Looks to me like a system ripe for hacking and fraud that will turn ordinary citizens into criminals.
The test setup is an electronics package outfitted with GPS, wireless internet, and a rating system algorithm that tracks the following things:
- The car’s environmental impact
- The distances driven,
- The route,
- The time it is driven
Supposedly, calculating all this together for a tax is a “fairer” way to assess the impact of the vehicle. Of course the whole idea is to discourage people from driving.
According to the article, the proposal will be introduced slowly as a replacement for the current car and gas tax, however it is most certainly controversial and will be a real test of how far environmentally savvy Dutch citizens will be willing to go to reduce the impact of the car.
Personally, I think it has FAIL written all over it since people really don’t want their personal vehicles to be like taxicabs with meters tracking everywhere you’ve driven. I wonder how long it will be before some citizen takes a hammer to the meter. The more tech savvy will just figure out a way to hack it or fool it.
Let politicians be the guinea pigs. All of them.
Odd though it may seem, Australia already has a tax (“FBT”) based on vehicle distance driven. OK, so it’s distance-based, not time-based, and it doesn’t apply to everyone, but the idea is similar. There is one important difference, however. There are distance thresholds, and when you cross one (drive far enough) your tax reduces. It is perfectly possible, of course, that some people lie about the distance driven, but people I know are honest about the distance they drive, and towards the end of the tax year sometimes undertake long journeys specifically to reduce their tax. Effectively, the government will pay for them to go for a long drive. While I was subject to the tax, I visited Adelaide twice (2200km return trip). Government insanity knows no bounds.
@Robert 12.59PM
You mean bycicle tax. The lucky few, driving their Indian and Harley motocycles didn’t have to pay roadtax!
All unelected, grotesque, insensitive, forever growing, government bureacracies will ultimately demand that all citizen pay checks be forwarded directly to their accounts and they in turn will perhaps return a pittance for us to possibly survive.
G. Karst says:
August 14, 2011 at 10:58 am
I am saying that there must be a theoretical limit on the general tax paid by the bulk of tax payers (ie middle class). Obviously, we cannot take 100% of a person’s income>>>
Well actually you can, and without a revolt. What do you think deficit spending is? The only way for a government to pay back the money it has borrowed (the debt incurred from deficit spending) is to raise money from taxes. So, deficits are just taxes deferred. Add up the % tax you pay (income plus consumption) and you get a number which is WRONG.
You musty add to what you paid up front to what was spent as “deficit” spending, which you must ALSO pay…at some point in the future. Plus interest. Since you will most likely die long before that, you will leave to your children ther personal assetts you have accumulated as well as your share of the government debt you have accumulated.
Once the two are added up, you will find that there are plenty of people who are taxed in excess of 100% without a revolt. However, when the country itself cannot service the debt, it then goes into bankruptcy. Who ever they owe the money to then owns them. Which would be YOU.
“According to data collected in the Eindhoven trial, watching the small charges add up changed driving habits.”
And that’s what they want to do, change our driving habits so we drive less so that there is more fossil fuels for the developing world to develop with.
peter_dtm
MarkG
davidmhoffer
Your points are all valid, but I don’t think I am communicating effectively.
I am referring to all taxes paid, income tax, sales tax, road tax, custom and excise taxes, licenses, parking meters, ALL TAXES. Can the average wage earner’s after tax earnings equal zero?
As a example, I will attempt a clumsy answer (obviously if I knew the answer, I wouldn’t have asked the question)
Obviously, my above answer is not correct, so what is the actual economic theory? GK
kramer;
And that’s what they want to do, change our driving habits so we drive less so that there is more fossil fuels for the developing world to develop with.>>>
Are you serious? Saracasm on?
Because if all it took was to have fossil fuel in order to become developed, then exactly what has gone wrong in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Chad, Lybia, Venezuala, Egypt, Syria…
And how did countries with pretty much zippo for oil become part of the developed world? Like Britain, Germany, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea…
@Lex, yes i did mean bicycle, but we have so many of them that the Dutch usually call them simpley “bikes” and when we talk about a motorcycle we usually say “motor”.
The joys of the Dutch langauge.
G. Karst;
There is no magic number. Its like the story of the boiled frog. Drop a frog into pan of hot water, and he’ll instantly jump out. Put a frog into a pan of cool water and he’ll be just fine. Turn up the heat slowly, and he’ll die without even trying to get out.
Raise taxes from 25% to 55%, and you will have revolts in the streets. Raise taxes from 25% by 0.25% per year for 120 years….and you will be where we are right now. No revolt.
Goverment is simply anticipating the day when cars won’t use gas ir diesel. Easier to tax miles driven: that way they keep getting money regardless if the car runs on vegetable oil, wood gassifier, propane, electric, sunlight, compressed air, steam, pixie dust… it all can be taxed by taxing the miles driven.
G. Karst says:
August 14, 2011 at 7:29 pm
peter_dtm
MarkG
davidmhoffer
Your points are all valid, but I don’t think I am communicating effectively.
I am referring to all taxes paid, income tax, sales tax, road tax, custom and excise taxes, licenses, parking meters, ALL TAXES. Can the average wage earner’s after tax earnings equal zero?
As a example, I will attempt a clumsy answer (obviously if I knew the answer, I wouldn’t have asked the question)
A people can be taxed to a maximum value that results in a zero disposable income, for the average wage earner. From that point onward, spontaneous rioting in diverse locales commence. For the average wage-holder this corresponds to a 70% (WAG) of total income paid out in all taxes.
Obviously, my above answer is not correct, so what is the actual economic theory? GK
*******************************************************************************************
As davidmhoffer says at 09.57pm there is no magic number, but I think that the frog analogy is incorrect (if amusingly true).
Surely the point at which the revolution starts is when the general population does not have sufficient money to subsist (buy food and shelter for themselves and family). So it depends on general incomes and food prices.
Think Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Syria et al.
As many of our moms in the US used to say on trips when we asked if we were almost there yet, “every time the wheels go round, we get a little closer.” I’m afraid to ask, but closer to what?
@David L
Then a black box that measures distance driven and a yearly MOT test would be enough.
Hmmm … not quite; please name for me the technique used (e.g. TDOA, incoming angle as determined by Adcock array techniques, ping ‘ranging’ etc.), or this falls in the category of spurious assertion or pure speculation; DFing (direction finding) isn’t as easy as most make it out to be (embedded GPS in phones being a different matter) and requires non-insignificant infrastructure support H/W and S/W if embedded GPS isn’t used (part of the location-based suite of services found in cellular nowadays) …
On top of that, the whole concept of ‘cellular’ is a single serving site for a given terrestrial area to be covered; the assumption that two (or possibly more) sites can render adequate coverage of a given area then becomes absurd; economics governs this as implemented by the engineering dept. On top of that, DF at 900 or 1900 MHz in an urban area results in multitude of signals owing to multiple paths from handset to site owing to a plethora of man-made reflectors found in the field; from light poles to power poles (each power pole employs a copper ground wire running the length) to man-made structures (buildings et al) result in a LOT of false bearings to target; I would suggest a ‘fox hunt’ (hidden transmitter hunt) put on by you local Ham repeater club some Saturday evening to experience these effects if you can’t take my word for it …
Ham fox hunts:
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=ham+fox+hunt&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest
.
An update on this issue; I found the report that contains a LOT more detail on this GPS RFI/Interference issue in case anybody was interested in hearing the *whole* story (as opposed to misconstrued quotes and excerpts by the ‘adulterating press’):
GPS Privacy Jammers and RFI at Newark
Navigation Team AJP-652 Results
March 2011
A not-so-brief excerpt showing the timeline of events:
NB, acronyms:
AJP-652 – The group within the FAA implementing the GPS augmentation system
EWR – the three-letter ICAO identifier for Newark Airport,
GBAS – Ground Based Augmentation System; equipment that verifies, quantifies GPS accuracy
FCC – Federal Communications Commission – US ‘Frequency Police’
NJTP – New Jersey Turn Pike
NOTAM – Notice to Airmen bulletins (safety notices)
PANYNJ – Port Authority New York New Jersey
RFI – Radio Frequency Interference
SLS-4000 – The Honeywell SLS-4000 is the GBAS equipment installed
Trigger Event—————————–
• November 23, 2009 during installation testing the EWR GBAS went into alarm.
– GPS Receiver satellite tracking was interrupted.
• Had not been observed in 10+ years at the Memphis GBAS
– Observed carrier-to-noise (CN0 ) measurements were not consistent
with normal RF environment.
• RFI monitor had triggered.
– Data from the SLS-4000 RFI monitors and an independent AJP-652 GNSS
monitor (GBPM) system alarms confirmed strong RFI events.
– Many other events are being observed.
• RFI Jamming events occur up to multiple times per day.
.
EWR GPS/GBAS RFI Background ————————–
• October 27, 2009 (2 days)
– AJP-652 Installs EWR GBAS Monitor at Newark Airport – in advance of GBAS SIS
• November 23, 2009
– The EWR GBAS Shuts down due to Excessive RFI (1) – Source Unknown
• December 2, 2009
– FAA AJP-652 provides EWR data to FAA Spectrum Engineering (SE) for support
• December 10, 2009 (2 days)
– FAA AJP-652 Deploys an event monitor to begin EWR RFI data collection
– Significant RFI is brief in duration, concentrated in weekdays, long gaps present.
•January 13, 2010
– The EWR GBAS Shuts down due to Excessive RFI (2) – Source Unknown
• January 20, 2010 (2 days)
– FAA AJP-652 Deploys Specialized RFI Detection and Characterizing Equipment
to EWR, supported by an FAA contractor Snapshot system (Building 80)
– Snapshot system Captures 1st wideband event (no shutdown)
• February 17, 2010 (3 days)
– AJP-652 Coordinates a multi-organization, multi-day RFI Stakeout @ur momisugly EWR
– Multiple Spectrum, GPS, DF equipment, and vehicles.
– GPS RFI instances and detected bearings were varied and intermittent
• March 11, 2010
– The EWR GBAS Shuts down due to Excessive RFI (3) – Source Unknown
• March 19th, 2010
– Zeta Deploys Specialized DF Equipment to GBAS Shelter as a second RFI station
• March 23rd, 2010 (4 days)
– AJP-652 Deploys an expanded multi-day RFI Stakeout @ur momisugly EWR – Same Contributors
– GPS RFI Source Identified and Confirmed (NJTP)
• April 14th, 2010 (2 days)
– FAA AJP-652 Performs Stakeout on NJTP, with FCC and FAA SE – RFI Observed
• April 29th, 2010 (2 days)
– FCC, FAA Spectrum, and AJP-652 on NJTP for a pursuit Stakeout.
– Jammer Vehicle is Pursued and Device surrendered – Source Stopped?
• May 7th, 2010
– The PANYNJ GBAS Shuts down due to Excessive RFI (4), More RFI sources present
• May 20, 2010
– AJP-652 Performs GBAS Antenna RFI Environment Optical Survey – NJTP
• May 26, 2010
– AJP-652 Begins EWR GBAS RFI Working Group Meetings for Mitigations Research
• June 15, 2010 Prototype RFI software installed, designed to recover from RFI events
– Multiple stronger events in Aug-Dec caused alarms in this new software baseline
• Revised Prototype SLS-4000 Software Installed December 2010
– Recovers from stronger events, service is interrupted during jamming events,
multiple instances
– Operational outages is being evaluated; an “Out of Service” NOTAM was
issued for the GBAS
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Also note that the GPS/GBAS monitors are located adjacent to the NJTP (turnpike) just across a parking lot!
Google Sat view with annotations: http://oi51.tinypic.com/2pydf0h.jpg
.
I would be remiss in my responsibilities if I didn’t link to this story (which I stumbled on again just moments ago while researching something else) and which the Coast Guard report (linked several posts above) was based on:
The Hunt for RFI
It begins:
.
I think they need to take this one step farther. Not only do we want to discourage driving, but also to encourage carpooling. In this effort I think it is obvious that we need to install RF tracking in the citizens themselves, so that the automobile GPS system can record and transmit who is in the vehicle as well as where the vehicle goes. They can just use the off-the shelf RF tracking currently used for pets. Think of the law enforcement benefits!! Oh wow!!
Why not just charge tax on fuel, then the more wastefull people pay more tax, like a user pays scheme – oh hang on, we already do that!!!! And it doesnt seem to change peoples attitudes to cars!
This is just an existing scheme being re-sold to us but worked out so overall it will cost more and it opens the door to more control, tracking of vehicle movements, automatic speeding tickets etc…. the public will hate it and everyone will cheat it – give up now before it turns into a huge mess
This could have far greater benefit than intended.
It should dispel myths that cause traffic and improve traffic flow far beyond the benefit of any one driver.
A device like this should teach drivers that quick, smooth acceleration is more efficient than gradual acceleration. This realization will also improve throughput at intersections and other bottlenecks, reducing drive times and increasing the capacity of roads.
The myth that slow acceleration is efficient at the same time gas prices went up and cellphone use proliferated hit our transit system hard and likely put a further, significant drag on our economy. I suspect that our traffic and fuel economy would have improved much more if gas prices had stayed low (congestion leads to smart phone use which leads to more congestion).
(I believe that our fuel economy actually declined 2004/2005 to mid 2008 despite improved fleet fuel economy rating. I tracked the FHWA tvt and EIA gasoline consumption and there was a clear
decline in fuel economy until the 2010 FHWA report was published and the traffic volume was revised upwards by far more than normal [Steve Jesseburger at the FHWA told me that tvt estimates are normally within 1%, 2010 saw greater than 3%, iirc]. I think this was an unintentionally consequence of stimulus dollars biasing the data. After 2010, the data showed a slight improvement in fuel economy.)
Gravitar auto populate script over wrote my name in my previous comment.
stumpy says:
August 15, 2011 at 2:42 pm
“Why not just charge tax on fuel, then the more wasteful people pay more tax, like a user pays scheme – oh hang on, we already do that!!!! And it doesn’t seem to change peoples attitudes to cars!”
Don’t forget the mandated E10 and E15. E10 throws an additional 1.5 cents per gallon and E15 an additional 2.3 cents per gallon just from the lower energy content when compared to regular gasoline. This is based on an average US State tax rate of 20.9 cpg and the Federal tax of 18.4 cpg.
Of course they want you to use E15, it puts more money in their pockets in the long run.
*feel free to check my math, it’s been a long day of driving…. to repair State owned equipment.
Here’s an excellent NYTimes article on the tech from 2001:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/07/technology/what-s-next-dashboard-miser-teaches-drivers-how-to-save-fuel.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
The tech (without the tax) reduced fuel consumption 11% on average and up to 20% in urban areas, while reducing drive times. That is before the traffic benefits I mentioned above (it would take widespread adoption for those benefits to manifest).
Here’s the money quote:
”It’s not commonly understood by people who drive,” Dr. Dougherty said. ”They think that the way to get best fuel economy is to accelerate very gently, but that proves not to be the case. The best thing is to accelerate briskly and shift.
”Don’t give it everything the car has, but push down when you’re going to shift, using maybe two-thirds of the available power, and change through the gears relatively quickly.”
Actually, the 2001 tech is different and much better.
We’ve already done those tests in the US, with sad (to me) results.
The University of Iowa study was published last year.
“UI study: drivers would accept new kind of highway tax”
http://thegazette.com/2011/03/17/ui-study-drivers-would-accept-new-kind-of-highway-tax/
And if I remember correctly, Minnesota is doing a similar study.
One does wonder, if you’re going to tax by the mile, why a GPS is necessary instead of just using that “odometer” thingy in the car they don’t seem to know about.