We should charge rego by weight and volume. We should measure safety by damage inflicted, not damage deflected.
Australia’s roads are full of giant cars, and everyone pays the price. What can be done?
Submitted 8 hours ago by vividspecter@aussie.zone to australia@aussie.zone
Comments
pHr34kY@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
TheHolm@aussie.zone 1 hour ago
We already to. IMHO rego is weight based.
Tau@aussie.zone 1 hour ago
Depends on the state. NSW for example is one that does vary depending on weight (based on weight ranges, not a full sliding scale) - there’s a ~$180 difference between my sedan and van due to the van’s tare weight placing it in the next category up. QLD on the other hand is one that doesn’t - they charge based on the cylinder count instead.
ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 hour ago
Why is rego on a little i20 so damn expensive then
reddig33@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
Replace petrol taxes with a formula based on miles driven and weight of car.
Tenderizer@aussie.zone 2 hours ago
People are surprisingly unkeen on tracking in their car. So kilometers driven wouldn’t work.
I’d say just go with a fee based on the weight of the vehicle, exponential of course. We need fewer heavy cars, fewer kilometers driven in just a side effect. And as a bonus effect maybe I’d be able to buy an EV without a range that’s 8 times what I actually need.
rcbrk@lemmy.ml 15 minutes ago
Eh, people can submit odometer readings once a year with their rego renewal.
Honesty based should be good enough. Penalties can apply if you’re caught tampering or severely underreporting.
TheHolm@aussie.zone 1 hour ago
“Second, under US fuel economy rules, fuel-efficiency targets are adjusted based on the size of the vehicle’s “footprint” — the area between its wheels. In practice, this means larger vehicles are allowed to consume more fuel while still meeting the target.”
So this is the problem (in US) remove that rule and cars will shrink again. Deformities often caused by unnatural pressure, and this is an example.
DampSquid@feddit.uk 7 hours ago
Make rego 10x for these yank tanks wanks
SarahFromOz@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Ban Ford Rangers at least. The drivers tend to be inconsiderate psychos.
They can ride eBikes instead.
Salvo@aussie.zone 6 hours ago
Ban F-trucks, Silverados and RAMs.
I saw an F350 Super Duty parked in a suburban mains street the other day.
It is so big, it needed Interstate Heavy Vehicle plates. It was not a tradies Utes; It was not a Tow Vehicle, It wasn’t even an Oversized Load pilot. It was just compensating someone’s inadequacy.
It had a sticker on the window “Patriotism is not Racism” and it looked like a MAGA sticker but with an Australian Flag instead of the Stars and Stripes.
With all my heart, I wanted to get a paint marker and write “GAGYGF Seppo Cunt”, but I was on work uniform and did not have a paint pen. Also, I am not a complete arsehole.
Almacca@aussie.zone 6 hours ago
Make an anger management course part of the requirements to register one.
DampSquid@feddit.uk 7 hours ago
Ranger Danger!
hanrahan@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Be still my beating heart
Almacca@aussie.zone 6 hours ago
First, the “SUV loophole”: under US law, most SUVs are classified as light trucks, meaning they’re subject to less stringent fuel-efficiency and crash-safety standards than passenger cars.
This has always been baffling to me. Make the standards universal and I reckon people would make very different choices.
rcbrk@lemmy.ml 4 hours ago
Zero BAC requirement for vehicles exceeding various hazard thresholds? Say, 3T GVM, vehicle width/length, and a particular vision path requirement.
Tenderizer@aussie.zone 2 hours ago
I’m guessing the sales of emotional support vehicles would drop overnight with that policy.
shirro@aussie.zone 5 hours ago
Speed limit Rangers to 40kph within city limits. They usually speed through school zones and roadworks so it won’t slow them down but we might get a few disqualified from driving which will help.
Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
Double the price of gas. Problem will solve itself.
porcoesphino@mander.xyz 7 hours ago
Pretty early the article points out that the top selling car in 2011 was far smaller than the best selling car now, in 2025, a Ford Ranger
It then says:
Four in five new cars sold in Australia are SUVs or utes – more than double the share of 20 years ago.
And follows up by pointing out two parts of US legislation that are driving manufacturing there to larger cars ends by pointing out the extra risks to large cars and how the situation can be improved with local legislation.
Why does the article ignore that the 2011 top selling car was from an Asian manufacturer and that Asian and European manufacturers exist. I went looking for data on sales from regions / brands over time but failed a bit. Anyone want to fill in the gaps? Obviously Mazda is no longer selling the top selling model and Ford is, but was there a swing in sales to Ford, a consolidation of sales on one model or maybe more that people that loved Ford just started buying the bigger cars? Any chance someone knows of some sort of data that helps fill in the gaps?
hanrahan@piefed.social 7 hours ago
Rest of is could vote Green
Seagoon_@aussie.zone 1 hour ago
just remove the tax rebate/incentive