Uber?

Quote: AZDuffman

I think our disagreement is that if nobody is paying their fair share then why should cabs and Uber still pay more? They are still paying their proportionate amount. A mile driven is a mile driven.

Because they are businesses. For example, you could pay $25 and visit Yosemite as a guest, and get a great value for your money. However, if you wanted to set up a business there, you would have to pay MUCH more. This is because the business is using a place that the government spends a ton of money to maintain and the $25 entrance fees cover only a small part of it.

Quote:

As to if the "costs are being funded" I always take claims of underfunded with a grain of salt. All my life I have never heard anything but the idea that roads are underfunded. Claiming such is as natural for politicians and bureaucrat as breathing.

They are underfunded. Go to Pittsburgh and look at all their bridges in danger of collapsing.

edited

Quote: Wizard

Because they are businesses. For example, you could pay $25 and visit Yosemite as a guest, and get a great value for your money. However, if you wanted to set up a business there, you would have to pay MUCH more. This is because the business is using a place that the government spends a ton of money to maintain and the $25 entrance fees cover only a small part of it.

Not a fair example. If I were to set up a concession and charge a fee, yes. But if I privately just give say guided tours and pay my own way and the client theirs then we are using nothing more than we did if we came as individuals then there is no reason I should pay more.

Quote:

They are underfunded. Go to Pittsburgh and look at all their bridges in danger of collapsing.

I live in Pittsburgh. No bridges are in danger of collapsing. This town has more bridges than any other city in the USA. Because of this, some are always under repair. A few will always be closed. And politicians are always saying we need more money for roads.

Been the case all my life.

Quote: AZDuffman

As to insurance, Uber is probably a gray area that an insurance underwriter needs to comment on.

No grey area, Uber has a million dollar policy
on car, driver and passenger when the passenger
is in the car. When they get out, the drivers
insurance kicks in. His personal insurance
will NOT cover him running a business out
of his car. They have separate insurance for
that, really expensive insurance. No gray
areas here at all.

When Uber drivers start having accidents,
and his insurance co rightfully refuses to
pay, the city or state will pass laws to remedy
it. Uber drivers will have to prove they have
the right insurance. I had to prove I had it
every 3 months.

Quote: AZDuffman

Not a fair example. If I were to set up a concession and charge a fee, yes. But if I privately just give say guided tours and pay my own way and the client theirs then we are using nothing more than we did if we came as individuals then there is no reason I should pay more.

I see it differently. You would be operating a business on trails and roads the government pays a great deal of money to maintain. If you are going to profit off of that then you should pay appropriately for their maintenance. You could argue you would have been there anyway, but I doubt anybody goes to Yosemite most days, like a tour guide would.

Quote:

I live in Pittsburgh. No bridges are in danger of collapsing. This town has more bridges than any other city in the USA. Because of this, some are always under repair. A few will always be closed. And politicians are always saying we need more money for roads.

Been the case all my life.

Are you saying they are all safe to drive on? Maybe collapsing was an overstatement, but don't pieces fall off the bridges sometimes, endangering those below?

Quote: AZDuffman

I live in Pittsburgh. No bridges are in danger of collapsing. This town has more bridges than any other city in the USA. Because of this, some are always under repair. A few will always be closed. And politicians are always saying we need more money for roads.

I got one story about the roads in Pennsylvania.

I was in a waiting room and picked up the nearest magazine. It was a trucker magazine and as I thumbed through it I found a poll result by truckers voting Pennsylvania as the worst roads in America. There were tidbit comments, like "most likely to take out an axel with a pothole" and stuff like that.

Quote: Wizard

I see it differently. You would be operating a business on trails and roads the government pays a great deal of money to maintain. If you are going to profit off of that then you should pay appropriately for their maintenance. You could argue you would have been there anyway, but I doubt anybody goes to Yosemite most days, like a tour guide would.

But here is the thing, keeping on the trail example. If I come alone or I bring a group of people, I am causing the same wear and tear. In fact, by bringing my business I am *helping* the park by bringing them more business. As long as I am using it the same, if I make a profit or not should not matter.

Lets get back to Uber. A mile driven is a mile driven. If we were to stand on the road you would not be able to tell me which were Uber cars and which were not. They cause no "extra" wear and tear by taking fares. So they pay their same share.

FWIW: When you hear "right wing" guys like me talk about taxes stifling business, this is the kind of thing we are talking about. You put that tax on, the fare at Uber goes up. Every $1 spent on that extra fare going to taxes is $1 that cannot be spent at say a restaurant.

Quote:

Are you saying they are all safe to drive on? Maybe collapsing was an overstatement, but don't pieces fall off the bridges sometimes, endangering those below?

You have to define "sometimes." Has it ever happened? Probably. But the reason it makes the news is that it is so rare. I have been under many of these bridges on the river many times with no fear. You have dripping water from designed-in gutters on occasion. But not "pieces."

There are 446 bridges in Pittsburgh, which I just verified is most in the world. If you assume a 30 year lifespan of a bridge, that means at least 15 will be closed for repair at any given time and another 60+ will look in bad shape as they have not been repaired in over 25 years. This makes it easy for anyone with an interest from a politician wanting camera time to the Teamsters who will haul the concrete to find "crumbling" bridges to show.

I was going to put this next part as an edit but you replied first.

One thing outsiders don't get about bridges here and elsewhere is a reason they get in real bad shape is often not money but practicality. The bridges here are major arteries. They just cannot be closed. The Fort Pitt Bridge was due for closure for major repairs but it was put off a decade, over and over. Reason is that it is the only good way from the airport and western suburbs to the downtown area and rest of the city. There is no detour you can make. Closing it means gridlock.

Bridge culture here is a weird thing. Outsiders don't get just how tough the geography is between the bridges and the mountains. Take me to Lombard St. and you might get a big "meh." But you learn as you live around it that the roads cannot be kept perfect at any level of funding. Again, I am 45 and have lived here 35 of those years. Pols have always talked about "underfunded roads." The only time when they do not is right after a new gas tax makes it impolitic to do so.

Quote: AZDuffman

Lets get back to Uber. A mile driven is a mile driven. If we were to stand on the road you would not be able to tell me which were Uber cars and which were not. They cause no "extra" wear and tear by taking fares. So they pay their same share.

FWIW: When you hear "right wing" guys like me talk about taxes stifling business, this is the kind of thing we are talking about. You put that tax on, the fare at Uber goes up. Every $1 spent on that extra fare going to taxes is $1 that cannot be spent at say a restaurant.

Driving does cause extra wear and tear and slows down other drivers due to the additional congestion. What I'm saying is no business should be taking advantage of publicly subsidized roads.

Everybody knows that "right wing" guys hate taxes. So, let's say the government has a budget of $x. How much should they try to collect in taxes to pay for it?

Regarding the bridges of Pittsburgh, I hope somebody else will take over my side of that as it is way out of my area. Just my luck I had to bring it up with somebody from Pittsburgh.

Quote: Wizard

Driving does cause extra wear and tear and slows down other drivers due to the additional congestion. What I'm saying is no business should be taking advantage of publicly subsidized roads.

But what I am saying is they are not taking advantage, they are using their fair share that they have paid for, same as anyone else. This is that Elizabeth Warren/Obama "you didn't build that........." thing. Roads are for the use of all, if someone makes money from it the better for them, as I will be in 2 hours from now.

Quote:

Everybody knows that "right wing" guys hate taxes. So, let's say the government has a budget of $x. How much should they try to collect in taxes to pay for it?

I would like to see all government spending at all levels fall to about 20p off GDP total. State and local should balance this out. Feds can be allowed to run a deficit of about 3p of GDP as there are reasons for having a national debt that if anyone wants me to expand on I will start another thread.

Quote:

Just my luck I had to bring it up with somebody from Pittsburgh.

Go play the don't......................................lol

Quote: AZDuffman

I still do not get why there should be a tax per mile driven. Cab, Uber, or my car all pay at the pump as do heavy trucks. In this regard it is a level playing field already.

Nah, trucks wear the right lane out faster than cars do the left lane.

If everyone pays at the pump for the whole road system, does that mean that me out here driving on roads that rarely wear out and bridges never rot, has to pay at the pump for Penn. bridges?

Who does the redistribution of taxes collected, feds?