Rednecktastic

So we need to pave our roads in gold is the argument you're making?

I say buy a new set of shocks every 70,000 miles and let the truckers spend an extra 20 minutes in traffic if they don't plan their trip right.


That's better than copying Japan or Europe with their shovel ready projects they tried over the last few decades that put them into a deep lasting recessions.
I'd prefer to have a pay raise and watch my property not drop in value. Seems like a lot of people disagree though seeing as how they voted last election.

dmurdock

The problem is really complicated but to try and state it simply we used to "pay as you go" when building highways and once they were built the excess money went to new roads and into cheaper fuel (the tax wasn't indexed...it's a set amount not a percentage) so we are actually getting that money back in "cheaper" fuel today (been the same 18 cent tax for at least ten years or so). So, the excess money has went into cheaper fuel and has been diverted to other non road related things or to things "loosely" related to transportation such as sidewalks, anti-dwi campaigns, flowers on the side of the road etc.. etc... . Currently, all the roads we built a while back are wearing out and on top of that we need more roads due to the higher number of cars and avg vehicle miles travelled per car. We are all looking at each other and saying "how do we pay for it?". Some don't want to give up their cheap fuel, no politician wants to give up their programs that are funded from the diversions, and most politicians don't want to bring the tax back up (adjusting to inflation AND increased mpg) to the buying power it had 10-15 years ago.

In essence, we bought a car with cash 15 years ago and it's wore out. In the mean time we've gotten used to cable tv, a nice house, college tuition and don't have any money in our family budget for a new car but we need one....something's gotta give. Oh, and only half our family actually makes any money...the other half live on the half with an income.

Rednecktastic

We don't need more roads or emissions laws. We need more carpoolers!!!!!!!



Keep that urban cowboy truck in the garage girls, you need to learn to love the minivan with your coworkers LOL. Minivan, MEGAFUN!

sheriffav8r

We just have to adopt a system like Turkmenistans. Here are the costs per liter ($/L) for some countries:

1. Uruguay 1.95 (1998-2000 MRYA)
2. United Kingdom 1.92 (1998-2000 MRYA)
3. Israel 1.87 (1998-2000 MRYA)
4. Argentina 1.75 (1998-2000 MRYA)
5. Japan 1.74 (1998-2000 MRYA)
...
74. Mexico 1.00 (1998-2000 MRYA)
...
102. United States 0.77 (1998-2000 MRYA)
...
131. Egypt 0.43 (1998-2000 MRYA)
132. Libya 0.41 (1998-2000 MRYA)
133. United Arab Emirates 0.41 (1998-2000 MRYA)
134. Saudi Arabia 0.39 (1998-2000 MRYA)
135. Kuwait 0.34 (1998-2000 MRYA)
136. Ghana 0.33 (1998-2000 MRYA)
137. Indonesia 0.28 (1998-2000 MRYA)
138. Venezuela 0.20 (1998-2000 MRYA)
139. Iran 0.08 (1998-2000 MRYA)
140. Iraq 0.05 (1998-2000 MRYA)
141. Turkmenistan 0.03 (1998-2000 MRYA)

True, our taxes should pay for road infrastructure, but they also pay for our congressmen....

graphitecumnz

I'm a Civil Engineer and I'm licensed as a Professional Engineer in two states so I feel I am more than qualified to talk about some of the issues discussed here.

1.) as far as fuel taxes are concerned, only in an ideal(i.e. make believe) world do all fuel taxes go towards infrastructure projects. The problem is that when a politician sees a pile of money sitting around not being 'spent' they get a tingle in their pants and want to find something to do with it. In the State of Kansas, we've had two consecutive 10 year highway plans that have been funded with all sorts of revenue streams including fuel taxes(we have high fuel taxes in comparison to our neighbors but have a state highway system that has no comparison amongst our bordering friends). During the latter half of our last 10 year Comprehensive Transportation Plan, our (former) esteemed governor, now your secretary of health and human service Kathleen Sebelius, borrowed money from the CTP to fund other areas of government... that money has not been, and won't ever be, paid back. Projects were cut and/or pushed into future years.

2.) The scary thing about infrastructure isn't the condition of the nations highways and bridges. It's the condition of the extremely aged water and wastewater pipelines, sewage treatment facilities, water treatment facilities, hydroelectric dams, flood control levees, etc... That's really a non-sequitur though...

3.) We can't just say, "hey, lets go to larger loads on the trucks"... our current infrastructure is not designed to handle larger truck loads and have any durability. There are tens of thousands of aging bridges in this country that are already inadequate(in design terms) for the loads they carry. No, these bridges aren't going to collapse and create nationwide mayhem but it is an issue because it costs REAL dollars and cents to a.) rehabilitate or b.) reconstruct these facilities to handle even current design standards. This doesn't even speak to the aging pavements on interstate (and non-interstate) highway system.

Spooler

LOL, our government is using these taxes to support everything but the roads. The usual rob Peter to pay Paul....

screagle2

Obviously another person who call his [ickup a truck, and has never been closer to one than on the highway.........Not a business owner either.

RAMRODD

So does that statement make you feel like a big man??

Not that it is any of your business but I have been self employed for just over ten years now.
I use my dodge as a truck do you have a problem with that??

As of now I just hire 1 or 2 private truckers for my hauling needs when I need them, works for me. So I know when fuel goes up trucking rates go up that isn't rocket science!!!

I hate high fuel prices myself when I sell grain or ship off a load of cattle I can't charge a surcharge because my expenses were higher. But the trucking company can charge me more for there's



Any more questions or opinions?

screagle2

No it does not make me feel any better. I do however farm on a large scale and have run class 8 trucks OTR since the mid 70's. For someone to make a blanket statement such as you did, while not having run trucks leaves you open to valid criticism. It is tantamount to me telling you that it matters not, whether or not you raise a crop, not what the price is, as the gov't. will provide you with all the income you desire......... That makes no more sense than saying that the average pickup buyer does not care what the price of new pickups is, as he will just demand more from his employer.
Any time a smart business owner can reduce his costs, he is better able to compete with those in his industry...... We are constantly looking for ways to improve our fuel efficiency both off road, and on road. I suspect that you might be also, even though the farm program has nothing to do with fuel.

Is the person raising his rates according to fuel prices......most likely, and if he is out of line you have the opprtunity to either replace him with another, of purchase your own equipment. If he chooses to raise those rates on non regulated freight, which your grain is, that raise is not supported by the government.........again your choice to agree to the increase or not.

As a previous post related, if the trucking industry did not care about fuel prices, they realize that they will loose freight to intermodal rail, and that is the same as you raising less crop with the same equipment. I am not speaking of the short haul that you use, but you stated the trucking industry which is by far where the greatest ton mile is moved.

If I hurt your feelers, it was not meant to be, but such blanket statements are dying for a response. If you check to see how many companies have accelerated their trade schedule, and ask the reason, it would primarily be two fold. One: As the emmision regs. get tighter, fuel economy is suffering and they wish to avoid any further degradation in fuel mileage, contrary to what you might believe. Fuel economy and fuel prices go hand in hand as related to expense. Higher fuel prices means a much greater cash flow, which you should see as a hinderence to operating a business.
Two: Higher fuel prices affects how their customers look at moving their freight, just as you have eluded to.

Once again, a close analogy is whether as a producer it makes any difference to you whether you raise any crops or not, not whether corn for example is $2.50/ bu vs. $4.00 of the current market price. If you raise 200 bpa or 20bpa. Many still think that you are paid not to produce.. a handy way to shift blame, but not the correct assumption.

One last thought, does your trucker fuel at the most expensive fueling station he can find, since it doew not matter to him what he pays?

I understand your frustration, but your basic premiss is flawed.

Rednecktastic

I acutally think it's more like 50 cents a gallon in the US.


I think we should just get rid of the tax and go to a toll road system. Don't hide the cost, give idiots a good reason to stay off the roads and carpool.

screagle2

Not it does not change anthing. But for you to make such a blanket statement, that is dying for a response, I will again.
Your statement is tantamount to someone saying that a farmer does not care whether or not he raises a good crop, poor crop, or no crop at all, or care what the prices are, because the farm programm through DCP, SURE, EQIP, etc. etc., will guarantee you of all of the income you need. It is simply not true. Counter cyclical payments, will however offset your crop price if it becomes extremely lower than the cost of production. That value, is as we both now, way to low to affect you at this time, but it is in law. With RA polices we can protect against some loss, but never be fully made whole. Yet many would interpret these, just as you have the fuel costs to the trucker.

You use grain hauling as an example, I raise and transport over 500,000 bushels per year, as well as having run class 8 trucks since the mid 70's. Grain is not a regulated freight, and if the trucker you are hiring is raising his rates, it is without gov't. intervention. It is then up to you whether or not you participate in that. If his rates are too high, you may find another, or address that issue yourself.

Any smart business owner knows that he must remain competitive, and if possible, gain an advantage over his competition, in order to do so. Although in farming, fuel is a major expense, it is not the most major, as it is in the trucking industry. A trucker cannot control fuel prices any more than you can, but he will do all he can to control fuel costs. This is the reason that most are updating their equipment at a greater rate than in the past, to increase fuel conomy. This is also the reason that the majority of trucks running on Interstate highways are running at 10 15 mph below the posted limit. They are giving up daily ton miles for fuel mileage. To choose to run at 60 - 65 vs. 70 or 75 exemplifies, how important doing what they can to control fuel costs is. The largest expense per mile is fuel.

If that trucking business does not remain competitive, he will loose that freight to another carrier, or to another mode of transport, such as rail.

Higher fuel costs increase overall cash flow needs greater than any other part of the business, and as a business owner, you should see how that affects the viability of that business. Higher fuel costs also affects the ability of his customer, (you) to be able, or willing to pay the freight he feels is necessary. If he isn't also thinking about that, he really is not a business partner.

Again consider all of the statements that you no doubt have read about how the gov't. guarantees your income as a farmer, no matter whether or not you produce, and how erroneous those statements are.

If I hurt your feelers, it was not my intent, but many read these posts and are more than willing to say, "yeah it's those guys that are doing this to us", whatever the crusade is about.

I understand your frustration, but your basic premiss is flawed when you state fuel prices make no difference to the trucking industry.

When you feed a bushel of $5.00 plus corn to your cattle, are you mad at the farmer side of yourself for the price of corn, or at the cattleman side of yourself for paying too much? These are all market forces that are often unbalanced, and unfair, but they do affect each and every business. The more consumers pay for one item, the less expendable income they have for another...

I would hope that whomever hauls your products, knows that he needs you to remain profitable, just as you need him to remain so.

It is always whose ox is getting gored, and neither is an easy business, and neither is usually portrayed honestly.

WAY OFF TOPIC, so I'm done. See Ya and Good Luck

Apache1

In my sidebar opinion, out here we waste hundreds of millions of dollars on roads that are perfectly serviceable needing, if anything, minor repairs or periodic resurfacing.

Many of our remote area roads are completely rebuilt and enlarged for absolutely no reason that I can see. The small amount of traffic volume on these roads doesn't justify huge expenditures of taxpayer money.

And, these days a lot more DOT money is going to labor and related benefit costs and less to materials.

When I was growing up, I did just fine with metal playground equipment. There are a lot of things in life I'd like to have as long as someone else is paying for it. . .

RAMRODD

You assume so much about me. I operate just over 8000 acres I hire most of my trucking because I don't have time to do it myself. When I am sending a load 2 states away I want a experienced driver behind the wheel. I don't want to send my hired hand.

Years ago I hauled cattle commercially when I farmed at a smaller scale then I do now. And I did so profitably

My whole point of my statement that you dislike is for the most part the trucking industry can raise there rates to cover rising fuel costs. Something farmers can't. Why do you think I want to see load limits raised?

Since you brought up the farm program I will give you my opinion. I wish the whole program would end. I don't need government aid to make my farm profitable, does yours? The only reason I am in the farm program is for the land I rent. The land owner knows there is a payment and that is added to the rent. So really it doesn't do me any good? Getting rid of CRP just think of that improvement alone. Think how much money the government could save of course this would upset the doctors and lawyers that have been buying it up for hunting land
.