Toll Roads without Toll Booths

I am in North Carolina. The scum sucking politicians have finally given into
corporate theives and decided to allow toll roads. Don't get me started on
the unfairness of a state that has one of the highest gas taxes in the
nation deciding they need to double charge some people for using some
roads....

Any how, the toll road they are building in my area is not going to have
toll booths. Instead they plan to electronically monitor traffic to charge
the tolls. They are encouraging people who will regularly use the toll road
to get an electronic pass that will alert the system when your vehicle uses
the road. For vehicles that do not have the electronic pass they claim they
will be able to read your licence plate and use that to send you a bill
(even if you are out of state). They plan to charge more for vehicles that
are billed based on licence plate detection. The local TV station recently
ran a segment featureing the toll road head crook and he made all sorts of
claims about the accuracy (and "fairness") of the system. Setting aside the
difficulty in charging out of state residents, is it possible that this
system can actually work? North Carolina does not require front licence
plates. It seems to me, all I have to do to avoid paying the toll when I am
driving my pickup is to leave the rear tailgate down. The plate is partially
covered with mud half the time and between a little mud and the tailgate
down, I can't see how any camera can possibly read the plate. I suppose if I
did this reguarly, the toll road authority would take notice of my truck and
send the Highway Patrol after me, but I don't intned to ever use the toll
road (in fact, I hope no one uses it and the corporation the crook are
allowing to build the road goes broke). However, I do wonder about the
hundreds of local dump trucks that cruise around the area with no rear
licence plates........are they going be allowed to use the road for free?
The whole thing seems wacko to me...

Ed

On 08/17/2010 05:40 AM, C. E. White wrote:
<snip sob story>

what is more "crook" ed - the state that wants a return on its
investment, or the prostitute who posts "opinion" that's been paid for
by a detroit auto manufacturer?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

"jim beam" > wrote in message
t...
> On 08/17/2010 05:40 AM, C. E. White wrote:
> <snip sob story>
>
> what is more "crook" ed - the state that wants a return on its investment,
> or the prostitute who posts "opinion" that's been paid for by a detroit
> auto manufacturer?

What is with you? I have my opinions and I have a right to post them. The
tactic of attacking the messenger is as old as politics, but in the end it
does not move along a discussion. If you don't like what I say, fine, you
are entitled. If I say something untrue, point it out. I am willing to
defend my statements or admit I am worng. I try not to fall into the sort of
tactics you employ, but occasionally I can't help myself.

As for my original post. I think the state is crooked in this case. North
Carolina has a very high gas tax. I've always believed it was a fair way to
pay for the cost of building and miainting roads. In recent years the state
has been diverting road tax money to other uses. The state now tells us they
do not have enough money to build needed new roads. In my particualr area
the new toll road will be an extension of what was I-540. A southern
extension is depeserately needed to move traffic into the RTP area from
southeastern Wake County. The extension was planned for years, but opposed
by Raleigh and Cary becasue (in my opinion) it would allow people to move to
other areas of the county not under the control of those two cities.
However, despite this oposition, the pressure has built to the point that
the road must be built. But the state says they have no money. Instead they
are allowing an independent corporation (agency) to build the road (now
relabeled as NC540) and collect tolls. However, people that use this road
will still be paying road use tax on the gasoline they buy, so essentially
the state is double dipping. Plus, the state is actually funding the road
anyhow! It is so crooked I can smell it from here. See
http://www.notollson540.org/ .

Ed

"jim beam" > wrote in message
...
> On 08/17/2010 07:50 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>> "jim > wrote in message
>> t...
>>> On 08/17/2010 06:57 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>> "jim > wrote in message
>>>> t...
>>>>> On 08/17/2010 05:40 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>>> <snip sob story>
>>>>>
>>>>> what is more "crook" ed - the state that wants a return on its
>>>>> investment,
>>>>> or the prostitute who posts "opinion" that's been paid for by a
>>>>> detroit
>>>>> auto manufacturer?
>>>>
>>>> What is with you? I have my opinions and I have a right to post them.
>>>
>>> but they're not "your" opinions ed. so when a prostitute posts
>>> astroturf
>>> bull**** masquerading as opinion, /i/ have the right to call them on it.
>>
>> I suppose, but that doesn't make it true. Email me directly
>> - remove the *) and I'll send you my phone
>> number
>> so we can talk man to man.
>>
>> Ed
>
> i have a better solution ed - you stop shilling for the toll road
> operator's sore losing competitor.

What losing competitor? Did you read the refernce in my prior post
(http://www.notollson540.org/ )? The state set up the corporation to build
the road. There was no losing competitor. There was no competitor at all.

Ed

>I am in North Carolina. The scum sucking politicians have finally given
>into corporate theives and decided to allow toll roads.
>

I've always like the idea that the people who use certain public services
the most should pay the most. (When that can be done.)

In my area the local government is building new campgrounds for camping.
This is paying for itself with campground fees paid by the people who use
the facilities.

And I have no problem paying for things I use. A new bridge, a campground,
highway, etc. Seems fair to me...

On 08/17/2010 08:12 AM, C. E. White wrote:
> "jim > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 08/17/2010 07:50 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>> "jim > wrote in message
>>> t...
>>>> On 08/17/2010 06:57 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>>> "jim > wrote in message
>>>>> t...
>>>>>> On 08/17/2010 05:40 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>>>> <snip sob story>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what is more "crook" ed - the state that wants a return on its
>>>>>> investment,
>>>>>> or the prostitute who posts "opinion" that's been paid for by a
>>>>>> detroit
>>>>>> auto manufacturer?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is with you? I have my opinions and I have a right to post them.
>>>>
>>>> but they're not "your" opinions ed. so when a prostitute posts
>>>> astroturf
>>>> bull**** masquerading as opinion, /i/ have the right to call them on it.
>>>
>>> I suppose, but that doesn't make it true. Email me directly
>>> - remove the *) and I'll send you my phone
>>> number
>>> so we can talk man to man.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>
>> i have a better solution ed - you stop shilling for the toll road
>> operator's sore losing competitor.
>
> What losing competitor? Did you read the refernce in my prior post
> (http://www.notollson540.org/ )? The state set up the corporation to build
> the road. There was no losing competitor. There was no competitor at all.
>
> Ed
>
>

ah, so the company you're shilling for today /wanted/ to be in on it but
didn't get the chance. got it.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

"Bill" > wrote in message
...
> >I am in North Carolina. The scum sucking politicians have finally given
> >into corporate theives and decided to allow toll roads.
>>
>
> I've always like the idea that the people who use certain public services
> the most should pay the most. (When that can be done.)
>
> In my area the local government is building new campgrounds for camping.
> This is paying for itself with campground fees paid by the people who use
> the facilities.
>
> And I have no problem paying for things I use. A new bridge, a campground,
> highway, etc. Seems fair to me...

I am OK with that, except in this case, people who live in SE Wake County
are going to get double charged to use the new road (originally planned as
part of I-540) - gas tax and a toll. People who live in NE Wake County have
the non-toll portion of I-540 they can use. There was a lot of local and
state politics involved. Until recently North Carolina politicians took a
stong position against toll roads. At least during my lifetime, NC state and
county roads have always been paid for with NC gas tax revenue plus for some
roads federal highway funds. NC has one of the highest gas taxes in the
nation, but it never bothered me becasue we generally had decent roads that
provided access to all. In recent years the gutless politicians have not
been willing to adjust the gas tax to provide sufficient funds to build and
maintain roads and they have been raiding the existing gas tax revenue to
pay for non-road related projects. So, if you are one of the unfortunate
people who live in SE Wake county (I don't), and you want to take a fast
efficient route to RTP, you will be forced to pay a toll to use the road and
still pay a tax on the gas you use while using the toll road. Plus, as it
turns out, the state is actually using state funds (the funds they claimed
not to have) to build the road.

Ed

"jim beam" > wrote in message
t...
> On 08/17/2010 08:12 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>> "jim > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 08/17/2010 07:50 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>> "jim > wrote in message
>>>> t...
>>>>> On 08/17/2010 06:57 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>>>> "jim > wrote in message
>>>>>> t...
>>>>>>> On 08/17/2010 05:40 AM, C. E. White wrote:
>>>>>>> <snip sob story>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what is more "crook" ed - the state that wants a return on its
>>>>>>> investment,
>>>>>>> or the prostitute who posts "opinion" that's been paid for by a
>>>>>>> detroit
>>>>>>> auto manufacturer?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is with you? I have my opinions and I have a right to post them.
>>>>>
>>>>> but they're not "your" opinions ed. so when a prostitute posts
>>>>> astroturf
>>>>> bull**** masquerading as opinion, /i/ have the right to call them on
>>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> I suppose, but that doesn't make it true. Email me directly
>>>> - remove the *) and I'll send you my phone
>>>> number
>>>> so we can talk man to man.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>
>>> i have a better solution ed - you stop shilling for the toll road
>>> operator's sore losing competitor.
>>
>> What losing competitor? Did you read the refernce in my prior post
>> (http://www.notollson540.org/ )? The state set up the corporation to
>> build
>> the road. There was no losing competitor. There was no competitor at all.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>
>
> ah, so the company you're shilling for today /wanted/ to be in on it but
> didn't get the chance. got it.

You cannot be that dense - can you? I don't want any company to build the
road as a toll road. I want the State od NC to follow the original plan and
build the road as a continuation of I-540. Turning the project into a toll
road is an elaborate shell game being run by politicians for reasons that I
don't completely understand. I know politicians in Raleigh and Cary don't
want the road built at all. I know politicans from other parts of NC want to
use the money originally allocated to finish I-540 for other roads in their
districts. I know that the local road construcitioon companies wanted the
road built to provide work and they don't care if it is a toll road or not.
I know the politicians are not willing to face reality and raise the gas tax
and/or quit raiding the gas tax revenue for other project. I believe it is
unfair for the State to have built the northern loop of I-540 which mostly
benefits Raleigh with State and Federal funds and then decided to convert
the southern portion of the planned I-540, which allows people more choices
of where to live, into a toll road. The state is planning to turn a section
of the existing I-540 built with tax money into part of the new toll road.
It stinks.

However, we have strayed far away from what I really was interested in
knowing......

I was interested in hearing thoughts on whether or not the toll road
authority could reliably read licence plates as a means of figuring out who
to bill for using the toll road. I can't see how it can work, at least not
reliably. If you have some insight into that discussion, I'd like to hear
them. If you are just going to post another unrelated, ridiculous attack,
don't bother.

Ed

> I was interested in hearing thoughts on whether or not the toll road
> authority could reliably read licence plates as a means of figuring out
> who to bill for using the toll road. I can't see how it can work, at least
> not reliably.
>

Search google.com for the words...

photo radar plate

....and you will find all sorts of info on this. But as they say, you can't
fight city hall! If people start doing that, then I would imagine they will
come up fines, enforcement, road blocks/checks, etc. to catch people...

"C. E. White" > wrote in
:

> I am in North Carolina. The scum sucking politicians have finally
> given into corporate theives and decided to allow toll roads. Don't
> get me started on the unfairness of a state that has one of the
> highest gas taxes in the nation deciding they need to double charge
> some people for using some roads....
>
> Any how, the toll road they are building in my area is not going to
> have toll booths. Instead they plan to electronically monitor traffic
> to charge the tolls. They are encouraging people who will regularly
> use the toll road to get an electronic pass that will alert the system
> when your vehicle uses the road. For vehicles that do not have the
> electronic pass they claim they will be able to read your licence
> plate and use that to send you a bill (even if you are out of state).
> They plan to charge more for vehicles that are billed based on licence
> plate detection. The local TV station recently ran a segment
> featureing the toll road head crook and he made all sorts of claims
> about the accuracy (and "fairness") of the system. Setting aside the
> difficulty in charging out of state residents, is it possible that
> this system can actually work? North Carolina does not require front
> licence plates. It seems to me, all I have to do to avoid paying the
> toll when I am driving my pickup is to leave the rear tailgate down.
> The plate is partially covered with mud half the time and between a
> little mud and the tailgate down, I can't see how any camera can
> possibly read the plate. I suppose if I did this reguarly, the toll
> road authority would take notice of my truck and send the Highway
> Patrol after me, but I don't intned to ever use the toll road (in
> fact, I hope no one uses it and the corporation the crook are allowing
> to build the road goes broke). However, I do wonder about the hundreds
> of local dump trucks that cruise around the area with no rear licence
> plates........are they going be allowed to use the road for free? The
> whole thing seems wacko to me...
>
Sounds to me like some politician is getting kickbacks for making a road a
toll road and then still losing money because then they pay (the company
that gives the kickback) money to run it. It's never going to be cheaper
than the state running the road themselves. Vote for the other guys next
time. Clearly these ones have no interest in your interests.




--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )