[grecht]

> It turned out the taxes are not high enough. If people really were depended on cars, but were hurt by the high taxes, car makers would sell smaller cars. They don't. Extremely big cars, totally unneeded by almost anyone, are still the most popular models. Why? Cause the costs of having and using one are not as high as you make it sound.

No, no, and no. Cars are getting more and more efficient, and there are many affordable efficient cars today. It‘s just that people in rich countries like to display their wealth by getting a big car. But there are still people that live in the countryside, who have no other means of transportation, that‘d get hit pretty hard by even higher taxes on fuel. It‘s how they get to work, how they get their groceries, how they get to their friends‘ place.

It‘s easy to renounce something if you‘re not dependent on it.

> A problem which hits parts of the population that usually don't even pay taxes (or if they do almost none)

What part of the population exactly are you referring to? Low-income households? Tax evaders?

[sgift]

> No, no, and no. Cars are getting more and more efficient, and there are many affordable efficient cars today.

Which people don't buy most of the time. By your explanation many people seem to be either rich or the price of cars (over lifetime) is still too low. I don't see the majority of people being rich, so that only leaves the other option.

> But there are still people that live in the countryside, who have no other means of transportation, that‘d get hit pretty hard by even higher taxes on fuel. It‘s how they get to work, how they get their groceries, how they get to their friends‘ place.

People in the country-side are the first to state that higher rent is the price of living in a city -- to turn that around: Higher transportation costs are the price of living in the country-side.

> Low-income households? Tax evaders?

The first. You don't pay taxes below a certain income, low wages still hit you. Tax evaders are usually not hit by either.

[grecht]

> Which people don‘t buy most of the time.

Now you‘re just imagining things. In 2018, 36.5% of the newly registered cars in Germany were small or compact[0]. Also have a look at this statistic [1].

> higher rent is the price of living in a city [...] Higher transportation costs are the price of living in the country-side.

Exactly. Now think about this: They live in the countryside BECAUSE they cannot afford to live in the city, which ends up being cheaper even if you have to pay for a car, especially with the current housing market situation in cities.

[0] https://www.kba.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2019/Fahrzeu...

[1] https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/165065/umfrag...

[sgift]

> In 2018, 36.5% of the newly registered cars in Germany were small or compact[0]

To quote your first source:

> Mehr als die Hälfte aller Neuzulassungen entfielen auf die Segmente Kompaktklasse (22,0 %), SUVs (18,3 %), Kleinwagen (14,5 %) und Mittelklasse (10,9 %). Die SUVs verzeichneten mit +20,8 Prozent den deutlichsten Zuwachs in der Jahresbilanz, gefolgt von den Wohnmobilen (+15,5 %) und der Oberklasse (+12,4 %).

SUVs were the second biggest segment and had the highest increase. The third highest increase was for luxury cars. 36,5% for small or compact also means over 60% weren't small or compact. Your source seems to support my conclusions pretty well.

> Exactly. Now think about this: They live in the countryside BECAUSE they cannot afford to live in the city, which ends up being cheaper even if you have to pay for a car, especially with the current housing market situation in cities.

Most poor people live in cities. People in the country side usually live there because they want big houses and "live in the green", not because they cannot afford rent. On the contrary, poor people usually have to live in the city despite the high rent, cause that's where low-wage jobs exist.

[grecht]

> Your source seems to support my conclusion pretty well.

Not quite. You said „which people don‘t buy most of the time“ (referring to efficient cars), which could not be more wrong judging by both of my sources. But sure, people by SUVs, which I never denied. In fact, I also think that‘s a bad thing.