Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / April 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Do RVer's really pay their fair share?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
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!
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.