How close are we to tracking autos and taxing mileage ? Closer than you know

[MORTARDUDE]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/governme...veillance.html

Government Prepares the Public for Cradle to Grave Surveillance

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
February 28, 2009

Last week Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood floated the idea of a mileage tax. “The idea — which involves tracking drivers through Global Positioning System (GPS) units in their cars — is gaining support in some states as a way of making up for a shortfall in highway funding,” reports CNN.

It didn’t take long for Obama to reject the idea — at least for now. The National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission report rolling out the mileage tax is designed not to foist this intrusive technology on the American people in the short term, but rather get them acclimated to the idea of being tracked and taxed.

“The White House was somewhat premature,” commission Chairman Robert Atkinson told Bloomberg. “It’s absolutely critical that we look at it. The members of Congress that are committed to a robust transportation system are certainly very aware of the risks of that system not having as much money as it needs because of the stated policy of the Obama administration.” According to Atkinson and the panel, the so-called stimulus bill won’t be sufficient to meet highway-funding needs and financing programs in partnership with private companies “can play an important supplementary role.”

Private companies such as defense contractor Lockheed-Martin currently manufacture and profit from red light cameras now going in around the country. Lockheed-Martin not only manufactures the cameras, it also takes a cut from fines issued to red light violators.

“Not only has the sheer number of tickets issued and money reaped increased, but the type of photo enforcement and surveillance the government uses has also vastly increased,” notes the National Motorists Association. “There are red light cameras, speeding cameras, railroad crossing cameras, and most recently face identification cameras. Tampa Bay, Florida is now scanning the faces of pedestrians on the street to compare them to their database of criminals. The Colorado Department of Motor Vehicles is investing in a camera system that will map the face of anyone with a driver’s license thus creating a photo database of the vast majority of their population. How long until the system used in Colorado is married to the system used in Florida?”

Adding GPS tracking to this emerging surveillance network would be a control freak’s wish come true. Obama’s supposed rejection of the GPS track and tax idea is a public relations trick. In fact, the global elite have long planned to impose a high-tech surveillance and control grid on humanity.

At approximately the same time we were told Obama rejected the GPS track and tax idea, CFR member and current DHS boss Janet Napolitano was rolling out the idea of “enhanced driver’s licenses,” that is to say RFID national ID cards.

“Privacy advocates are issuing warnings about a new radio chip plan that ultimately could provide electronic identification for every adult in the U.S. and allow agents to compile attendance lists at anti-government rallies simply by walking through the assembly,” writes Bob Unruh for WorldNetDaily.

[39mto39g]

1st
a GPS devise could only be put in NEW cars, not cars already out there. and second, a Traceable drivers license? What for, just to see were you are? not going to happen. And if initiated, people would not go along, they would just copy the DL and throw the GPS one away.
GPS in our criminal based society is not a bad thing, unless your a criminal. Tracking non criminal type people is a bad thing, How do we tell the difference? In order to be fare to the criminals we can't tell the difference, so we can't track anyone.
I think an easier way to prevent criminal behavior would be to take a DNA sample from all Jr high school students. After all these kids are the eventual criminals of our country. Just about any crime that is committed, there is DNA left behind. And that DNA put into a national DNA bank could and would solve most crimes.
With the criminals behind bars, what is the reason to fallow law abiding people?



Ron

[SuperScout]

Do you remember when I wrote about the distinct differences between Conservatives and liberals with regard to the basic things, such as Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? Recall, if you will, about liberty especially, stating that liberals will cause us to lose liberties, by taking more of our wealth, and by taking more of our freedoms. When Big Brother has the ability and resources to track where we go, you have just lost a large part of your freedoms.

Be afraid, America, be very afraid.

America deserves better, much better.

[MORTARDUDE]

"Conservatives" have failed this country by every measure you can make.

Find a copy of Time magazine from Feb 23, 2009. Turn to page 20 for the article, "25 People to Blame" ( for the economic "crisis" ). # 2 on the list is Phil Gramm. The last paragraph under his name says, "...The he inserted a provision into the 2000 Commodity Futures Modernization Act that exempted derivatives like credit-default swaps from regulation..." This opened the door to the CDS "casino" that brought us the mess we have now. Who put him up to this ? I am sure many "conservatives" voted for this too.

Larry

[phuloi]

Wrong, Larry. Conservatives haven`t failed us, the condescending Republican party has failed.

[SuperScout]

How has lowering the tax rates, as Ronaldo Maximus Reagan, seen as a failure?

How has a firm and ardent advocate for 2nd Amendment rights, by Conservatives, seen as a failure?

How can advocating a strong military, as Conservatives do, be seen as a failure?

I would be very wary of using Time Magazine as an authoritative source of really accurate data.

[SuperScout]

How has lowering the tax rates, as Ronaldo Maximus Reagan, seen as a failure?

How has a firm and ardent advocate for 2nd Amendment rights, by Conservatives, seen as a failure?

How can advocating a strong military, as Conservatives do, be seen as a failure?

I would be very wary of using Time Magazine as an authoritative source of really accurate data.

[Micky J. Jagger]

Why is it stunningly stupid for "Upper-income taxpayers" to try to reduce their income to avoid proposed tax increases on those earning more than $250,000?

http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200903030013

[darrels joy]

GreenCarReports.com, a partner site to TheCarConnection, carried this story yesterday regarding the new federal economy standards. Editor-in-Chief John Voelcker cleaved through much of the rhetoric to highlight some important points overlooked by many media outlets.

Namely;
- That California retains its rights to set its own standards after 2016.
- That a new energy policy is coming, and that this is code speak for a huge new gas tax.

The first point clearly contradicts one of the main goals of the new regulation, that is to have one national standard. At least there will only be one set of rules for the next six years ... that gives automakers some breathing room for one round of new products. That's a good thing.

The second point highlights that along with paying more for more fuel-efficient vehicles, we'll also likely be paying more for gasoline, about $3.50 per gallon according to a report in Automotive News. We don't know whether this will be a market-directed price or whether the federal government will impose a new floating gas tax that will artificially keep the price of fuel at that level. Many in government and the auto industry see that approximate price point as the tipping point that inflicts enough economic pain on drivers to make them want the more fuel efficient vehicles that the new emissions regulations require.

So the reality is that we'll be paying more to drive, even if you don't own a new car.

More Added Costs
When you do go to buy a new car, the cost will jump substantially over current prices. It is interesting to note that President Obama said that new vehicles will cost more (the figure $1,300 was called out in the President's speech yesterday), but that a figure from a 2006 EPA study cited by a noted industry analyst (who wasn't trying to sell a government program) came in at $2,176. So which branch of the government do you believe?

Frankly, your author's gut tells him to look at the relative cost differential between today's conventionally powered internal combustion engine powered vehicles and their hybrid or diesel counterparts. Full hybrids generally run $4,000 more, and diesel variants cost anywhere from $900 on up. Mild hybrids are less expensive (reference the Honda Insight as a good example). The bottom line is that driving is going to get much more expensive, but we can't pin down a single figure as the increases will fall into a range.

Again, Why Are We Doing This?
At times like this, it is often good to pause and go back to the basics. Ponder the core reason for the new rules. The question is why are we doing this? Will these steps really save the earth or move the U.S. away from Mid-East oil?

I hate to be a naysayer, but China and India will gladly burn all the fossil fuels we don't, and they'll pollute much more in the process. Sorry, it's going to be a net loss for the earth realizing this truth. It may be counter intuitive, but it's better for the earth to burn fuel here than in third-world countries that have little regard for ecology. So, tell me again, where's the net gain?

Second, once enacted, we will consume less fuel in our vehicles, but the U.S. transportation sector consumes only a quarter of the fossil fuels used in the country, and this new legislation will have a mere 2.5-3 percent of CO2 (based on Congressional Research Service findings), which works out to be a scant 0.6-percent impact on CO2 levels globally. The logic behind these new regulations is vacuous.

In a national move that will have no impact on the planet, U.S citizens are going to be forced to drive more expensive vehicles that provide no greater utility. The proverbial emperor is buck naked.

Oh well, plenty of people didn't like GWB's politics...

http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/ma...fuel-standards

Air pollution in Vegas comes from China and California forest fires. Particles around which rain drops form in Wyoming come from Asia & Africa.

Joy