You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Signs, Portents, and the Weather-
California moves closer to pay-by-the-mile auto insurance
2009-11-03
Car insurance by the tankful?

Not quite, but California moved a step closer last month to pay-as-you-drive policies that could allow motorists to buy insurance like they do gasoline — a little at a time.

Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner released regulations permitting and authorizing mileage verification for pay-as-you-drive, without dictating what form such plans must take.

The goal is to use per-mile pricing to entice Californians not to drive so much, thus easing air pollution, relieving traffic congestion and lowering the number of traffic collisions.

A first-of-its-kind plan is MileMeter, available only in Texas, which last year began offering six-month policies with chunks of insured miles ranging from 1,000 to 6,000 miles. When the "tank" runs dry, motorists buy more.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#6  Hillary told the Pakis that we tax everything that moves or doesn't move in the U.S. and that Pakistan should do the same if they want to come into the modern fold.

I agree that everything that moves or doesn't move is taxed. In other words Hillary is in favor of State sponsored slavery.
Posted by: JohnQC   2009-11-03 19:09  

#5  Drive less, pay less. Makes sense, so the government will outlaw it.
Posted by: ed   2009-11-03 18:01  

#4  M. M., I see you are not including the left in 'humankind'; sounds right.
Posted by: Glenmore   2009-11-03 15:41  

#3  The looney left's ideal outcome would be for all humankind to die off and leave dear ol' gaia alone. But still pay taxes...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2009-11-03 15:39  

#2  My insurance company lowered my rates when I told them I wouldn't be driving so far to work anymore. I thought it made sense in that, if I'm driving fewer miles, there will be fewer opportunities for me to wreck my car.

But for the state to use this policy as a club to beat people who have no choice but to drive to work is Big Brother at his worst.

For years I've had a pet peeve about the way they add new lanes to I-5 and I-15 but they're carpool lanes and ordinary commuters can't use them. WTF? I pay my taxes just like everybody else, why can't I use those lanes?

I can't help it if my job is 30 miles from my home. I looked for a job that was closer and couldn't find one. I can't move either because then my wife would have to driver farther to her job and she'd make my life miserable for it. I couldn't find anybody to carpool with me either (I don't have body odor either, although I do comment on Rantburg).

Do you want me to work or not?
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2009-11-03 15:17  

#1  First they push us to more efficient vehicles, but then tax revenues go down, so now they want to shift the taxes to distance-based? But I thought the whole point of gallon-based taxes was that the heavier vehicles caused disproportionately more pollution and road damage? I guess now it's that the light vehicles take up space and require more road building?
So next will be taxes based on which roads you drive on and when?
Posted by: Glenmore   2009-11-03 13:15  

00:00