User Fees

Colin W Kingsbury wrote:

Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago, but
the tollbooths persist. A couple years back when the debate flared up, the
tollbooth defenders said, "well, if we quit collecting tolls, the state will
need to come up with that $200 million some other way." Funny part is, the
accountants opened the books and figured that staffing and maintaining the
tollbooths cost the state about 60 cents on every dollar of tolls they
collected. So the net cost to the state of shutting down the tolls would be
only $80 million.

The same thing is going on here in New Jersey, only they figured the cost of
collecting the tolls at over 80 cents on the dollar. When you figure in the
Federal highway funds that they can't get because the GSP and NJT are toll
roads, the State would make a net *profit* by eliminating the toll booths.

The problem is that the State set up a bureaucracy decades ago to run the toll
roads. This group knows that their jobs and power base disappears if the roads
become free, so they are continually borrowing money to "improve" the toll
system. These loans could not legally be repaid with Federal highway funds. Four
years ago it was "EZPass." The latest effort is to remove half the toll stations
in one direction, expand those in the other direction, and double the tolls.

The signs say "The inconvenience is temporary -- the improvements permanent." So
are the tolls, it seems.

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

("George Patterson" wrote)
snip
The signs say "The inconvenience is temporary -- the improvements
permanent." So
are the tolls, it seems.


I think Denver to Boulder (30 miles?) got rid of their booths after that
toll road was paid off. My sister lives in Boulder - it was my first toll
road experience when I drove out for a visit. We don't have toll roads (yet)
in Minnesota.

We had a private party buy a 100 year old railroad-over-the-top-cars-on
the-bottom (single lane) swing bridge across the Mississippi River in the
80's. He charged a toll (only toll both in the state at the time).

That trusty old wooden decked bridge closed for good a few years ago. I
loved "The Old Bridge." sniff in my hometown of sniff St Paul Park -
downriver from St. Paul about 10 miles.

sniff, sniff. I'm ok, sniff

Hope I'm on the money with my Colorado Toll Freeway facts :-)


Montblack

"Dude" wrote:

Still, what complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc.
etc. etc. thinks user fees are a fix?

I wittily replied:

The complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc. etc. etc.
administration we elected.


"Dude" retorted:

Oh, let's not be partisan. Can't we agree both sides have demonstrated
enough foolishness?

To which I say:

Not partisan, just the facts. In our democracy, we get the government we
elect. If we elect morons, why are we surprised that they govern (and set
FAA policy) moronically?




Then "Dude" wrote:

Let's say we want a $20 fee per flight for using the IFR system.
Would it not be
easier just to raise the fuel tax a penny or two? That would raise the
same amount would it not?

Do you burn 2000 gallons of fuel on a typical IFR flight?


And the ever-clever "Dude", noted:

Yes, when its IMC, I mostly take Southwest. Besides, my per passenger
fuel use is similar to Southwest's, so what's the difference?


Upon which I am happy to point out to "Dude":

Actually, if you fill a couple of seats in a single engine piston airplane
you are probably below Southwest's average fuel per occupied seat-mile by a
good margin.

That said, a $.01/gallon extra tax on aviation fuel will not cover the cost
of the ATC system, which in any case is far more than an average of $20 per
IFR flight. I also agree with you (and many other posters) that user fees
are a very bad idea, primarily because they will discourage the safety
benefits of IFR operation.

--
-Elliott Drucker

"George Patterson" wrote in message
...

The problem is that the State set up a bureaucracy decades ago to run the
toll
roads. This group knows that their jobs and power base disappears if the
roads
become free, so they are continually borrowing money to "improve" the toll
system. These loans could not legally be repaid with Federal highway
funds. Four
years ago it was "EZPass." The latest effort is to remove half the toll
stations
in one direction, expand those in the other direction, and double the
tolls.

Ah yes, nothing like digging holes and filling them back up again. Here in
Mass. a senior toll collector can collect up into the low 80k range with
overtime plus state-worker bennies and union rules. For what this costs they
could easily equip every car in New England with an EZ Pass unit and cut the
cost of collection by probably 90%. Then again, now that most gas stations
are self-serve it's pretty much up to the state to provide jobs for people
willing to work but not skilled enough to get ahead.

-cwk.

"Colin W Kingsbury" posted the exciting
message link.net:

...."now that most gas stations are self-serve it's pretty much up
to the state to provide jobs for people willing to work but not
skilled enough to get ahead.


That's a great, but pathetically sad, post!

Prime Factor

"Colin W Kingsbury" wrote in
link.net:


"Dude" wrote in message
...

And then we could use the money to buy gear and pay controllers
instead of creating an all new department to manage the fee system!


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to
build the pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid
off, then the tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than
10 years ago, but the tollbooths persist. A couple years back when the
debate flared up, the tollbooth defenders said, "well, if we quit
collecting tolls, the state will need to come up with that $200
million some other way." Funny part is, the accountants opened the
books and figured that staffing and maintaining the tollbooths cost
the state about 60 cents on every dollar of tolls they collected. So
the net cost to the state of shutting down the tolls would be only $80
million.

Of course, the tollbooths remain. I feel quite certain that long after
the nuclear war with China, when the whole world devolves into a Mad
Maxian opera of barbarity, the last functioning piece of the
government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts will be running the
tollbooths on the Masspike...

-cwk.



Has anyone ever taken the Massachussetts to court about keeping the tolls?
Many years ago there was a 10 cent toll on the Southern State Parkway on
Long Island, NY just before it reached the Cross County Parkway. One day
they raised the toll to 25 cents. One of the commuters was a lawyer who
looked up the statute authorizing the toll. The toll was supposed to go
away once the parkway had been paid for. It had. He sued. The toll booth
was removed.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

In article 4fK_d.12274$oa6.4378@trnddc07, wrote:

Still, what complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc.
etc. etc. thinks user fees are a fix?

The complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc. etc. etc.
administration we elected.

yep - the Clinton administration was looking at user fees.

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

"Colin W Kingsbury" wrote in message
link.net...


Up here in Taxachusetts there's a long-standing feud over tolls on the
Massachusetts Turnpike. The law that authorized the bond issue to build
the
pike said, tolls will be charged until the bonds are paid off, then the
tolls shall end. Well, the bonds were paid off more than 10 years ago,
but
the tollbooths persist.

Same deal here in Florida. Florida's turnpike was paid off about a
decade
ago, the promise was always that the tolls would go away when the bonds
were
paid. The reality was that they instead drastically increased the tolls.

The basic lesson here is that there is no such thing as a temporary
tax.

Vaughn

Same story in Illinois.

wrote in message
news:GpM_d.9280$GI6.1852@trnddc05...
"Dude" wrote:

Still, what complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted
etc.
etc. etc. thinks user fees are a fix?

I wittily replied:

The complete idiotic, power hungry, stupid, short sighted etc. etc.
etc.
administration we elected.


"Dude" retorted:

Oh, let's not be partisan. Can't we agree both sides have demonstrated
enough foolishness?

To which I say:

Not partisan, just the facts. In our democracy, we get the government we
elect. If we elect morons, why are we surprised that they govern (and set
FAA policy) moronically?

If something other than a moron ran for public office I would gladly vote
for them.

"Dude" wrote in message
...

Let's go ahead and leave out other tax revenues for simplification. Also,
one can justify ANYTHING using the economic growth argument. Governments
local, state, and federal almost uniformly make bad decisions when the
"invest" in economic growth. That's why communism failed.


Here's a prime, multi-BILLION dollar example (Denver's airport)! Only
difference from most projects is the degree.
http://fumento.com/supena.html
http://fumento.com/specpena.html

In 1982, the Grace Commission said that governement spending was AT LEAST
25% up to 40% waste. Now, and since then, they tell us every year they can't
cut the budget.

So what the hell is Congress smoking/ingesting? Should we be holding them to
"Zero Tolerence"?

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO