|
|
|
|
|
|
by stouset
459 days ago
|
|
|
Where exactly do you think the additional revenue comes from to fill the gap between "infrastructure revenue" and "total transportation spending"? In California—a state where revenues from user fees approximates 100% of highway expenditures—that only accounts for 45% of the overall transportation budget. Where do you suppose the extra $14.5bn comes from? |
|
|
Total - infrastructure = non infrastructure.
I have never doubted California might regressively tax the shit out of people for non infrastructure transit spending like metro busses.
This is doubly regressive in California due to their property tax increase capping that is well below inflation, highly benefitting earlier wealthier older entrants at the expense of the younger and less wealthy.
This isn't a very rosy fact for California or for collecting even more on non infrastructure transportation revenue under the current tax regime.