Canada has a better way to improve mileage of the cars and trucks

[eleison]

Originally posted by: desy
Problem is, the price of fuel is a day traded commodity and doesn't reflect longer term realities.
Just like the Levies, we should really build these up cause we 'might' get a hurricane, yeah, someday. ooops , crap too late. .
Same thing with fuel you can't change 1/2 billion vehicles on the road overnight, so, planning ahead, you enourage a change in the cultural norm. Because the impending fuel crisis, unlike the 70's one, is not political but one of capacity shortfalls.

Cost of fuel has been going up as fuel has become more scarce... how does this not reflect longer term reality?

 

[desy]

Its going to get worse and with what is called the peak plateau with undulating severe swings in prices.
This can be mitigated to future proof ourselves so the impact will be lessened, much like levees

The economy of america is in decline, it used to account for over 50% of the world's GDP in the 50's, now its under 30% and due to the fact that of a huge trade imbalance of being a net energy importer going to plumet further.
Its why almost every currency in the world now trades much better against it than just a few years ago.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: chucky2


That's clearly an excess that should not be rewarded or encouraged, and I think keeping gas high (or even higher) is a good way to make people make the hard choice on if they really want that 16 mpg highway behemoth they just have to have. If they do, fine, I say let them have it...if they can afford $6 a gallon gas then it must be worth it. No need to charge them extra at purchase, or reward a Prius owner my tax dollars (that could go to something else) as a bonus for buying a Prius - that bonus comes at the pump, where the consumption happens.

JMHO...

Chuck

Originally posted by: eleison
I agree with you. However, I think the government should not excessive tax or regulate the gas prices. I would let market forces decide how much gas should be worth. Having a government decide something is always rife with inefficiencies. As gas gets increasingly rare, it will naturally become more expensive.

Fixed.

It is the demand for oil, more than the supply shortfall, that will affect gas prices in the future. As China and India modernize and their citizens purchase vehicles, this will put a tremendous strain on world oil production (together, these two countries account for almost half of the world's population).

Would you rather the government slowly increase gas taxes over time to wean us off our addiction, or leave market forces as is and suffer a dramatic, huge price increase in the near future?

Originally posted by: eleison

Having the government dictate prices.. especially artificially higher prices via taxes... that just hurts the economy as a whole. Lower oil prices have always helped the US economy. After all, we are the biggest and one of the most efficient in the world

Umm...actually, the U.S. has 5% of the world's population and consumes 25% of the world's oil. (I'm not taking a holier than thou attitude; Canadians are nearly as bad on a per capita basis.) How is that efficient?

Originally posted by: eleison

..........Regardless if your dad drives an expedition.. heck, maybe because he drives an expedition, he is more efficient than his contemparies in europe, or asia where the economy is not as good.

This is not the reality. Gas is $6/litre in many European countries - no surprise that they drive more subcompact vehicles that get over double the fuel economy of an Expedition.

Originally posted by: eleison

Maybe your dad functions well (I'm assuming because he knows that when he's done with his job, he can get in his big car and run over logs as if it was nothing..

Yep...because people have to do this everyday on the freeways and city streets :roll:

Originally posted by: eleison

verses some wimppy guy in europe who has to drive a small hatch back home every day.. kinda depressing

And there you've pretty much summarized one of the biggest problems with North American consumerism..."OMFG, I must have the biggest, most powerful vehicle ever." How does that help you get from point A to point B any faster?

Pull your head out of your tailpipe.

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: eleison

I agree with you. However, I think the government should not excessive tax or regulate the gas prices. I would let market forces decide how much gas should be worth. Having a government decide something is always rifle with inefficiencies. As gas gets increasingly more rare, it will naturally become more expensive.

Having the government dictate prices.. especially artificially higher prices via taxes... that just hurts the economy as a whole. Lower oil prices have always helped the US economy. After all, we are the biggest and one of the most efficient in the world ..........Regardless if your dad drives an expedition.. heck, maybe because he drives an expedition, he is more efficient than his contemparies in europe, or asia where the economy is not as good. Maybe your dad functions well (I'm assuming because he knows that when he's done with his job, he can get in his big car and run over logs as if it was nothing.. verses some wimppy guy in europe who has to drive a small hatch back home every day.. kinda depressing


So yea to market forces.. Nay to higher taxes

Well, I apologize, I should have been lots clearer. What I should have said was that I'm in favor of a national gas tax but with relief from that tax for businesses that operate oil driven machinery. The average driver though should have the full tax applied to the gas they consume. This IMHO is overall the most fair thing to the country as a whole.

Others are right above me: China, India, and the rest of the 3rd world contries as they start their Industrial revolutions (like we ourselves had) are going to place a greater demand on the worlds oil reserves. This will simultaneously raise competition for oil (meaning greater pricers for the highest bidder) and increase worldwide oil consumption (unless us current large consumers of oil consume less and/or alternate forms of realistic usable power are devised)...which again will raise prices.

Just doing nothing with the taxes or Fed. mpg targets, oil will get more expensive regardless if we in the US do nothing or not.

I'm not for big government, however...

...it's clear that people in the US (myself included) are not going to go drive little "death trap cars" that get great mpg while fuel is so cheap (relatively) here in the US. It's just not going to happen. Someone is going to have to either limit supply - that didn't have a positive affect back in the 70's - or raise prices for folks to start demanding and buying more fuel efficient vehicles.

If the oil companies do this, then all h3ll will break loose, no one is going to trust them to take in double the profits they do now and actually accomplish something with it. The government can get away with it if they specifically channel the profits from the excessive taxes into determining alternate mobile energy sources and then funding the building of that infrastructure (as they do highways now) so as to allow much easier adoption.

Chuck

P.S. There is no public transportation to the factory and I doubt my dad would take it anyways. From working there during one hot hot hot hot summer: The absolute last thing you want to do after killing yourself in that oven all day long is to a.) wait for public transportation to be available, b.) go cram yourself onto public transportation with everyone else, c.) deal with everyone else, and d.) see a - c again. He does however actually use his SUV several times each year for actual SUV purposes, which is very unlike the other 98% or so SUV drivers who's "trucks" never see a dirt road, much less offroad.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: senseamp
The whole thing is stupid. Just tax the gasoline more. Then people can decide what to buy based on how much gas it burns.

Agreed 100%. People bitch and complain about how much gas costs but nobody pays the "true cost", which is anywhere between $1.60-$7.00/gallon more than current prices (source) once you factor in noise, health effects, lost productivity because of congestion, etc.

Do the math, and now all of a sudden the annual gap in fuel cost between a Civic/Corolla and a Suburban is absolutely massive ($10,000+).

Having said that, I'm still a fan of these rebates because trying to enforce these "true costs" would be political suicide - I don't see it happening any time soon.

Politicians love having a patchwork of subsidies or taxes rather than dealing with the actual problem comprehensively, because that's where their power comes from. Lobbyist give them money to pass specific laws that favor them. The only real working solution is a gasoline tax. It's no accident that in countries with high gasoline taxes there are more efficient consumers.
Look at it this way. I bike to work every day. I only drive my car on the weekend, maybe 100 miles a week tops. Why should I have to pay a huge tax to buy a car I want even though I burn a lot less gas than most hippies who commute to work in their Prius and get a subsidy? Because if you tax the car purchase and not the gas, then what you are saying is that after you buy the car, your decisions on how you use it don't matter as far as the government is concerned. We only care about what car you drive, not how much gas you actually use.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: senseamp
The whole thing is stupid. Just tax the gasoline more. Then people can decide what to buy based on how much gas it burns.

Agreed 100%. People bitch and complain about how much gas costs but nobody pays the "true cost", which is anywhere between $1.60-$7.00/gallon more than current prices (source) once you factor in noise, health effects, lost productivity because of congestion, etc.

Do the math, and now all of a sudden the annual gap in fuel cost between a Civic/Corolla and a Suburban is absolutely massive ($10,000+).

Having said that, I'm still a fan of these rebates because trying to enforce these "true costs" would be political suicide - I don't see it happening any time soon.

Poor people or lower middle class working families don't need to be hit with another tax that will drive their real income down further. You are penalizing people across the board instead of those who need behavior modification.

Plus it will drive the price for consumer goods through the roof since almost everything is shipped via semi.

What you two are proposing would be economic suicide and punishing those who don't need to be punished.

That is a decision to make. But if the goal is to reduce fuel consumption, that is the way to do it. Now you may say it's too expensive and not do it, that's fine, but I am just saying don't do stupid stuff instead just because doing the right thing is too expensive.
The smart thing to do would be to very slowly raise the gas tax, so that people have time to adjust their lifestyles, and plan ahead, and simultaneously cut lower bracket/payroll tax rates to remain revenue neutral and offset some of the cost. Also, if you tax gasoline, companies like truckers and other will look for more efficient ways to transport their goods or produce them locally, which will help reduce fuel consumption, which is the goal.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: tw1164
Here's the current gas guzzler tax. It doesn't include trucks.

Text

It also doesn't include SUV's.

Text

Check out the list of vehicles for 03... The list is mostly made up of cars that you and I will never be able to afford, well, maybe a crown victory but it got and exemption due to emergency vehicle! hahaha We maybe able to afford a mustang... But I doubt few people will be able to buy a Rolls or a Aston Martin ... you might be able to buy one used...but the tax doesn't apply to USED only new.

Anyway, it's pathetic. It just goes to show how ineffective are government is and how much our government cares about gas and oil... Face it our government is corrupt and as long as the oil companies keep buying off or handing out checks to a certain political gain then there never will be a gas tax even worth reading.

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: ayabe
We talked about this a couple months ago Shiv and you flamed me for proposing a stiff tax penalty for gas guzzlers like SUV's, given that a Mercedes sedan will get hit with the GG tax but a worse offender in terms of MPG a Mercedes SUV is exempt.

Now you seem almost to be embracing this.

Curious thing that.

Because I do not think SUVs should be penalized any different from other vehicles. The type of vehicle should not matter. Ignorant people villify SUVs while ignoring the fact that many sedans and vans get the same or WORSE mileage!

would you single out the SUV driver when they have a hybrid Escape? What about hybrid Tahoes? (they are coming).

I am not suggesting draconian standards to be met, what I would like to see is tax benefits for buying better cars, as for penalties... not needed, just remove the tax deductions people are scamming with

Obviously what you fail to see is...... SUV's are not penalized any different from "OTHER" vehicles... They are EXEMPT!!! How can you penalize something that is exempt? How is that fair? REASON? Because they are one of the best sellers. And, well, we can't have a gas tax taking away all the fun out of that can we? NnnnnnOOOoooo!!!!

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison
I agree with you. However, I think the government should not excessive tax or regulate the gas prices. I would let market forces decide how much gas should be worth. Having a government decide something is always rife with inefficiencies. As gas gets increasingly rare, it will naturally become more expensive.

Fixed.

It is the demand for oil, more than the supply shortfall, that will affect gas prices in the future. As China and India modernize and their citizens purchase vehicles, this will put a tremendous strain on world oil production (together, these two countries account for almost half of the world's population).

Would you rather the government slowly increase gas taxes over time to wean us off our addiction, or leave market forces as is and suffer a dramatic, huge price increase in the near future?

The USA has already felt a dramatic, huge price increase before... It was called the energy crisis of the 70's. To increase the price of gas artificially by putting an emphasis on taxes is to introduce inefficiencies that can hurt the economy. Even without being taxed to death with respect to gasoline prices, the American public has already started to use more efficient cars on their own.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

Having the government dictate prices.. especially artificially higher prices via taxes... that just hurts the economy as a whole. Lower oil prices have always helped the US economy. After all, we are the biggest and one of the most efficient in the world

Umm...actually, the U.S. has 5% of the world's population and consumes 25% of the world's oil. (I'm not taking a holier than thou attitude; Canadians are nearly as bad on a per capita basis.) How is that efficient?

Why is this so bad? Just because the USA consumes more oil doesn't mean it is less efficient. As the largest economy, the US SHOULD consume the most oil. For the amount of oil that the US consumes, the benefits outweigh the negatives. Not only has the USA been able to create the best university, it has also been able to become one of the largest exporters of food to the rest of the world. The average USA worker is also one of the most productive. Their researchers, one of the worlds best. Guess who created the internet? It wasn't the Europeans with their "I'm holier than thou because I drive a small econbox car" attitude.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

..........Regardless if your dad drives an expedition.. heck, maybe because he drives an expedition, he is more efficient than his contemparies in europe, or asia where the economy is not as good.

This is not the reality. Gas is $6/litre in many European countries - no surprise that they drive more subcompact vehicles that get over double the fuel economy of an Expedition.

Whatever floats their boat. If the average American worker needs to drive his Expedition to be one of the most productive workers in the world, so be it. With most European countries having issues with high unemployment, having econo boxes that sip gasoline should not be a concern to those governments. Their priorities should be about getting Europeans employed instead of trying to see what new regulation they can think up that will force people to drive wimp mobiles - what new gasoline taxes that they can intro, etc..

So far the USA government has been smart enough to understand its about getting Americans hired and working and not about raising taxes on gasoline to make the hippies happy.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

Maybe your dad functions well (I'm assuming because he knows that when he's done with his job, he can get in his big car and run over logs as if it was nothing..

Yep...because people have to do this everyday on the freeways and city streets :roll:

Whatever it takes to make the average USA worker one of the most efficient. Its a world economy. If the USA worker doesn't have to worry about all the gasoline taxes that his European, Asian, African competitor have to, the more the American can focus on doing a better job.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

verses some wimppy guy in europe who has to drive a small hatch back home every day.. kinda depressing

And there you've pretty much summarized one of the biggest problems with North American consumerism..."OMFG, I must have the biggest, most powerful vehicle ever." How does that help you get from point A to point B any faster?

Pull your head out of your tailpipe.

If Americans had the biggest, most powerful vehicle in world.. who cares??? Its a world economy, if the Americans can afford these gas guzzlers. Who cares? At the end of the day, the Americans work harder and smarter than almost everyone else. They can afford their toys... Remember it is sometimes not just about getting to point A to point B faster, its about how you get there

OIL is going to be used up.... the question is who's going to use it all up. Saving oil and delaying the inevitable does nothing. It has been noted that necessity is the mother of all inventions. When there is no oil, there will be alternative energy sources.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: senseamp
The whole thing is stupid. Just tax the gasoline more. Then people can decide what to buy based on how much gas it burns.

Agreed 100%. People bitch and complain about how much gas costs but nobody pays the "true cost", which is anywhere between $1.60-$7.00/gallon more than current prices (source) once you factor in noise, health effects, lost productivity because of congestion, etc.

Do the math, and now all of a sudden the annual gap in fuel cost between a Civic/Corolla and a Suburban is absolutely massive ($10,000+).

Having said that, I'm still a fan of these rebates because trying to enforce these "true costs" would be political suicide - I don't see it happening any time soon.

Politicians love having a patchwork of subsidies or taxes rather than dealing with the actual problem comprehensively, because that's where their power comes from. Lobbyist give them money to pass specific laws that favor them. The only real working solution is a gasoline tax. It's no accident that in countries with high gasoline taxes there are more efficient consumers.
Look at it this way. I bike to work every day. I only drive my car on the weekend, maybe 100 miles a week tops. Why should I have to pay a huge tax to buy a car I want even though I burn a lot less gas than most hippies who commute to work in their Prius and get a subsidy? Because if you tax the car purchase and not the gas, then what you are saying is that after you buy the car, your decisions on how you use it don't matter as far as the government is concerned. We only care about what car you drive, not how much gas you actually use.

You hit it right on the mark. Have a .

In my earlier post, I mentioned that I also think gas taxes should be increased gradually so that businesses and individuals have time to adapt. Finding alternative, renewable fuel sources should be a part of this adaptation, but obviously we can't find a gasoline replacement overnight - this is why we need to buy time.

Similarly to you, I only drive on the weekends. Not driving saves much more fuel than driving a hybrid a lot.

This rebate is definitely a half-assed attempt as it targets purchasing behaviour, rather than the far more critical driving behaviour. I totally favour larger gas taxes, but as I said, good luck finding a politician who will stand up to the oil lobbyists...for that matter, the short-sighted general public would each such a politician alive at the polls.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison
I agree with you. However, I think the government should not excessive tax or regulate the gas prices. I would let market forces decide how much gas should be worth. Having a government decide something is always rife with inefficiencies. As gas gets increasingly rare, it will naturally become more expensive.

Fixed.

It is the demand for oil, more than the supply shortfall, that will affect gas prices in the future. As China and India modernize and their citizens purchase vehicles, this will put a tremendous strain on world oil production (together, these two countries account for almost half of the world's population).

Would you rather the government slowly increase gas taxes over time to wean us off our addiction, or leave market forces as is and suffer a dramatic, huge price increase in the near future?

Originally posted by: eleison

The USA has already felt a dramatic, huge price increase before... It was called the energy crisis of the 70's. To increase the price of gas artificially by putting an emphasis on taxes is to introduce inefficiencies that can hurt the economy. Even without being taxed to death with respect to gasoline prices, the American public has already started to use more efficient cars on their own.

Canadian consumers certainly have - the top 7 selling models are all compact or subcompact cars Link. As for Americans, I don't agree that they're driving the most efficient vehicles Link. The Civic is the only compact on the list. Apart from the Accord and Camry, the list is dominated by large pickup trucks.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

Having the government dictate prices.. especially artificially higher prices via taxes... that just hurts the economy as a whole. Lower oil prices have always helped the US economy. After all, we are the biggest and one of the most efficient in the world

Umm...actually, the U.S. has 5% of the world's population and consumes 25% of the world's oil. (I'm not taking a holier than thou attitude; Canadians are nearly as bad on a per capita basis.) How is that efficient?

Originally posted by: eleison

Why is this so bad? Just because the USA consumes more oil doesn't mean it is less efficient. As the largest economy, the US SHOULD consume the most oil. For the amount of oil that the US consumes, the benefits outweigh the negatives. Not only has the USA been able to create the best university, it has also been able to become one of the largest exporters of food to the rest of the world. The average USA worker is also one of the most productive. Their researchers, one of the worlds best. Guess who created the internet? It wasn't the Europeans with their "I'm holier than thou because I drive a small econbox car" attitude.

You're side-skirting the issue. I agree that the US has created some incredible inventions and has world-class universities, but that has nothing to do with efficient use of oil. Plenty of other developed countries (including European ones) are also world-class in these respects and they use a hell of a lot less oil.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

..........Regardless if your dad drives an expedition.. heck, maybe because he drives an expedition, he is more efficient than his contemparies in europe, or asia where the economy is not as good.

This is not the reality. Gas is $6/litre in many European countries - no surprise that they drive more subcompact vehicles that get over double the fuel economy of an Expedition.

Originally posted by: eleison
Whatever floats their boat. If the average American worker needs to drive his Expedition to be one of the most productive workers in the world, so be it. With most European countries having issues with high unemployment, having econo boxes that sip gasoline should not be a concern to those governments. Their priorities should be about getting Europeans employed instead of trying to see what new regulation they can think up that will force people to drive wimp mobiles - what new gasoline taxes that they can intro, etc..

So far the USA government has been smart enough to understand its about getting Americans hired and working and not about raising taxes on gasoline to make the hippies happy.

Reducing unemployment is a laudable goal. Regardless of whether many Europeans are unemployed, they have a tremendous social safety net that will support them through rough times. The same can't be said in many areas of Canada or the US.

Again, you're missing the point about the Expedition (or any vehicle). In fact, when large numbers of people are in single-occupancy vehicles, they occupy a disproportionate amount of road space, increasing congestion and thus commuting times, and taking away from time people could be spending working (so much for increasing productivity). Imagine a city bus with 50 people on it. Now imagine those same 50 people each in their own vehicle on the same road. Which do you think is a more efficient use of the road network?

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

Maybe your dad functions well (I'm assuming because he knows that when he's done with his job, he can get in his big car and run over logs as if it was nothing..

Yep...because people have to do this everyday on the freeways and city streets :roll:

Originally posted by: eleison

Whatever it takes to make the average USA worker one of the most efficient. Its a world economy. If the USA worker doesn't have to worry about all the gasoline taxes that his European, Asian, African competitor have to, the more the American can focus on doing a better job.

See my point above.

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha

Originally posted by: eleison

verses some wimppy guy in europe who has to drive a small hatch back home every day.. kinda depressing

And there you've pretty much summarized one of the biggest problems with North American consumerism..."OMFG, I must have the biggest, most powerful vehicle ever." How does that help you get from point A to point B any faster?

Pull your head out of your tailpipe.

Originally posted by: eleison
If Americans had the biggest, most powerful vehicle in world.. who cares??? Its a world economy, if the Americans can afford these gas guzzlers. Who cares? At the end of the day, the Americans work harder and smarter than almost everyone else. They can afford their toys... Remember it is sometimes not just about getting to point A to point B faster, its about how you get there

OIL is going to be used up.... the question is who's going to use it all up. Saving oil and delaying the inevitable does nothing. It has been noted that necessity is the mother of all inventions. When there is no oil, there will be alternative energy sources.

I agree with you here. If people want to pay to drive a guzzler, and to drive more, that is their choice. But they will spend more hours at work to pay for that privilege. Americans work some of the longest hours in the developed world...and are very stressed. Why not make smarter transportation choices, work less and spend more time enjoying life?

Indeed oil will be depleted eventually. The longer that prices are kept artificially low (as they are now), the longer people will procrastinate about finding alternatives. If we instead turn up the heat gradually, this will give us the right balance of time and incentive to find alternative energy sources.

 

[StageLeft]

Well, since there is a FINITE amount of oil left, saving oil now is a good thing because when we die, our kids will be able to have oil for their cars. obviously, if we use all the oil now, our kids might have to use Alternative fuel sources -- hydrogen cars or electric cars. Etc.

The less we use, the more available for China, India, Europe. The US doesn't consume enough oil that if it cut back even 25% (which is MASSIVE) it would substantially push out the end game on oil reserves. Prices would fall and other countries would just get to drink more.

r, so we can stretch out our primary energy resource for mobile vehicles, that happens to be non-renewable, as long as realistically and economically possible?

Again, no, others will just burn through it quicker/easier and we pay the cost.

If the US was the only country with oil and making oil, this makes sense, but since it's not and it imports a good amount of it, cutting back its oil use will not suddenly save the world from eating it all up.

The only theoretically beneficial point to this would be if the US could cut its consumption and continue to drink as much foreign, thereby saving its domestic resources, but of course that won't happen.

 

[Stunt]

Yet another sound Conservative policy; keep up the good work Prime Minister Stephen Harper!

 

[piasabird]

I never understood why pick up trucks are always exempt. The license of a vehicle should be by their intended use not the configuration of the body and the wheels. If a truck is a commercial use truck then give it a commercial use license. If it is primarily a private use truck then give it a standard car license. Lots of people buy trucks simply because they know sooner or later they will need to haul something. However for the most part it is used as a car. Either that or it is for hauling boats or something like that. I see a lot of trucks driving around with nothing in the back. Especially these smaller trucks. I would not just give all trucks a free ride, otherwise people will just buy trucks and use that to skirt the law. You might see a lot of king cabs sold.

 

[Stunt]

piasabird,

I think part of it has to do with farm, small business and commercial vehicles, but also has do with the big 3 getting most of their profits from these trucks (large markup relative to the smaller cars). The domestics still have a stranglehold on this segment of the market. I have mixed feelings on this aspect of the policy.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: piasabird
I never understood why pick up trucks are always exempt. The license of a vehicle should be by their intended use not the configuration of the body and the wheels. If a truck is a commercial use truck then give it a commercial use license. If it is primarily a private use truck then give it a standard car license. Lots of people buy trucks simply because they know sooner or later they will need to haul something. However for the most part it is used as a car. Either that or it is for hauling boats or something like that. I see a lot of trucks driving around with nothing in the back. Especially these smaller trucks. I would not just give all trucks a free ride, otherwise people will just buy trucks and use that to skirt the law. You might see a lot of king cabs sold.

IIRC, wasn't this a problem a few years ago with people buying large SUVs (Hummers, etc.), claiming them as business expenses and enjoying a huge tax write-off (up to $100,000 on the vehicle I think)?

For sure, some trucks and vans should be given commercial licenses, but it would make more sense to limit these licenses to businesses where the vehicles are a demonstrated need (for example, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, construction, etc.) As for the rest, with higher gas taxes, people will think twice before driving a full-size SUV every day and justifying it by towing a boat a few weekends out of the year. Truck rentals are available for a reason.