Michigan lawmakers introduce plan to hike state gas tax.

[kraig]

January 27, 2010http://detnews.com/article/20100127/METRO05/1270409Michigan lawmakers introduce plan to hike state gas tax

TOM GREENWOOD
The Detroit News Lansing -- Two state representatives have introduced bills in Lansing that call for an increase of the state tax and both gasoline and diesel fuel.
The bills -- sponsored by Rep. Dick Ball, R-Bennington Township, and Pam Byrnes, D-Lyndon Township, call for raising the gas tax incrementally until motorists would eventually be paying 27 cents per gallon for both gasoline and diesel by Jan. 1, 2013.
Currently, the gas tax is 19 cents per gallon and 15 cents per gallon for diesel.
If passed, the first tax increase would go into effect on March 1 when the gas tax jumps by 4 cents per gallon for gasoline [[to 23 cents per gallon) and by 6 cents per gallon for diesel, raising it from 15 cents to 23 cents per gallon.
Ball and Byrnes said the bills would initially raise $240 million a year in additional revenues, and when fully implemented in 2013, raising $480 million a year thereafter.
Currently, Michigan is facing an annual transportation budget shortfall of $3 billion per year.
"Michigan's transportation infrastructure is at a critical juncture," Ball said. "These increases will allow our state, counties and cities to make the critical repairs our roads and bridges need, while also ensuring we can put forth the matching funds necessary for federal dollars."
""The poor quality of Michigan roads and bridges has already passed the crisis stage," said Byrnes, chair of the House Transportation Committee.
"This is neither a Republican nor Democrat issue. This is a Michigan issue -- an issue of doing what's right for Michigan drivers, businesses and taxpayers."
tgreenwood@detnews.com">tgreenwood@detnews.com [[313) 222-2023
© Copyright 2010 The Detroit News. All rights reserved.

[milesdriven]

When the smoking ban reduces sales tax revenues from purchases at bars and restaurants, get ready to pay tax on pop and candy, like OH and IL.

[Detroitnerd]

The good news for roads: Even the American Trucking Association wants to raise the gas tax.

The bad news for roads: The ATA also wants larger trucks on the road.

[Hermod]

As we have discussed before, the highway fuel tax pays for the roads.

If we don't have enough money for the roads, we either have to raise the per gallon fuel tax or we people need to buy a lot more gasoline.

[Detroitnerd]

As we have discussed before, the highway fuel tax pays for the roads.

Isn't it closer to the truth to say that the highway fuel tax helps pay for roads?

[Mikeg]

Kraig,

I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that you neither requested nor received authorization from the management of the Detroit News to reproduce their copyright-protected article here or anywhere else. Simply acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material is not a substitute for obtaining permission from them.

There is a reason why you do not see other members of this forum inserting entire articles that have been copied and pasted from print media sources. That is because they have learned about the "fair use" of copyright-protected materials and practice it when posting.

[Retroit]

I support the increase in gas tax [[as well as any other taxes, such as vehicle registration fees, toll roads, etc.) so that the funding of roads is paid for entirely by those who use the roads. Those who benefit from the roads, but do not actually use them, will be contributing to its funding by costs that are passed on to them by direct users.

As for copyright, I fail to see the infringement against Detroit News of their copyright rights. Fair Use allows for "reproduction...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching...,scholarship, or research.." It furthermore specifies that reproductions can be used for "nonprofit educational purposes" as distinguished from commercial, profit-making purposes, for which I am sure Lowell can attest does not describe this website.

Now, if kraig had copied just the main article and didn't attribute it to Detroit News, that would be wrong. If kraig copied the main article and any/no portion of all the attributional information and he put it on a website that actually generated a profit, that would be wrong. But the fact that he copied the article in its entirety without any attempt to take credit for the article or conceal its source, or to make profit from it, raises the question: what is the basis for a claim of infringement?

[bailey]

I support the increase in gas tax [[as well as any other taxes, such as vehicle registration fees, toll roads, etc.) so that the funding of roads is paid for entirely by those who use the roads. Those who benefit from the roads, but do not actually use them, will be contributing to its funding by costs that are passed on to them by direct users.

As for copyright, I fail to see the infringement against Detroit News of their copyright rights. Fair Use allows for "reproduction...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching...,scholarship, or research.." It furthermore specifies that reproductions can be used for "nonprofit educational purposes" as distinguished from commercial, profit-making purposes, for which I am sure Lowell can attest does not describe this website.

Now, if kraig had copied just the main article and didn't attribute it to Detroit News, that would be wrong. If kraig copied the main article and any/no portion of all the attributional information and he put it on a website that actually generated a profit, that would be wrong. But the fact that he copied the article in its entirety without any attempt to take credit for the article or conceal its source, or to make profit from it, raises the question: what is the basis for a claim of infringement?

To further expand on that point, in the link you provided Mikeg the following appears:

Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.

The article as posted is entirely the quotes of the state legislators' and the facts of the proposal. There was no other commentary or opining in any fashion that would be protected...even if the conditions noted were violated.

[Bcscott]

[quote=Retroit;115206]I support the increase in gas tax [[as well as any other taxes, such as vehicle registration fees, toll roads, etc.) so that the funding of roads is paid for entirely by those who use the roads. Those who benefit from the roads, but do not actually use them, will be contributing to its funding by costs that are passed on to them by direct users.

Well hey, I don't have any kids and I graduated high school a long time ago so I don't want to pay any taxes that will benefit public schools. Millage increases don't help me personally. Plus, my house didn't burn down so I don't want to fund those greedy firefighters either.

I a own a motorcycle and four V8 powered vehicles of which three are driven and registered, the fourth is being built right now. I give the state pleanty when it comes time to get new tabs and at the gas pump. Penalizing people for driving may cause them to drive less, decreasing revenue from lost gas taxes. This compunds the problem, it doesn't solve it. I think any politician is going to have a hard time convincing voters a tax increase is a good idea right now. Lucky for me I live two miles from work, I could drive a Sherman tank if I wanted to.

[kraig]

Kraig,

I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that you neither requested nor received authorization from the management of the Detroit News to reproduce their copyright-protected article here or anywhere else. Simply acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material is not a substitute for obtaining permission from them.

There is a reason why you do not see other members of this forum inserting entire articles that have been copied and pasted from print media sources. That is because they have learned about the "fair use" of copyright-protected materials and practice it when posting.

I just went through this with MichMatters last week. I do the same thing with articles for facebook. If the papers have a problem with me posting their articles, I'm sure that they'll say something. In a matter of days or weeks the papers will probably have Detroityes included amongst the over 50+ websites that they currently allow to share.

[Mikeg]

If the papers have a problem with me posting their articles, I'm sure that they'll say something.

Yes, but they will go after the owner of the web site, not you. We are all guests here and your blatant disregard for the copyright laws could affect us all.

[esp1986]

When the smoking ban reduces sales tax revenues from purchases at bars and restaurants, get ready to pay tax on pop and candy, like OH and IL.

You would be shocked how little of an effect this could have on tax revenues from bars and restaurants... the effect wasn't that great in Ohio, I know that for a fact.

[Fury13]

When the smoking ban reduces sales tax revenues from purchases at bars and restaurants, get ready to pay tax on pop and candy, like OH and IL.

That statement is illogical. The smoking ban will likely increase sales tax revenues from bars and restaurants. Eighty percent of the population is non-smoking, and that vast majority will be more inclined to patronize bars and restaurants after the ban takes effect.

[Long Lake]

This will never happen. There is no political will for a regressive tax increase.

[Lowell]

Please do not copy entire articles as it has led to complaints, ergo unpaid work for us. Use this method: Excerpt, Credit, Link to full article, add your own comments. Linking to the article gives the source site traffic and some actual or potential revenue. That is only fair. Adding your own comments is important too. As a thread starter it is your duty to offer context.

Our conditions of participation are clear on this.
"7-Pictures, text or any content that you post must be your property or permitted for posting by the contents' owners or fall under fair use acceptability. If you post content taken from a permitted outside source, it must be credited to the owners by name and link, if one exists."

[kraig]

Please do not copy entire articles as it has led to complaints, ergo unpaid work for us. Use this method: Excerpt, Credit, Link to full article, add your own comments. Linking to the article gives the source site traffic and some actual or potential revenue. That is only fair. Adding your own comments is important too. As a thread starter it is your duty to offer context.

Our conditions of participation are clear on this.
"7-Pictures, text or any content that you post must be your property or permitted for posting by the contents' owners or fall under fair use acceptability. If you post content taken from a permitted outside source, it must be credited to the owners by name and link, if one exists."

You've got it.

[Long Lake]

IMO, they can cut hundreds of these planned road projects. There is no current reason for road expansions or general improvements. We should only fund basic maintenance right now.

A gas tax is regressive because something like 96% of Michigan households own motor vehicles, including most poor. Even in Detroit, a majority of poor households own a motor vehicle. And businesses get totally screwed with such increases, given their vehicular needs.

Michigan already has some of the highest fuel prices in the nation. There should be no increase in the gas tax until the state can get petroleum refinery/transportation costs under control.

I think Michigan needs to change its income tax system to a progressive one. It's insane that poor folks are paying the same proportional share of taxes as rich folks. The strong majority of states [[especially more successful states) use a progressive tax.

[Hermod]

IMO,
I think Michigan needs to change its income tax system to a progressive one. It's insane that poor folks are paying the same proportional share of taxes as rich folks. The strong majority of states [[especially more successful states) use a progressive tax.

The most "progressive" state income tax is California. How is that working right now?

[Long Lake]

The most "progressive" state income tax is California. How is that working right now?

Overall, it's working quite well. You do know that California is one of the richer and more successful states in the nation, and has absolutely no problem with revenues, right?

The main problem in CA is spending, especially pensions and other obligations, which are absolutely out-of-control. This has nothing do with with whether or not a progressive tax is in effect.

The other problem in CA is Proposition 13, which is an amazingly regressive regulation [[a $2 million house in Beverly Hills, CA can pay less in property taxes than a $200,000 house in Troy, MI), but that's another story.

[Detroit Stylin]

Overall, it's working quite well. You do know that California is one of the richer and more successful states in the nation, and has absolutely no problem with revenues, right?

The main problem in CA is spending, especially pensions and other obligations, which are absolutely out-of-control. This has nothing do with with whether or not a progressive tax is in effect.

The other problem in CA is Proposition 13, which is an amazingly regressive regulation [[a $2 million house in Beverly Hills, CA can pay less in property taxes than a $200,000 house in Troy, MI), but that's another story.

Ummmm The state is bankrupt......

[Hermod]

Overall, it's working quite well. You do know that California is one of the richer and more successful states in the nation, and has absolutely no problem with revenues, right?

The main problem in CA is spending, especially pensions and other obligations, which are absolutely out-of-control. This has nothing do with with whether or not a progressive tax is in effect.

The other problem in CA is Proposition 13, which is an amazingly regressive regulation [[a $2 million house in Beverly Hills, CA can pay less in property taxes than a $200,000 house in Troy, MI), but that's another story.

And businesses and retirees are fleeing in droves..........

[mjs]

Michigan already has some of the highest fuel prices in the nation. There should be no increase in the gas tax until the state can get petroleum refinery/transportation costs under control.

Done. According to gasbuddy.com we're 12 cents a gallon below the national average.
So, can we consider you in favor of the tax now?

http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_pr...rt.aspx?time=3

[Long Lake]

Done. According to gasbuddy.com we're 12 cents a gallon below the national average.
So, can we consider you in favor of the tax now?

http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_pr...rt.aspx?time=3

Your link doesn't even respond to my point.

The link just provides a sample size of point-in-time prices in various cities.

I am talking about average statewide prices over time. Michigan has been, and continues to be, one of the more expensive places to buy gas.

And you should re-read my statement. I said that an increase in gas tax shouldn't be considered until costs are under control. I never claimed that a decrease in overall costs necessitates an increase in the gas tax.

[mjs]

Your link doesn't even respond to my point.

The link just provides a sample size of point-in-time prices in various cities.

I am talking about average statewide prices over time. Michigan has been, and continues to be, one of the more expensive places to buy gas.

Then you didn't click on my link because you didn't want the facts to get in the way of your opinion. My link allows anyone to create a graph that compares gas prices in a very large number of cities, states, and even Canada going back as far as six years. My link shows that we are generally very close to or well below the national average.

Its not true 100% of the time, but look and you'll see that practically every city and state outside of Texas is above the average from time to time. I'm sure their local news also limits the comparison to those times as well.

And you should re-read my statement. I said that an increase in gas tax shouldn't be considered until costs are under control. I never claimed that a decrease in overall costs necessitates an increase in the gas tax.

So, I showed that they should be considered because they're under control. I was bringing to light your subtle assumption that gas prices are the only factor in the conversation on whether gas taxes, hence road spending, should go up.

And before you go bragging on how much better California is than Michigan because of Michigan's "terrible" gas prices and tax system, use my link to run the six year gas comparison on Michigan versus California. They're currently 40 cents a gallon higher. Also remember which state had to force IOU's on their contractors last year. IOU's that the banks refused to honor.

[Sstashmoo]

Higher taxes on everything in the future is just a fact we are all going to have to live with. We've been borrowing and spending like drunken sailors. The Fed is broke, the states are broke, leaving our doors open, and trying to accommodate anyone who feels like showing up, we reward people who refuse to work with an income, Millions an hour for a war based on lies that nobody wanted, the money has to come from somewhere. And now our new Pres keeps trying to push through free programs like healthcare, free money for all sorts of BS, nothing is free. Get ready to pay up.