| > First, you aren't forced to pay any tax, the ride-sharing company is. I am forced to pay taxes for the roads since you can't possibly fund all of the rodes solely by taxing ride-sharing companies. > Businesses like to say that taxes are passed on to their customers, but that's not actually true. Eh. Economics is not an exact science so there is no way for me to prove it to you. If you don't believe in that (and have another reason why iPhones are more expensive in higher taxed countries) then let's leave that. > That's an issue with every public good, from schools to police to public health to courts to real estate records office, etc. None are utilized anything like equally across the population. Yet we chip in and pay for them because we decide, collectively, that they are important for the community. Then why not subsidize cars, or better yet, offer a free car per citizen? In fact, "we" decided that we should tax cars and maybe we should also tax car usage (gas, roads, pollution, ...). > Your hair stylist uses them to get to work [...] Imagine your situation if there were no roads. There should be roads. And private drivers shouldn't get out of paying for them. > It's a private, for-profit company. Taxis are private and for profit, yet they are considered public transportation. |
> Then why not subsidize cars, or better yet, offer a free car per citizen? In fact, "we" decided that we should tax cars and maybe we should also tax car usage (gas, roads, pollution, ...).
OK, why or why not? Are you proposing something?
> There should be roads. And private drivers shouldn't get out of paying for them.
They do pay, via their taxes, which is the generally appropriate way to fund public goods.