OK, so we have a whole bunch of people buying ridiculously large vehicles and driving them to the detriment of everyone else, usually as a single occupancy vehicle. I say, if a TBD percentage of the population of any given neighborhood buys one of these smogbeasts, then the rest of the citizens shouldn't have to pay to pave their road.
-- Vecini, Jan 10 2001

Related Humor http://www.herald.c...2001/docs/jan07.htm
[blahginger, Jan 10 2001, last modified Oct 04 2004]

anti-SUV site http://www.changingtheclimate.com
Go get 'em, tiger! [mrthingy, Jan 10 2001, last modified Oct 04 2004]

Anti-stupidity site http://www.tealeafmag.com
Anti SUV. How the automakers psychologically market SUV buyers [tealeaf magazine, Oct 04 2004]

Wastemonsters - fighting the SUV menace http://www.wastemonsters.org.uk
Realistic fake parking tickets for SUVs in London, UK. [sianb, Oct 04 2004]

Mr. Sealy: I like your style. For a similar idea, check out Sports Utility Spuds.
-- Vecini, Jan 11 2001


Again, Peter, the link is only readable for WSJ subscribers.
-- jutta, Jan 11 2001


Damn straight!
-- egnor, Jan 12 2001


SUVs are allegedly off-road vehicles. Therefore, they should not be allowed to drive on roads, except as necessary to get off. This could be enforced with an off-road incentive and on-road tax. That is, there would be a charge of , (for example only) 9 cents per mile for driving on roads. A rebate of l cent per mile would be given for driving offroad. That would ensure that someone who drives offroad nine times as much as on-road would pay no tax at all. In short, working vehicles would be taxed neutrally, and 100 per cent offroad would actually earn a small premium.
-- gfrajkor, Jul 29 2001


Smart, gfrajkor! I like your style.
-- Mentalelemental, Mar 26 2003


Changing taxes in the US so they relate to the fuel economy/polution a vehicle produces is a bakable way to resolve this. Shame they want consumerism ahead of enviromentalism. [Jethro] - Fat people havent done anything to you, whereas you have incited hatred against them. If anything, you should be charged with discrimination, not them taxed more.
-- miasere, Mar 28 2003



halfbakery