Ridiculously low fuel taxes.

[Euro]

Your entire country is smaller than one of our States.

Sweden - 173,860 square miles
Finland - 130,558 square miles
Norway - 125,020 square miles
Iceland - 39,768 square miles
Denmark - 16,638 square miles


Texas - 268,580 sq mi
California - 163,695 sq mi
Montana - 147,042 sq mi
New Mexico - 121,589 sq mi
Arizona - 113,998 sq mi

And that only two thru six of 50...

Add to that our ninth SMALLEST state is still almost twice the size of Denmark...West Virginia 24,230 sq mi

Not to mention that damn near ALL OF SCANDINAVIA would fit within the borders of our largest state, Alaska, with an area of [SIZE=+1]663,267 sq mi.


Plus, American manufacturers have moved to a On Demand Inventory or Just In Time logistics model that almost completely eliminates warehousing...but is totally reliant on over the road truck transport.

Trains, barges and ships are fantastic for moving huge tonnage at low rates...but they are not conducive to scheduled on time delivery.

For that trucks are currently the only solution.


Almost 70% of domestic freight tonnage in the U.S. is moved by commercial trucking as compared to 13% by rail and 7% by water.[/SIZE]

I’ve seen those railways you have in USA, it is sad. You should invest more money in railways. We’ve electrified most of our railways so we can have more carriages and freight on each train. An electrified train can transport much more than a diesel train. It goes much faster to.

In each larger city at the train station we have a "freight terminal". So the logistics between train and trucks and flights are well planned and integrated.

How often do you have electrical outages, due to storms and things of nature? And how long is the average time to get your electric back on?
We have had many times, in our large cities that have electric trains who have been stuck on them for many hours, when the electricity goes off.
We like our individual space and don't like to be packed like sardines in trains.

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and unmodern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

 

[Big Fitz]

We use flights for long distance transportation. We also have trains and ships. Trucks are mainly used to transport on short distances. (e.g. to the airport, train station, harbour etc.).

Trucks arent suited for long distance transport. trains,flights,boats works better.
Short distance:Trucks.
Long distance:Trains,flights,boats etc.

Your entire country is smaller than one of our States.

Sweden - 173,860 square miles
Finland - 130,558 square miles
Norway - 125,020 square miles
Iceland - 39,768 square miles
Denmark - 16,638 square miles


Texas - 268,580 sq mi
California - 163,695 sq mi
Montana - 147,042 sq mi
New Mexico - 121,589 sq mi
Arizona - 113,998 sq mi

And that only two thru six of 50...

Add to that our ninth SMALLEST state is still almost twice the size of Denmark...West Virginia 24,230 sq mi

Not to mention that damn near ALL OF SCANDINAVIA would fit within the borders of our largest state, Alaska, with an area of [SIZE=+1]663,267 sq mi.


Plus, American manufacturers have moved to a On Demand Inventory or Just In Time logistics model that almost completely eliminates warehousing...but is totally reliant on over the road truck transport.

Trains, barges and ships are fantastic for moving huge tonnage at low rates...but they are not conducive to scheduled on time delivery.

For that trucks are currently the only solution.


Almost 70% of domestic freight tonnage in the U.S. is moved by commercial trucking as compared to 13% by rail and 7% by water.[/SIZE]

I’ve seen those railways you have in USA, it is sad. You should invest more money in railways. We’ve electrified most of our railways so we can have more carriages and freight on each train. An electrified train can transport much more than a diesel train. It goes much faster to.

In each larger city at the train station we have a "freight terminal". So the logistics between train and trucks and flights are well planned and integrated.

The rails for the US are not meant for passengers anymore. It cannot meet the needs of this nation and would take a revitalization project so grand, and unnecessary right now because there is no way ridership would make it profitable in the foreseeable future.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUbeUY8M_uc]Starlight Express- Freight - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Big Fitz]

some of our cities could benefit from a good, efficient rail system...but in no way shape or form does that take care of our suburban sprawl and how far most of us have to go, to get to work....

super high gas prices would hit the middle and lower classes big time....as was said earlier, its a regressive tax.

As someone who's seen the waste and frivolity of the Hiawatha and now Crosstown Line in the Twin cities, I can say uncatagorically it is a waste of a billion dollars it's taken to build it. It services less than 10% of the twin cities and even then there are only 4 main locations that people care to get to: The Mall of America (which has been directly liked to a major spike in crime there), The airport, The Metrodome (only used on football Sundays) and Twins Field (same thing only on home baseball games)

The crosstown line would connect downtown St. Paul and the State Capitol, down University, one of the highest crime corridors in the cities, and worst revenue generation with highest incidents of violence and non-payment, to the U and then downtown Minneapolis by the Metrodome.

In the twin cities, there is a direct corollation of bus/train service and crime. It is so under supported by fares, it should not be operating. When the Metropolitan Council, a regional government body dedicated to managing growth of the two cities and the surrounding area, they sold off the profitable lines (and yes there are profitable lines) to private companies. But this was only after they put out the previous 14 companies that used to handle service out of business to 'streamline' things. They mismanaged it ever since. Ridership has increased, but revenues have stagnated in comparison requiring more and more tax monies from out of area to support it.

There ARE possibilities for mass transit to work in private hands. The catch? It's not going to be as ubiquitous as public mass transit is. No 'every 2 blocks stop' BS and telling drivers to let people steal rides because taxes will make up the difference. They'd be limited, like airlines are to what's profitable.

If you took all the tax money wasted on mass transit, applied it to maintaining and expanding good roads, it would be far better spent, with less issues than operating mass transit for a minority of people. If you really want to be fair, tax bus fares and license bikes to pay for the roads they currently use for 'free'.

 

[Big Fitz]

I’ve seen those railways you have in USA, it is sad. You should invest more money in railways. We’ve electrified most of our railways so we can have more carriages and freight on each train. An electrified train can transport much more than a diesel train. It goes much faster to.

In each larger city at the train station we have a "freight terminal". So the logistics between train and trucks and flights are well planned and integrated.

How often do you have electrical outages, due to storms and things of nature? And how long is the average time to get your electric back on?
We have had many times, in our large cities that have electric trains who have been stuck on them for many hours, when the electricity goes off.
We like our individual space and don't like to be packed like sardines in trains.

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and unmodern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

Of course. Spend money on infrastructure. Mass Transit is NOT infrastructure. Passenger rail travel is unsustainable in it's current form due to cost and coverage. When the government is broke, Mass Transit should be one of the first things to go, right next to parks and recreation, public festivals and other non-essential services.

The most efficient, least costly (that'd be roads and highways) should be focused on.

 

[peach174]

I’ve seen those railways you have in USA, it is sad. You should invest more money in railways. We’ve electrified most of our railways so we can have more carriages and freight on each train. An electrified train can transport much more than a diesel train. It goes much faster to.

In each larger city at the train station we have a "freight terminal". So the logistics between train and trucks and flights are well planned and integrated.

How often do you have electrical outages, due to storms and things of nature? And how long is the average time to get your electric back on?
We have had many times, in our large cities that have electric trains who have been stuck on them for many hours, when the electricity goes off.
We like our individual space and don't like to be packed like sardines in trains.

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and modern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

Our electricity is very good and modern.
Our electric goes out due the very heavy electrical storms and tornadoes and hurricanes.
Not because our infrastructure is old or not modern.

 

[Big Fitz]

We use flights for long distance transportation. We also have trains and ships. Trucks are mainly used to transport on short distances. (e.g. to the airport, train station, harbour etc.).

Trucks arent suited for long distance transport. trains,flights,boats works better.
Short distance:Trucks.
Long distance:Trains,flights,boats etc.

Your entire country is smaller than one of our States.

Sweden - 173,860 square miles
Finland - 130,558 square miles
Norway - 125,020 square miles
Iceland - 39,768 square miles
Denmark - 16,638 square miles


Texas - 268,580 sq mi
California - 163,695 sq mi
Montana - 147,042 sq mi
New Mexico - 121,589 sq mi
Arizona - 113,998 sq mi

And that only two thru six of 50...

Add to that our ninth SMALLEST state is still almost twice the size of Denmark...West Virginia 24,230 sq mi

Not to mention that damn near ALL OF SCANDINAVIA would fit within the borders of our largest state, Alaska, with an area of [SIZE=+1]663,267 sq mi.


Plus, American manufacturers have moved to a On Demand Inventory or Just In Time logistics model that almost completely eliminates warehousing...but is totally reliant on over the road truck transport.

Trains, barges and ships are fantastic for moving huge tonnage at low rates...but they are not conducive to scheduled on time delivery.

For that trucks are currently the only solution.


Almost 70% of domestic freight tonnage in the U.S. is moved by commercial trucking as compared to 13% by rail and 7% by water.[/SIZE]

I’ve seen those railways you have in USA, it is sad. You should invest more money in railways. We’ve electrified most of our railways so we can have more carriages and freight on each train. An electrified train can transport much more than a diesel train. It goes much faster to.

In each larger city at the train station we have a "freight terminal". So the logistics between train and trucks and flights are well planned and integrated.

The Twin Cities, since I'm most familiar with it as a metropolitan area is serviced by 10 different railroads from class 1 roads to smaller local roads, short lines and bridge lines specializing in shunting cars around the city. The big railroads have their own main yards.

Canadian Pacific (1 moderate)
Canadian National (1 small one)
Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (2 MASSIVE ones)
Union Pacific (1 Massive yard)

Plus over 200 miles of minor yards and facilities not including the Metro Transit light rail system, or Northstar which runs on BNSF track. THere are at least 3-4 intermodal yards as well mixed in. This services a regional area of around 200 or so square miles with about 3 million people.

After you travel 30 miles in any direction from the downtown area, you're in farmland for often a hundred plus miles with only small towns with maybe a factory or two, a few other businesses and a small city with it's own local bus service to handle local circulation.

You cannot just say 'come to the freight terminal'. It's not the hub of society. America never had this compact European approach. We evolved by living on the land we farmed, not in small farmer villages surrounded by the fields the farmers kept. Often the closest neighbor was the next 2-4 farms over, a mile plus distant. The local store was 10 miles away and kept the local mercantile, machine shop, gas station and other minor businesses. Big towns had a grain silo and rail spur. It's a totally alien geography to you. European solutions will not fit here.

 

[Euro]

How often do you have electrical outages, due to storms and things of nature? And how long is the average time to get your electric back on?
We have had many times, in our large cities that have electric trains who have been stuck on them for many hours, when the electricity goes off.
We like our individual space and don't like to be packed like sardines in trains.

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and unmodern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

Of course. Spend money on infrastructure. Mass Transit is NOT infrastructure. Passenger rail travel is unsustainable in it's current form due to cost and coverage. When the government is broke, Mass Transit should be one of the first things to go, right next to parks and recreation, public festivals and other non-essential services.

The most efficient, least costly (that'd be roads and highways) should be focused on.

We finance it by using toll roads not income taxes. So the burden is put on those who drives cars not on the government/state.
Parks,festivals and culture is nescesccarry for people wanting to live there.

 

[peach174]

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and unmodern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

Of course. Spend money on infrastructure. Mass Transit is NOT infrastructure. Passenger rail travel is unsustainable in it's current form due to cost and coverage. When the government is broke, Mass Transit should be one of the first things to go, right next to parks and recreation, public festivals and other non-essential services.

The most efficient, least costly (that'd be roads and highways) should be focused on.

We finance it by using toll roads not income taxes. So the burden is put on those who drives cars not on the government/state.
Parks,festivals and culture is nescesccarry for people wanting to live there.

We have toll roads here too.

 

[Big Fitz]

It happens here to. But that is because the infrastructure is old and unmodern. The same thing in USA. Spend more money on your infrastructure!
We are investing as much as possible in modern railways and power grids to prevent those things.

Of course. Spend money on infrastructure. Mass Transit is NOT infrastructure. Passenger rail travel is unsustainable in it's current form due to cost and coverage. When the government is broke, Mass Transit should be one of the first things to go, right next to parks and recreation, public festivals and other non-essential services.

The most efficient, least costly (that'd be roads and highways) should be focused on.

We finance it by using toll roads not income taxes. So the burden is put on those who drives cars not on the government/state.
Parks,festivals and culture is nescesccarry for people wanting to live there.

We use toll roads as well. Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York and a few other states are infamous for them. Most people then look for ways around them and find them because there is a 'free' alternative more often than not. Of course, if you privatized the highway system (not something I'd advocate as it is a constitutional responsibility of our national government) the free alternative would disappear.

Then again, the costs of roads would drop if we stopped pretending the government had to provide a way to use them too, aka buses.

Culture and recreation is the first cut to make when facing budgetary shortfalls. Once you're solvent again, luxuries can be had. I suppose you'd suggest cutting schools and police first when faced with the inevitable choice of a cut? It's what they always threaten here to get the public to accept a tax hike. It's stupid but works.

 

[Ernie S.]

Why not increase the fuel taxes to pay for infrastructure and to improve state finances. The gasoline prices in USA are ridicoulously low. In UK and Germany they pay more in taxes pr. gallon than a gallon of gas in USA included fuel taxes.

All this talk about taxing the rich, why not put a 3$/gallon tax on gasoline instead? Is it really a need to have such low taxes on gasoline when USA is a net-importer of oil?

Increase the federal gasoline tax by $1 per gallon: The current federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon, but the commission proposes to increase the federal gas tax, gradually and beginning in 2013, so that in 2020, it would be $1.18 cents per gallon. This would not only generate significant revenue but also reduce consumption of gas, reduce carbon emissions, and provide an incentive to automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles. Projected revenue in 2020: $130 billion

By just increasing the fuel tax by 1$ the federal budget can have a revenue 130$ billon by 2020.

Why? Because it is a regressive tax that harms the most needy in society. This may be acceptable for a nation smaller than Kentucky with the population barely that of Iowa, but will not work for a nation 100 times that size with a diverse and dispersed population center that prides itself on having individual freedom of movement.

Ever here the expression "Out where the buses don't run"? Well that covers almost half the population of this nation, And 90% of it's land area. Not everyone here's packed in and able to bike to and from work like Copenhagen, Oslo, Trondheim or Stockholm.

You europeans don't realize that for a large portion of America, driving over 250 miles in a day, and in some places one way, for any civilization is not uncommon. What you suggest is both onerous and antithetical to the American way of life.

Visit sometime outside of a big city and learn this.

You are free to move and live wherever you want. If you get a new job 50 miles away from your home, you should move closer to the job.

I think that is why the unemployment is so high in USA, because people are not willing to move to places where the jobs are. I had to move 300 miles to find the job I have now.I just read that their are lots of jobs in North Dakota and also areas in Texas, you americans are not willing to move to find jobs thats why the unemployment is so high.

Not with our homes now worth half of what we owe on them. You really should read up on life in the US before you impose your unwelcomed advice on us. In other words, find a message board in Scandanavia where you at least have some idea what you are talking about, OK Swen?

 

[Ernie S.]

Todays price for gasoline here: about 9$/gallon.
USa gasoline: 3$/gallon.

A 3$/gallon tax wouldn’t be much, you’ll still have really cheap gasoline(6$/gallon)

you must have missed the post where I said- fuel taxes are highly regressive, now, if you don't know what that means, ask ....

It is no right to own a car.

If a person is poor he/she should be forced to sell the car and move to place where he/she can find a job. If you try to claim welfare here, your car will have to be sold before you can get anything.

You will also be forced to move if the job office finds a job for you.

E.g. person having a 30.000$ car claims welfare and no job.
1. Car sold on auction.
2. Forced to move if the job office can find a job (easy to find a job if you can move all over the country.)

Great advise, Tovarich. Impose your communist ideals somewhere else.

 

[Ernie S.]

You are not forced to do anything, but if you dont your welfare will be cut.

It would only end up giving more crime.



Dont you think its fair that when the government(your tax money) gives people welfare it should also have the chanche to move people if it is a job some place else the person can fill?. If an other person gets welfare he actually takes away your freedom by taking your tax money. Isn’t in your interest then that the guy gets a job so you dont have to pay for him (through welfare)?

Or do you want as much as possible of your tax money to be given in welfare? I want as a little as possible, and I think it is great when people find a job and support themselves.

Was it 9% unemployment: Cant be cheap in welfare payments for the government.

A car is a luxury, poor people dosent have cars. If so they should sell it.

In America, cars are necessities. Not having a car is a hardship. Thanks to used car markets, almost all working Americans have cars save for extreme poverty and in population dense centers that can support public transportation (with heavy subsidization)

How's the public transit in Lapland? How do they have to get around? Dogsled? Snowmobile? Or wait for the next bus they had to walk 45km to get to?

Most people live in the cities here (more and more) so usually only retired and old people + people on welfare. In the cities it is really easy to find a job with a decent pay. We actually have a shortage of workers, and it is a huge problem that we cant find enough labour to solve important tasks.

You mean like forcing people to move?

 

[Big Fitz]

It would only end up giving more crime.



Dont you think its fair that when the government(your tax money) gives people welfare it should also have the chanche to move people if it is a job some place else the person can fill?. If an other person gets welfare he actually takes away your freedom by taking your tax money. Isn’t in your interest then that the guy gets a job so you dont have to pay for him (through welfare)?

Or do you want as much as possible of your tax money to be given in welfare? I want as a little as possible, and I think it is great when people find a job and support themselves.

Was it 9% unemployment: Cant be cheap in welfare payments for the government.




In America, cars are necessities. Not having a car is a hardship. Thanks to used car markets, almost all working Americans have cars save for extreme poverty and in population dense centers that can support public transportation (with heavy subsidization)

How's the public transit in Lapland? How do they have to get around? Dogsled? Snowmobile? Or wait for the next bus they had to walk 45km to get to?

Most people live in the cities here (more and more) so usually only retired and old people + people on welfare. In the cities it is really easy to find a job with a decent pay. We actually have a shortage of workers, and it is a huge problem that we cant find enough labour to solve important tasks.

You mean like forcing people to move?

That's a subservient, dependent culture of subjects. They are indoctrinated to submit to their 'betters' and ruling class and are not free in their spirit.

We are citizens here, not subjects to a crown. No more kings and no man or woman is our master. I keep forgetting Scandinavians are of that mindset, divided into nobility and peasantry. No matter how many layers of shellack and brick-a-brack you stack on it, it's still that same mentality of Peers and Subjects.

 

[Norman]

It would only end up giving more crime.



Dont you think its fair that when the government(your tax money) gives people welfare it should also have the chanche to move people if it is a job some place else the person can fill?. If an other person gets welfare he actually takes away your freedom by taking your tax money. Isn’t in your interest then that the guy gets a job so you dont have to pay for him (through welfare)?

Or do you want as much as possible of your tax money to be given in welfare? I want as a little as possible, and I think it is great when people find a job and support themselves.

Was it 9% unemployment: Cant be cheap in welfare payments for the government.




In America, cars are necessities. Not having a car is a hardship. Thanks to used car markets, almost all working Americans have cars save for extreme poverty and in population dense centers that can support public transportation (with heavy subsidization)

How's the public transit in Lapland? How do they have to get around? Dogsled? Snowmobile? Or wait for the next bus they had to walk 45km to get to?

Most people live in the cities here (more and more) so usually only retired and old people + people on welfare. In the cities it is really easy to find a job with a decent pay. We actually have a shortage of workers, and it is a huge problem that we cant find enough labour to solve important tasks.

You mean like forcing people to move?

I live in scandinvia. His post is completely wrong on the moving thing, car selling and welfare. I say this as welfare recipient. And the system quite sucks here too regarding these issues so I don't see why US should imitate it. Those are some really utopistic views he is presenting.


Yeah impose huge taxes on car usage and then build less efficient railway solutions that cost unimaginable amounts to make and are unprofitable. This will solve the debt crisis and make for more efficient economy, no doubt!


And regarding the shortage of labor, well thats what happens with generous unemployment benefits and free education. High unemployment with shortage of workers in low-paying / not so nice to work in sectors.



At least the govt here is a bit more responsible though. So comparatively we are in better shape. But not because high fuel taxes and trains that are known for their bad schedule.

 

[auditor0007]

Why not increase the fuel taxes to pay for infrastructure and to improve state finances. The gasoline prices in USA are ridicoulously low. In UK and Germany they pay more in taxes pr. gallon than a gallon of gas in USA included fuel taxes.

All this talk about taxing the rich, why not put a 3$/gallon tax on gasoline instead? Is it really a need to have such low taxes on gasoline when USA is a net-importer of oil?

Increase the federal gasoline tax by $1 per gallon: The current federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon, but the commission proposes to increase the federal gas tax, gradually and beginning in 2013, so that in 2020, it would be $1.18 cents per gallon. This would not only generate significant revenue but also reduce consumption of gas, reduce carbon emissions, and provide an incentive to automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles. Projected revenue in 2020: $130 billion

By just increasing the fuel tax by 1$ the federal budget can have a revenue 130$ billon by 2020.

It would cripple our economy, that is why. What you don't seem to understand is that the US is a very large country where most things are spread out. Because of this, we do not and could not support a public transportation system like those in Europe. Also, we drive many more miles per year due to the long distances between places. Europe has a population density of 134 people per square mile where the US has a population density of 32 people per square mile. If you want to visit one of your relatives who lives in another city, you might have to travel 300 kilometers where we could easily have to travel 3000 kilometers.