Now I know we are not ideologically pure for even owning a car, but most people I know who are middle aged with kids have two cars. And if you have two cars, you drive two cars, all of the time. It is always easier. We bike and bus to work regularly, but we still have to take the kids to school, basketball practice, ballet, etc.

Why do you care so much as long as carsharing folks don't pay the tax?

I'd love to have one car instead of two, but the car seat requirement (a good one) makes multi-modal FlexCar-ing tricky.

Renting is cheaper if you want to go hiking, skiing etc. Those are things lots of car-less people like myself want to do sometimes.

Any renting that helps people stay car free is just as socially useful as car share and shouldn't be subject to a special tax aimed at tourists. That said, driving is destructive regardless of who owns the car

Those? I assure you they exist.

You should do some reporting on this subject, beyond the marketing materials Flexcar gave you. All I know is, calling an hourly rental car a "car share" makes me want to barf.

When I first started carsharing, I used it for holidays to the family get-togethers. When I told my aunts about Flexcar, they looked at me like I just said I was a Communist or something.

Will/HA why would you use Flexcar for holiday vists instead of a rental car? Unless you used the hourly rate to get away from Grandma sooner.

Holiday visits to Kent, homeskillet. For like, 5 hours, tops. Totally a Flexcar-able trip.

Why do you assume this, and even if you do, why shouldn't they? What if they've simply grouped multiple errands into one day for efficiency, rather than multiple small trips? That doesn't seem a totally unrealistic scenario. If the P-I's arguments are deficient for lack of empirical data, so are yours.

So let’s assume, for the moment, that most people who rent cars aren’t just paying for a full day’s rental and using them for a couple of hours. If that’s the case, then those people shouldn’t be exempt from the rental tax.

Why do you assume this, and even if you do, why shouldn't they? What if they've simply grouped multiple errands into one day for efficiency, rather than multiple small trips? That doesn't seem a totally unrealistic scenario. If the P-I's arguments are deficient for lack of empirical data, so are yours.

Enterprise $25 including tax - not including gas and extra insurance.

Why draw the line at car-sharing? All rental cars are shared cars.

I can see the ultimate point with the article, that they should just axe the rental tax altogether. This is a society that is actively trying on aggregate to go carless and ease up on road traffic, and such a tax doesn't really help that cause... plus, the state's benefit from the tax is negligible.

Whenever I or friends have called (we have now given up), even first thing in the morning, we are told they are out of them for the day, even when we can see them on the lot; that they are actually $19.95 for three hours; and that taxes, etc., add this huge amount on top.