"Put it this way... you only cover 65-85% of the costs when you include the cost of your car in the "societal burden" costs package, and make that responsible for (45 / (45 + 7) x 100% =) 86% of the costs to society, you are massively overstating what drivers actually pay."
I don't believe this is accurate. The 85% was using "A direct, expenditure-based (pay as you go) approach." You can see on the graph that they have revenues at ~6 billion for the 3 years and the costs at 6-7 billion over the three years.
None of those numbers in the graph below "Summing-Up How Much Users Pay" include direct vehicle costs.
Edit: Yeah, you can see in the article they say vehicle ownership and maintenance costs are ~50-60 billion dollars. So its not being considered in the 65%-85% numbers. When you include vehicle costs its basically just 100%.
I don't believe this is accurate. The 85% was using "A direct, expenditure-based (pay as you go) approach." You can see on the graph that they have revenues at ~6 billion for the 3 years and the costs at 6-7 billion over the three years.
None of those numbers in the graph below "Summing-Up How Much Users Pay" include direct vehicle costs.
Edit: Yeah, you can see in the article they say vehicle ownership and maintenance costs are ~50-60 billion dollars. So its not being considered in the 65%-85% numbers. When you include vehicle costs its basically just 100%.