01-31-2018, 03:14 PM
SammyOES, I think your point is that there is a huge overlap between taxpayers (who do pay to maintain our roads and highways) and drivers. That is true. So the drivers on our roads that are also taxpayers do pay to maintain our roads and highways (and so do taxpayers who are not drivers).
I think ijmorlan's point is that there is no significant, direct usage cost that drivers must pay in order to drive on our roads. Someone visiting from Australia (who doesn't pay taxes here) can rent a car here and drive on the roads as much as they want. So "drivers do not pay (much) to use the local roads/highways" is true, if you don't assume that drivers are also taxpayers.
Transit users do have a significant, direct usage cost -- a transit fare. And Netflix viewers also have a significant, direct usage cost -- the monthly fee.
You're each saying different correct things, you're arguing over semantics.
I think ijmorlan's point is that there is no significant, direct usage cost that drivers must pay in order to drive on our roads. Someone visiting from Australia (who doesn't pay taxes here) can rent a car here and drive on the roads as much as they want. So "drivers do not pay (much) to use the local roads/highways" is true, if you don't assume that drivers are also taxpayers.
Transit users do have a significant, direct usage cost -- a transit fare. And Netflix viewers also have a significant, direct usage cost -- the monthly fee.
You're each saying different correct things, you're arguing over semantics.