Feds to require a "black box" in every vehicle

[ghuns]

As fuel economy improves, leading to reduced consumption of gas/diesel, the amount of $$$ collected through gas tax will drop. It's not politically feasible for any politician to advocate for raising the price per gallon of gas. To tax it per miles driven makes a lot more sense, especially for Democratic politicians, who will say that it has less net effect on the pooooooor, because they drive less or don't even own a car.

I really think that this is the end game of the technology referred to in the article. Not that the .gov wouldn't see other "benefits" from it. Just think, you break the posted speed limit, you run a stop light, you get an E-ticket in your E-mail. Think of how this would enhance the revenue of states and localities. Less po-po on patrol to pay also saves them $$$.

Like any other infringement on our privacy, it really doesn't effect our daily lives, until you become a target of Big Brother. This makes it acceptable to most people, as they never expect to become a target.

 

[beararms1776]

"True to its name, the OnStar is always on. Like a psychotic stalker, it’s simply unwilling to hang up"

 

[kiddchaos]

Where there is technology, there are hackers.

I wouldn't do OnStar.

This is why will never use snapshot from Progressive. Let's hope insurance companies will not force feed this into law.
Progressive Takes Snapshot of Your Driving Habits

Companies that use Black boxes need to give you full disclosure of what's being recorded.

 

[beararms1776]

Are you all aware the current administration has proposed that a "black box" or GPS device be put into the vehicles and the reason they are offering is to tax you on miles driven?

Now that I can agree with.

 

[beararms1776]

Where there is technology, there are hackers.

I wouldn't do OnStar.

This is why will never use snapshot from Progressive. Let's hope insurance companies will not force feed this into law.
Progressive Takes Snapshot of Your Driving Habits

I always wondered why they named it Progressive.

 

[Ted]

Any OnStar-equipped GM vehicle can be located and shut down remotely at a time and location convenient to the police. Really nice in the case of theft, really sucks in the case of .gov overreach.

Unless its a thief that knows and disables the OnStar system, as it occurred in my case.

 

[Ted]

I always wondered why they named it Progressive.

I looked into Progressive and found that if you missed a monthly premium and they cancelled your policy, they still expected that you pay said premium.

Thanks for the quote, but no thank you.

 

[kiddchaos]

Remember this video? This hacker thief got into older model cars that had remote locks.
He'd just walk by the cars until one unlocked. Presto!
Have Car Thieves Cracked the Code? | Video - ABC News

Progressive was not so nice in this case:
(conferred with the defendant "in and out of the courtroom.")
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fami...urer-defending/story?id=17002650#.UMYks-Tm4n0

 

[beararms1776]

Honestly, I would be more concerned about thief's following you around. Take some sort of precautions against their aggression. Or would that be considered paranoid?

 

[Bill of Rights]

I always wondered why they named it Progressive.

Because it's owned by George Soros.

 

[traderdan]

I am with the "Tin-foil hat crowd"on this one...in the event of real civil unrest,travel must be restricted.Many things that are flying under the radar of the typical American are being put in place for use in a time to come....Call it far fetched if you will,but I am not in the mood to assume that my "elected officials" have my best interests in mind...

 

[Mark 1911]

I don't like the idea of the government assuming the role of big brother who can watch me at every time. The technology is there, and although it wasn't designed to be used to spy on us, it makes it very easy for them if we don't draw the line to prevent it. For example, we have smartphones, many of which transmit location information, although they also provide the option to turn off transmission of location information.

I have a GM vehicle with OnStar. It costs about $20 per month. I was going to stop subscribing, but decided to keep it after I locked my keys in the car with the engine running on a recent hunting trip. Even though I was in a remote location, I was able to call and have my truck unlocked via satellite signal. That is a very nice feature, but it does require location data to work.

Technology can work for us, and it can work against us. Its developing at a very rapid pace, and it provides a lot of great conveniences unknown to my dad's generation, much less to his parent's generation. But it also presents some very real privacy issues that haven't been worked out yet, maybe at least partly because the technology is so new. One thing that isn't new - the government is not to be trusted. This is one that we can't afford to be complacent about. It's worth writing and calling the congressmen and senators on this one.

 

[IndyDave1776]

They don't have to track you real time.

All they need to do is make you subject to yearly inspections and download all your data then. Actually they don't even need a fancy data recorder to tax you by the mile. Your car already records miles.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Only one problem with simply using odometer mileage--you can't determine where the mile was driven to apportion the money by state. The other problem is that odometers are not that accurate. For example, if you drive a car with 15" wheels and replace the factory P205 tires with P225, you introduce an 8% discrepancy in speedometer/odometer readings (i.e., if it says 60 mph you are actually travelling 64.8 mph). GPS eliminates all that, plus allows for apportionment of tax money even among localities.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The fact that unelected bureaucrats even have the power to impose law on the citizens rather than having this go before Congress for a vote is a much bigger tragedy than any particular rule they choose.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Only one problem with simply using odometer mileage--you can't determine where the mile was driven to apportion the money by state. The other problem is that odometers are not that accurate. For example, if you drive a car with 15" wheels and replace the factory P205 tires with P225, you introduce an 8% discrepancy in speedometer/odometer readings (i.e., if it says 60 mph you are actually travelling 64.8 mph). GPS eliminates all that, plus allows for apportionment of tax money even among localities.

lolz...

Who cares about the details, or accuracy? The point is that if they want to tax your mileage, they have the means, and likely the will to do so.

 

[IndyDave1776]

lolz...

Who cares about the details, or accuracy? The point is that if they want to tax your mileage, they have the means, and likely the will to do so.

You are missing my primary point. When they start taxing mileage, establishing where that mile was driven gets to be very, very important to them. I have to provide my mileage every quarter for tax purposes, and dividing the mileage up by state is one of the most critical elements in the process.

Some people here wonder why so many truck drivers passionately hate government. This is a prime example. Not only on account of yet another tax, but because it is a pain in the ass out of this universe.

 

[ATOMonkey]

You are missing my primary point. When they start taxing mileage, establishing where that mile was driven gets to be very, very important to them. I have to provide my mileage every quarter for tax purposes, and dividing the mileage up by state is one of the most critical elements in the process.

Some people here wonder why so many truck drivers passionately hate government. This is a prime example. Not only on account of yet another tax, but because it is a pain in the ass out of this universe.

I'm guessing this is because you're figuring state income tax, correct?

 

[downzero]

Only one problem with simply using odometer mileage--you can't determine where the mile was driven to apportion the money by state. The other problem is that odometers are not that accurate. For example, if you drive a car with 15" wheels and replace the factory P205 tires with P225, you introduce an 8% discrepancy in speedometer/odometer readings (i.e., if it says 60 mph you are actually travelling 64.8 mph). GPS eliminates all that, plus allows for apportionment of tax money even among localities.

It would likely violate the dormant commerce clause for states to impose such a tax, but I'm not an expert on that.

States do indirectly tax mileage already, however. It's called "road tax."

 

[IndyDave1776]

I'm guessing this is because you're figuring state income tax, correct?

It would likely violate the dormant commerce clause for states to impose such a tax, but I'm not an expert on that.

States do indirectly tax mileage already, however. It's called "road tax."

I apparently failed to be sufficiently specific. It is a truck thing. We are taxed on income like everyone else. We are taxed on plates which is far more expensive than everyone else. We are taxed on fuel in a different way than everyone else, which requires more work on our parts. We are taxed per mile for every mile apportioned by state in which the mile was driven. There is nothing indirect about this, and it has nothing to do with state income tax--it is a per mile road use tax.

Watch out. It appears that they are preparing to be able to do this to everyone at any time that they may decide to do so.

 

[Classic]

I am kinda glad I'm gettin old. I am so weary of constantly being spied upon for "good" reasons.