21. The following appeared as part of an editorial in an industry newsletter.
While trucking companies that deliver goods pay only a portion of highway maintenance costs and no property tax on the highways they use, railways spend billions per year maintaining and upgrading their facilities. The government should lower the railroad companies property taxes, since sending goods by rail is clearly a more appropriate mode of ground transportation than highway shipping. For one thing, trains consume only a third of the fuel a truck would use to carry the same load, making them a more cost-effective and environmentally sound mode of transport. Furthermore, since rail lines already exist, increases in rail traffic would not require building new lines at the expense of taxpaying citizens.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The conclusion of this editorial is that the government should lower property taxes for railroad companies. The first reason given is that railroads spend billions per year maintaining and upgrading their facilities. The second reason is that shipping goods by rail is cost-effective and environmentally sound. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
First of all, the argument depends upon a misleading comparison between railroad and truck company expenditures. Although trucking companies do not pay property tax on roads they use, they do pay such taxes on the yards, warehouses and maintenance facilities they own. And while trucking companies pay only a portion of road maintenance costs, this is because they are not sole users of public roads. Railroad companies shoulder the entire burden of maintenance and taxes on their own facilities and tracks; but they distribute these costs to other users through usage fees.
In addition, the author assumes that property taxes should be structured to provide incentives for cost-effective and environmentally beneficial business practices. This assumption is questionable because property taxes are normally structured to reflect the value of property. Moreover, the author seems to think that cost-effectiveness and environmental soundness are equally relevant to the question of tax relief. However, these are separate considerations. The environmental soundness of a practice might be relevant in determining tax structuring, but society does not compensate a business for its cost-efficiency.
Splitting the issues of cost-efficiency and environmental impact highlights an ambiguity in the claim that railway shipping is more appropriate. On the one hand, it may be appropriate, or prudent, for me to ship furniture by rail because it is cost-effective; on the other hand, it might be appropriate, or socially correct, to encourage more railway shipping because it is environmentally sound. The argument thus trades on an equivocation between social correctness on the one hand, and personal or business prudence on the other.
In sum, this argument is a confusion of weak comparisons, mixed issues and equivocal claims. I would not accept the conclusion without first determining: the factors relevant to tax structure, whether specific tax benefits should accrue to property as well as to income and capital gains taxes, whether railway shipping really does provide greater social benefits, and whether it is correct to motivate more railway shipping on this basis.
停止空谈 用想象力和自由意志克服心理作用
研究:吃糖过多会引发抑郁
兑现承诺 美国校长被学生粘在墙上
纽约警察被目击使用暴力
研究:女领导比男领导更易抑郁
英教育大臣呼吁学习中国课堂教学法
专家建议把鸡冻了再吃以防食物中毒
不要告诉你的孩子说他们很有能力
为什么给男友打扫房间不能收费
美国对抗肥胖新政 菜单标明卡路里
你真的懂这些办公室行话吗?行天下必备
大反派回归 第24部007电影明年上映
马云将网上假货泛滥归咎于消费者贪心
韩国小萝莉靠晒萌照过上土豪生活
囧研究 男人更愿帮助穿高跟鞋的女性
西班牙最奇葩女公爵去世 生前是八卦杂志常客
纽约州遭遇强降雪 至少8人死亡
别人家的护照 挪威极光护照美如画
世界上最幸福的国家在哪里?
科学证明:气色健康是事业成功关键
2016年里约奥运会吉祥物亮相 本周将公选名字
七成伴娘被要求在婚礼上扮丑以衬托新娘
节省开支的34个途径
习近平在新西兰媒体发表署名文章
做家务就能健身,你还在骗自己吗?
一见不钟情 沙特新郎看到妻子就离婚
以色列公司研发新型电池 30秒充满电
《小苹果》在全美音乐奖 广告时间遇尴尬
数字医疗投资重现火爆局面
玩坏了互联网:卡戴珊奇美香槟广告
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |