Road pricing not a good plan, because it delivers less on

Posted on 12-10-2015 at 14:56 by Ricardo – 52 Comments”

According to the CPB.

The current government years ago has a line put in by all kilometerheffingsplannen, whereby motorists to use go instead of pay to own. However, there are at least six political parties that have a form of road pricing/road pricing to enter.

This is logical, because politicians can road pricing with all sorts of arguments strength. For example that car use decreases emissions decrease (which has a positive effect on the biodanzasessies Party), and that less kilometres driven and therefore are inherent to less noise pollution and road casualties.

However, there is one question that all other questions are overruled: delivers the fuss-technical for the treasure chest on? The Central Planning bureau has today presented a study in which four different forms of road pricing against the light were held, and the results are not best. Whether it is a toll road, spitsheffing or congestion charging scheme is, it is the feel in the staatsportemonnee. In a nutshell, it produces less than in the current situation with road tax.

The conclusion of the study is about is pretty clear:

“A road pricing reduces car use. […]. It will, however, also for less accijnsopbrengsten what a welvaartsverlies results. This welvaartsverlies is greater than the welfare gains from fewer emissions, noise pollution and road casualties.”

So f#ck filevermindering and f*ck pay to use, the reduced revenues outweigh the benefits. Very good, that honesty of the CPB. Now the rest of the politics yet.

Congestion charging scheme, a form of toll collection on busy points, would be what can produce, but is hard to implement. Spitsheffing delivers low economic growth again no whistle. And high economic growth is the congestion charging scheme again the better variant:

“The benefits of the congestion charging scheme are higher than the costs. This form of pricing is in practice, however, hard to implement. The easier spitsheffing is unprofitable with low economic growth and less socially profitable than the congestion charging scheme to high economic growth.