 2007 16:27 GMT >>> A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh! >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Shad O'Shay Wassamatta? Been plonked by so many people, you morphed? Shouldn't your middle school track break be over by NOW? Hasn't mommy found out you're playing on the computer again? Or is she still out on a crack binge or out on the stroll makin' the rent? Or is SHE the ones in the Netherlands and Belgium working in a public brothel for some Easter money?
Bye again.
Ted Bell / Shad O'Shay - 08 Apr 2007 16:57 GMT >>>> A motorhome is a type of RV. Duh! >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Netherlands and Belgium working in a public brothel for some Easter > money? After this post I went ahead and put my name in the from: line right behind Ted's so anybody who has "plonked" me will not have to do it again. Satisfied?
You call me a school boy but you act like one yourself with your silly attempts at insults. Sad! More proof of the ugly RVer!
Shad O'Shay
Jim Redelfs - 05 Apr 2007 22:21 GMT > I am proposing higher taxes upon RVers to bring them into parity with > commercial truckers and higher standards/qualifications for drivers. > Only a few of the RVers will be disallowed from RVing Another outstanding troll. ...and the usual lemmings will line up to feed it.
 Signature <sigh> JR
Vaughn - 05 Apr 2007 23:40 GMT > I've noticed many going on about RVer's paying road taxes. There is no > denying they pay road taxes when they purchase fuel and in some cases [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > Rusty Warrick > Peconic, NY Higher taxes no. Everyone pays more than enough already. More strigent licensing, yes. Retesting every few years too. One jerk/impaired driver is too many on the road. A few of these drivers are so mentally deteriorated that driving drunk would be safer than them driving. In the interest of safety, get them off the road.
Vaughn
Jim - 06 Apr 2007 23:35 GMT >.... But let's compare them to commercial > tractor trailers.... Cool. Let's us do road taxes on a 'fair' basis, by all means... like ton-miles, maybe? Gross weight multiplied by miles driven should give us an accurate factor to base road use taxes on. Lesse, my Tiger CX weighs about 9200 lbs. max. I've had it a little more than a year, and driven it 9335 miles... probably 8,000 mi. in a year. Now do the same math for each semi, and maybe all the other vehicles on the road.... cars, snHarleys, motopecans, bicycles, etc.... Use the result as a factor in calculating taxes... drive more, pay more; weight more, pay more.
While you're making sh.t 'fair', let's make parents pay their fair share, too... take school taxes... shouldn't they be based on the number of kids a couple has in school? Take the total cost to run a region's school system, divided by the number of kids taught. Multiply by the number of kids a family has in school, and assign the costs where it belongs.... There, wasn't that easy? And I bet the kids' homework would get more attention from the parents if they were actually paying the costs of education.
Jim, "Manure occureth."
stan.birch@hotmail.com - 07 Apr 2007 19:14 GMT >On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:25:20 -0400, Rusty Warrick wrote: >I am proposing higher taxes upon RVers to bring them into parity with >commercial truckers . . . You must be experiencing a really boring weekend!
|
|
|