It doesn't really matter as it is outside any point made. 20 people, one person, or no one at all, it does not make someone a criminal but it doesn't mean the clerk or store owner can hate ski masks.

When we become a non free country, you would be able to take whatever you want from the rich, you will be able to demand they do not buy what you deem frivolous luxury items or that anyone produces them. When we become a non free country, you can invent things for scientists to solve.

But wait, no you cannot because the chances of you being the supreme dictator of this non free country would be about zero. What we will end up with is the same as every single other communist country- an elite few muddled with various levels of corruption and brutal enforcement of their demands to do what they decide is best for you. We may even end up killing thousands if not millions of people in order to make it happen just like in almost every other start of communist ruled countries. You may think, oh noes, couldn't be because this time we will get it right those with more will have less and it will all be unicorns shitting rainbows all over the place, and then they take your Iphone because a nokia flip phone is good enough and everything else is a luxury. Then they take your computer because it wastes electricity and they deemed you do not need it. But hey, that's an ideal world right? Someone making arbitrary decisions about who can purchase what, about who works on what and who can produce what, all based around the whims of someone who doesn't like people with more money than them.

What is a federal law? I think you need to cite that. The feds do not have jurisdiction over most vehicles once produced and sold.

lol.. What's the sacrifice you ask then say taking vehicles off the road as if it does not deprive anyone of anything. The problem is all the rest cost money. It costs more money than the current model. So when you raise prices, people will have less. This less means they will sacrifice something- whether it is savings, stability in electric power, a car or whatever. It will only make the world more expensive and people will have to do without. You make it sound like you can just speak it into existence and there is no repercussions. There are and there will be.

And this is not one of them. No compelling case for it being one has been made.

Still doesn't prevent anyone from not liking TOR. But you are correct, no one would know who you were which was the point- you are not a criminal because you use it, but it still allows people to dislike it.

Oh and it might make some people a little more than nervous if you walked into a store wearing a ski mask.

And I bet you have throwing stars and walk around pretending you are a ninja too.

No one said if you use TOR you would be a criminal. They said criminals use TOR so governments dislike it. Now, do you think the corner drug store clerk doesn't like you walking in wearing your ninja mask? I would bet he has no problem with you personally, just when you dress up like a crook trying to rob the store.

What is your point? Roads and taxes are one of the few constitutionally authorized roles of the federal government and the state doesn't need authorization. Legitimate Government services have always been paid for by people who do not use them or use them as much as others since well before the USSR or any concept of what formed it ever existed.

It would be different if all roads were private and you owned them but that is not the case. Even when some roads were privately owned, it was up to the owners to set pricing which often overcharged sone and under charged others.

It is really no different than the pokice and fire which both are legitimate government uses. You pay to support both and likely never use either as much as the rich guy tryong to protect his store or the trailer trash that have the cops break up a domestic situation every other weekend. That was the economic system of the USSR too. Do you want to make police and fire availible only to those yhat can pay for the costs they impose? Here is a hint. You wouldn't like it.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if it goes beyond publishing papers and into political advocacy. However, you should expect people to discount the agenda and information behind it when that hapens. Do not be surprised when people lay politics with your politics. Especially when you turn the AC off and schedule a presentation for the politics of global warming after specifically setting it on one of the historical hottest days in washington for dramatic effect.

It doesn't help when scientists pushing the fear also push the politics.

Also, its not fiction that is easier to understand. Its how it does or does not impact your daily life directly or indirectly enough for the near future. That is what politicians and news anchors do.

And if that redistribution did not happen, those drivers would be out of jobs among other things. But who cares anyways. Its not like the government will stop taxing cars, they will just find new ways to sprnd the money.

Also, on existing roadways, the amount collected from the gas taxes at the state and federal levels is completely enough to maintain state and federal roads. Where the shortfall come from is adding additional capacity to existing roads, new roads, projects that are not roads, and roads and infrastructure unrelated to those roads. A sizable portion of money collected for roads does get shifted to non road uses.

Lol.. i'm not wrong. Trucks pay more than four times as much but more importantly, the amount of taxes collected are enough to cover the maintinence from the combined damages on the roads the trucks drive on. It would likely be enough for all the roads if portions of the money wasn't taken and used for other things.

What? Lol

This is the opposite result of less regulation. The government was sharing the costs of bringing broadband to rural areas. Now they cannot because a single entity by regulation changed a definition that specifically applies.

Do you see how your statement defeatz itself in context?

He did not say only criminals use it, he said criminals love to use it. Also, as long as that is the theme being pushed by the governments (propaganda), his point is still valid as governments and law enforcement are demonizing it and it will make them the enemy.

You are crazy if you think the amount of wear and tear or damage to a road from one truck is 8 million a year. The prius is getting over charged but that doesn't matter.

Now your facts are a bit off too. A tandem axle has a weight limit of 34,000 lbs which effectively reduces your 20,000 to 15,000. and the steer axle is limited to 12,000 lbs. The 20,000 lbs is only if there is ten feet between center line of the axles even if they are rated for 20k or there is only a single axle on the truck besides the steer axle. But we are talking about semis now unless you want to change the goal posts again.

  Also, the prius has single tires per axle side and a semi has dual tires or the equivilant in what is called a super single. Its not a direct comparison but the math works out to the truck paying over 4 times as much as the prius anyways.