Welcome to Thunderdome

You might want to give this EV from Mercedes a look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k1tbf8muMc

Maybe 2nd on the list. I have a decent # of rechargeable AAs lying around.

I really enjoyed paying for my Ohio car registration renewal, a minute ago. $76 for a big F-150, and $260 for a small electric car that won't do as much road damage over the life of the car that a single semi truck will do in 1 week. Seems totally fair and cool.

GORDON wrote: a small electric car that won't do as much road damage over the life of the car that a single semi truck will do in 1 week.

'Splain.

As for the other part, do you really think the government is going to be cool with getting less money out of you?

I mean a fully loaded semi truck will damage a road more in 1 pass than my little car would do in 10 years.

I'm on your side, Gordon.

GORDON wrote: I mean a fully loaded semi truck will damage a road more in 1 pass than my little car would do in 10 years.

I don't disagree with what will do more damage, I just think your numbers are off.

But as to my comment about the government getting their cut, they can't charge you at the pump, so they're charging you up front. That's clearly what's happening, right?

And I don't think there are sides here? I'm not taking up an anti-electric car position, just discussing the math of Gordon's example and speculating why the government is making him pay more for it.

Catt nailed it a while back. The republican governor figures the filthy electric car hippies have more money to take, and weren't going to vote for him anyway. This wasn't a tax I was ever allowed to vote on, btw.

He lost my vote, but I'm sure I'm an outlier.

Roads are rated to handle X amount of pressure/stress. I'm assuming if a semi-trick = 75% of X, then a small passenger car is about 1% of X. 1% of X is never going to break down a road designed to handle X, within the life of that vehicle. unlike a 75% X semi truck, which will cause measurable sag every time it rolls across.

If we were talking fairness of "the roads cost money to maintain and fair is fair," then small passenger vehicles shouldn't be paying shit, because they aren't damaging the roads. The registration fee for plates is already the "up front" cost.

Leisher wrote: But as to my comment about the government getting their cut, they can't charge you at the pump, so they're charging you up front. That's clearly what's happening, right?

That is, but their math is bad. They're basically assuming Gordon's going to drive more than 15,000 miles per year, or more. So instead of a mileage based tax for gas, we get a very high flat rate that is at the 95% of what people really drive. Especially for small electric cars that only have commuting range (<100 miles).

GORDON wrote: If we were talking fairness

There's where you lose in a rational discussion on this topic. Fairness has nothing to do with this and we all know it.

Whether it's an R governor taxing you more because he thinks you have more income or a D governor taxing you an additional $100 for buying a PC (just the first example that popped in my head), they're going to get their money and it's never based on the actual math or facts.

Right. This is a horseshit money grab, and that's all I was saying.

I happened to come across this unattributed quote elsewhere, in a different conversation, and I'm copying it here because it supports my earlier arguments:

The big German automotive club ADAC one calculated that a single 40-ton semi damages an asphalt road it passes as much as 35,000 regular cars.

That is a fuckton of damage.

Leisher wrote: Ohio to become the 49th state to only require a rear plate as of July 1st.

Ohio is currently the 20th state to get rid of front license plates.

Your #s confuse me.

Also, I really like having both plates. But, I live in a state that only requires the back plate.

What's to like about having 2 plates? I always assumed it was 100% to make things easier for cops.

TheCatt wrote: Your #s confuse me.

They confuse me too. I've always been told Ohio and...Delaware?...were the only states still requiring two plates.

GORDON wrote: What's to like about having 2 plates? I always assumed it was 100% to make things easier for cops.

That's what I like. And, easier for me if someone tries a hit and run.

Leisher wrote: They confuse me too. I've always been told Ohio and...Delaware?...were the only states still requiring two plates.

You have been told very wrong.

No. 31 states require both front and rear license plates, while the remaining 19 only require rear license plates. Automobile manufacturers are prohibited by law from distributing cars with only one license plate in states that require both.

The 19 states that require only the rear license plate are:

Alabama
Arkansas
Arizona
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi
New Mexico
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
West Virginia

Obviously that will be 30 and 20 with Ohio changing.

This is going to piss off the camera cops who try and shoot the front plates of cars.