Submitted by Terry Parker on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 5:50pm.
Jim is absolutely correct. Listed are nearly 17 million dollars of bike infrastructure spending for the freeloading pedal pushers who directly contribute nothing in taxes to the funding, and approximately 44 million of spending for transit infrastructure while only 21 percent of the operations costs are collected through the farebox from the ridership. Additionally both groups are in line to receive utility tax discounts.
Siphoning off tax dollars collected from motorists to pay for alternative modes of transport instead of for roads is a misdirected priority. Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams are all befitting to scam artists when they call for investments transit and bicycle infrastructure and then only add the tax burden to the drivers of cars and trucks. What is needed as an alternative is some affirmative action in tax policies and codes such that the direct users of transit and bicycle infrastructure actually start paying their own way for the government services they are provided.
Since the federal portions of spending for new transport non-motorist transport infrastructure contained in this spending program are coming from The Federal Highway Trust Fund which comes from the federal tax on motor fuels, this whole proposal totally lacks tax equity. Moving beyond the gas tax needs to establish a three legged stool of user mode taxes whereby transit riders pay a surcharge on transit fares to pay for transit infrastructure and repairs to the roads that are damaged by the busses, while bicyclists are directly taxed to pay for bicycle infrastructure. Furthermore, instead of receiving socialistic utility tax discounts, transit riders and bicyclists should be paying double or even triple the amount of people paying gas taxes.
To suggest that Sam is ambitious and explains his transportation plan so well it is testament to his knowledge and passion makes him the ultimate “flimflam man”. The passion equates to one of discrimination towards motorists when the details are viewed of who is taxed and then how the money will be spent. If he is so confident that this proposal is the right thing to do, Sam would be recommending sending it to a vote of the people. He is not because the proposal is stacked full of discretionary politically motivated spending to support his personal streetcar comrades and bicycle babble buddies. His elaborate rhetoric however should be turned into a clarifying campaign catchphrase: “A vote for Sam is a vote for Flimflam".
An Ambitious Bureaucrat turns into the Flimflam Man
Jim is absolutely correct. Listed are nearly 17 million dollars of bike infrastructure spending for the freeloading pedal pushers who directly contribute nothing in taxes to the funding, and approximately 44 million of spending for transit infrastructure while only 21 percent of the operations costs are collected through the farebox from the ridership. Additionally both groups are in line to receive utility tax discounts.
Siphoning off tax dollars collected from motorists to pay for alternative modes of transport instead of for roads is a misdirected priority. Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Portland City Commissioner Sam Adams are all befitting to scam artists when they call for investments transit and bicycle infrastructure and then only add the tax burden to the drivers of cars and trucks. What is needed as an alternative is some affirmative action in tax policies and codes such that the direct users of transit and bicycle infrastructure actually start paying their own way for the government services they are provided.
Since the federal portions of spending for new transport non-motorist transport infrastructure contained in this spending program are coming from The Federal Highway Trust Fund which comes from the federal tax on motor fuels, this whole proposal totally lacks tax equity. Moving beyond the gas tax needs to establish a three legged stool of user mode taxes whereby transit riders pay a surcharge on transit fares to pay for transit infrastructure and repairs to the roads that are damaged by the busses, while bicyclists are directly taxed to pay for bicycle infrastructure. Furthermore, instead of receiving socialistic utility tax discounts, transit riders and bicyclists should be paying double or even triple the amount of people paying gas taxes.
To suggest that Sam is ambitious and explains his transportation plan so well it is testament to his knowledge and passion makes him the ultimate “flimflam man”. The passion equates to one of discrimination towards motorists when the details are viewed of who is taxed and then how the money will be spent. If he is so confident that this proposal is the right thing to do, Sam would be recommending sending it to a vote of the people. He is not because the proposal is stacked full of discretionary politically motivated spending to support his personal streetcar comrades and bicycle babble buddies. His elaborate rhetoric however should be turned into a clarifying campaign catchphrase: “A vote for Sam is a vote for Flimflam".