• @Anekdoteles@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    251 year ago

    Cars should be taxed based on their potential for road wear, which is calculated approximately by their weight to the fourth power.

    Road wear comes from weight and power, so does pollution. Add size to the equation and you can estimate a cars dangerousness. Look only at size and you can see a cars damage to urban spaces. Hence, private vehicles should be taxed based on their size, weight and power. Bonus points for tire width, because tires are a non-recycable environmental problem and super-wide tires add nothing to the world but damage.

      • @Jaccident@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        That’s relevant to certain rural communities, but I see a lot more wide tyres on suspension lowered BMW with bad chrome jobs.

        Feels like the kind of thing that shouldn’t be encouraged for Inner City vehicles, I wonder what the correlation is between these vehicles and the kinds of arsehole tearing up a 20mph at 60mph at 4am.

      • @Anekdoteles@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ceteris paribus, it mostly does. But that also means, that they can be used to driver faster holding the probability of an accident constant, while raising the severity of damage in case of an accident. Incidents where they would have prevented an accident are likely to be insignificant, while at the same time, more grip is likely to induce more risk-seeking driving, hence resulting in a net-negative to overall safety.

        However, keep in mind that super wide tires are never installed for safety reasons anyway, but mostly for cosmetic purposes and the drivers couldn’t care less for the risks and damages that come with wider tires. Therefore society has to prohibit it in self-defence.