Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-16-2005, 07:54 AM   #1 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Carno's Avatar
 
Taxed by the mile??

Text

Quote:
(CBS) College student Jayson Just commutes an odometer-spinning 2,000 miles a month. As CBS News Correspondent Sandra Hughes reports, his monthly gas bill once topped his car payment.

"I was paying about $500 a month," says Just.

So Just bought a fuel efficient hybrid and said goodbye to his gas-guzzling BMW.

And what kind of mileage does he get?

"The EPA estimate is 60 in the city, 51 on the highway," says Just.

And that saves him almost $300 a month in gas. It's great for Just but bad for the roads he's driving on, because he also pays a lot less in gasoline taxes which fund highway projects and road repairs. As more and more hybrids hit the road, cash-strapped states are warning of rough roads ahead.

Officials in car-clogged California are so worried they may be considering a replacement for the gas tax altogether, replacing it with something called "tax by the mile."

Seeing tax dollars dwindling, neighboring Oregon has already started road testing the idea.

"Drivers will get charged for how many miles they use the roads, and it's as simple as that," says engineer David Kim.

Kim and his team at Oregon State University equipped a test car with a global positioning device to keep track of its mileage. Eventually, every car would need one.

"So, if you drive 10 miles you will pay a certain fee which will be, let's say, one tenth of what someone pays if they drive 100 miles," says Kim.

The new tax would be charged each time you fill up. A computer inside the gas pump would communicate with your car's odometer to calculate how much you owe.

The system could also track how often you drive during rush hour and charge higher fees to discourage peak use. That's an idea that could break the bottleneck on California's freeways.

"We're getting a lot of interest from other states," says Jim Whitty of the Oregon Department of Transportation. "They're watching what we're doing.

"Transportation officials across the country are concerned about what's going to happen with the gas tax revenues."

Privacy advocates say it's more like big brother riding on your bumper, not to mention a disincentive to buy fuel-efficient cars.

"It's not fair for people like me who have to commute, and we don't have any choice but take the freeways," says Just. "We shouldn't have to be taxed."

But tax-by-mile advocates say it may be the only way to ensure that fuel efficiency doesn't prevent smooth sailing down the road.

MMV, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Ummm, this seems like an invasion of privacy to me. I'd prefer not to have the government know where I am at all times. I thought the black boxes in cars were bad enough, but this is blatant Big Brother. I mean, they'll try to say there are other benefits, such as police knowing where to find your car, etc, but I don't think that outweighs the government knowing where you are. I don't think the government has any right to know where I am.

Thoughts?
Carno is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 08:13 AM   #2 (permalink)
All hail the Mountain King
 
the_marq's Avatar
 
Location: Black Mesa
I don't really see privacy being the big issue here. According to your article the only information being reported is odometer readings, so they can tell how far you have gone, but not where you went and when you went there. It's not like a GPS signal reporting your every movement.

However, what is completly asinine is the increase in taxes paid by those who drive more fule efficent cars. Using this same logic they could start charging "cancer tax" to those who stop smoking as they would no longer be paying the high taxes on cigarettes.
__________________
The Truth:

Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to.

#3 in a series
the_marq is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 08:21 AM   #3 (permalink)
Junkie
 
dogzilla's Avatar
 
Location: New York
A milage based tax seems reasonable, but it needs to consider vehicle weight since the damage done to roads by a SUV is more than that done by a subcompact. I also don't agree with a time-based charge since some people have no choice but to drive during peak hours. It would be nice if it also considered fuel efficiency and emissions to still encourage improvement in those areas.
dogzilla is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 08:49 AM   #4 (permalink)
Insane
 
Cadwiz's Avatar
 
Location: work
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogzilla
A milage based tax seems reasonable, but it needs to consider vehicle weight since the damage done to roads by a SUV is more than that done by a subcompact. I also don't agree with a time-based charge since some people have no choice but to drive during peak hours. It would be nice if it also considered fuel efficiency and emissions to still encourage improvement in those areas.
I have to agree with everything you say except the time thing. If some people "have to drive" during peak hours, thats probably what makes them "peak" hours.

And as far as having a gps to tell how far you've driven, the same could be done with a trip odometer that is reset every time fuel is put in the car. No need to know where I've been, just how far.
__________________
Semper Fi
Cadwiz is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 08:50 AM   #5 (permalink)
Junkie
 
That is ridiculous to punish someone for driving a fuel efficient vehicle while allowing the gas guzzling land barges that actually do most of the wear and damage to the roads to not be taxed so heavily. A mileage tax is stupid regardless of vehicle because someone who puts a lot of highway miles on a vehicle, whether its a 80,000 pound semi or a Geo Metro is not as abusive to the roads, since there isn't as many stops, starts and turns on a highway, all of which result in more wear on the road.
laconic1 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 08:57 AM   #6 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Carno's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_marq
I don't really see privacy being the big issue here. According to your article the only information being reported is odometer readings, so they can tell how far you have gone, but not where you went and when you went there. It's not like a GPS signal reporting your every movement.
In for a dime, in for a dollar....

Right now it will only report your mileage.. in the future, who knows?? I'd prefer to not have anything on my car at all. Why not just increase the damn gas tax? Hybrids still need gasoline to operate. There are other ways to collect taxes to pay for the roads than to install devices on our cars.
Carno is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 09:58 AM   #7 (permalink)
Junkie
 
dogzilla's Avatar
 
Location: New York
What this sort of comes back to, minus the peak hour surcharge, if you factor in car weight and fuel efficiency is the same gas tax we have today. Maybe consider what it really costs to maintain the roads and then set the gas tax appropriately.
dogzilla is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:07 AM   #8 (permalink)
Insane
 
AngelicVampire's Avatar
 
Its a good idea, a hybrid/fuel efficient car puts the same stress on a road as a standard car, a larger car = more stress.

So basically there might be 5 bandings:

1: Motorbikes/ULV - 1x
2: LV - 1.2x
3: standard car 1.5x
4: SUV - 2x
5: Vehicles over 3Tonnes 3x

So a light vehicle like a motorbike pays just the charge, a regular car pays 1.5x as much as a motorbike etc...

It makes more sense, if you also keep the tax on the fuel then it encourages people to drive fuel efficient light cars (less environmental damage)... if people want to drive an SUV getting 1m/g then they can... but it costs them a lot more because their environmental impact is far greater than the person driving the fuel efficient car.

Remember that the gas tax was designed to tax fairly across all vehicles... the more you use the more you drive the more you pay. However as cars get more efficient and not lighter then you have to pay more...
AngelicVampire is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:20 AM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
I am against this idea, Look at it in the long run. This will cause truckers to pay more tax, cause the cost of goods to rise, then the sales tax will cost more on goods because of the % from the higher price.

Then what about toll roads, I already pay to drive on those. Will we be taxed twice. What about interstates, those are paid for by taxes that I pay yearly to the federal goverment and the fed. gas tax as well. Or people who dont drive on public roads. There are many private roads that the goverment doesn't take care of so they shouldn't get tax money for it.

I truely doubt that our loving goverment will get rid of a tax for another. If we allow this to happen then, most likely, we will get taxed for gas and milage in the end.
wnker85 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:37 AM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
One more thing, the way that they are going to get your milage is by tracking your car electronically. Then they can track you where ever you are and watch you. And that is an invasion of privacy.
wnker85 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 11:36 AM   #11 (permalink)
My future is coming on
 
lurkette's Avatar
 
Moderator Emeritus
Location: east of the sun and west of the moon
So increase the gas tax. That way people who are using fewer MPG will still pay less than people driving gas-guzzlers, and the government gets its funding. Seems like that would offer even more incentive to drive more fuel-efficient cars.
__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France
lurkette is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 11:42 AM   #12 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
As I recall the water utility in Seattle charged more for water because the usage went down. They said it costs x amount to deliver the water and since folks were using less, they had to charge more per gallon. I guess the highway folks are thinking along these same lines.
flstf is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 11:49 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Exactly.
This is bass ackwards and smacks of beuraucrats trying to find a way to justify their jobs more than actually coming up with feasible and just solutions.

It's ridiculous and the whole GPS thing is just the first step to knowing were every citizen is at every moment of the day and that's just not right. What next? Making every person in New York wear a pedometer so they can charge people for using the sidewalks?
Lockjaw is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 12:05 PM   #14 (permalink)
Insane
 
moot1337's Avatar
 
Location: Learning to Fly...
Upkeep/etc for mass amounts of people is the reason taxes exist; taxes are *relatively* annonymous in this regard, and don't single people out... what this is bordering into is a usage fee, as would be charged by a private corporation, rather than a government unbiased against the people... I pay taxes so I can use any/all of those government provided things, not just one of them...

Corporatization leaking into government... interesting.
moot1337 is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 02:27 PM   #15 (permalink)
big damn hero
 
guthmund's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurkette
So increase the gas tax. That way people who are using fewer MPG will still pay less than people driving gas-guzzlers, and the government gets its funding. Seems like that would offer even more incentive to drive more fuel-efficient cars.

Exactly. Those that use more gas will have to fill up more often and subsequently pay more of the 'gas tax.' That seems, to me at least, the way to go, if you have to have a 'go' at all.

The government gets it's money, it 'penalizes' those that use more gasoline and all without having to strap a box on your car.
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
guthmund is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 02:52 PM   #16 (permalink)
Junkie
 
G_Whiz's Avatar
 
Location: Northern California
Living in California, I've heard this discussed for a few months. The key point always keeps coming back to a way to keep tax collections up. Before they go there, they are going to have to deal with one big issue.

California has one of the highest state taxes on gas in the nation. But, they keep taking money out of the transportation system to balance the budget. They did this before we had a huge budget problem. It's just another source of money for the General Fund.

So, if they tax based on mileage, how do they assure that the funds will be used for that maintenance, repair and upgrades? There is no history that it has ever happened before.

Until they can convince the electorate that will happen, the new tax system won't stand a chance. California voters have a history of passing initatives that override what the politicians want to do. That's what the Governator relies on to threaten the Legislature today.
__________________
If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
G_Whiz is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 03:21 PM   #17 (permalink)
on fire
 
animosity's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, GA
This is absolutely insane. I do not even know how to respond to such a thing. RIDICULOUS!

I'd rather privatize all roads, and pay tolls every 5 miles than have the government on my ass about how far I am driving.


<---- that is how I look right now
animosity is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 04:27 PM   #18 (permalink)
Mulletproof
 
Psycho Dad's Avatar
 
Location: Some nucking fut house.
Privacy? Were the government actually able to track where people drive and how far, does anyone think that they would really want to try to track the millions of cars on the road? We can't find Osama Fucking Bin Laden in a rock pile. Why the hell would we want to track minivans on their way to buy groceries? The sky ain't falling here people.

Now for the taxes, I'd like the government to do the same thing I do when I forsee a decline in revenue, spend less money.
__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.
Psycho Dad is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 04:36 PM   #19 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Carno's Avatar
 
Well if Osama drove a car with a GPS unit on it, they'd find him pretty quick

And it's not that everyone would be tracked, but with a GPS unit on your car, the government could track you if they ever decide they want to.

This Big Brother shit starts one small step at a time.
Carno is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 06:18 PM   #20 (permalink)
Observant Ruminant
 
Location: Rich Wannabe Hippie Town
Well, there's one other thing that you consume while driving besides gas: rubber.

Instead of a mileage tax that requires hooking into your odometer directly, why not just tax tires according to their rated mileage, at time of purchase? The more miles a tire is rated for, the higher it's taxed. The more you drive, the more tires you wear out and replace, and the more tax you pay. Vehicles registered in the state in question would have to either buy tires in that state, or have the tires assessed and taxed when they were brought into the state (if mounted on the car elsewhere). Each tire would have to carry some kind of electronic key that could be read, to prove that it was a "state tire."

There are some weaknesses here, but it's a fun idea to play with.
Rodney is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 06:58 PM   #21 (permalink)
With a mustache, the cool factor would be too much
 
Fremen's Avatar
 
Location: left side of my couch, East Texas
I predict a run on 5 gallon gas cans.
__________________
Google
Fremen is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 07:08 PM   #22 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
The gasoline tax and/or the mileage tax seems to hit the people least able to pay more than the affluent. People who can't afford to buy or rent in close to the city or can't afford one of these fancy new cars will pay more.
flstf is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 09:47 PM   #23 (permalink)
big damn hero
 
guthmund's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by flstf
The gasoline tax and/or the mileage tax seems to hit the people least able to pay more than the affluent. People who can't afford to buy or rent in close to the city or can't afford one of these fancy new cars will pay more.
You know, you're absolutely right. I didn't even consider this when I posted and I should've.

The only thing I can think of right now is maybe some payment formula that takes into consideration the miles a person drives via their odometer and their level of income. That, however, would make it ridiculously complicated and impractical.
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
guthmund is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 10:03 PM   #24 (permalink)
Desert Rat
 
spived2's Avatar
 
Location: Arizona
I think it's rediculous to consider taxing for the amount of miles a person drives. If a person is broke and needs to drive to the next town to apply for a job or something, and he spends his last 5 dollars on gas in his fuel efficient hybrid, does that mean someones going to take the money he doesnt have just for driving down the road?

When are flying cars going to be mainstream so we don't have to worry about upkeep of roads anyhow?
__________________

"This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis--vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."
- V
spived2 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:53 AM   #25 (permalink)
Shade
 
Nisses's Avatar
 
Location: Belgium
They'll probably make it so that those aircars need a special surface to glide on...

but this whole thing is basically stupid, it takes away any real incentive to drive efficient, alternative cars. Then what's the point in having em?
__________________
Moderation should be moderately moderated.
Nisses is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 06:38 AM   #26 (permalink)
My future is coming on
 
lurkette's Avatar
 
Moderator Emeritus
Location: east of the sun and west of the moon
Quote:
Originally Posted by flstf
The gasoline tax and/or the mileage tax seems to hit the people least able to pay more than the affluent. People who can't afford to buy or rent in close to the city or can't afford one of these fancy new cars will pay more.
Ooh, you're right, I forgot about the regressive tax thing :-/

OK, how about this....tax cuts for fuel-efficient cars, car-pooling, and using mass transit, offset by massively higher taxes on inefficient cars and luxury vehicles?

This whole thing is kind of stupid, compartmentalized thinking, anyhow. So the revenues from gas taxes go down - big whoop. Supposedly it should be offset by lower health costs from polluted air. You're just shifting savings from one area to another.
__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France
lurkette is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:40 AM   #27 (permalink)
Pickles
 
ObieX's Avatar
 
Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)
I'd rather see them spend time on cutting nedless programs or bloated prorams that ehy have that are wasting all this money. Adding a milage tax will end up costing them more because they'll h ave to have the sytem set up. All the gas stations will have to install something on every pump, and every car will have to have something placed inside, etc. This is a dumb idea on many levels, implementation being the worst part.
__________________
We Must Dissent.
ObieX is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:49 AM   #28 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Carno's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurkette
Ooh, you're right, I forgot about the regressive tax thing :-/

OK, how about this....tax cuts for fuel-efficient cars, car-pooling, and using mass transit, offset by massively higher taxes on inefficient cars and luxury vehicles?
Yeah but that's still the same result, because people who don't have a lot of money will be the ones driving the inefficient cars.
Carno is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 09:03 AM   #29 (permalink)
Forget me not...
 
Amnesia620's Avatar
 
Location: See that dot on the map? I don't live there.
Poverty is what I'm concerned about. Some people, when they go to fill up at the gas station, can only afford a few dollars...would the GPS "calculation" made add dollars onto the bill of sale?

In example: If you can only get $5 in gas and start filling up but you've driven $15 worth in GPS road taxes - which it says it would add to your bill...wouldn't you pay $20??? Or would it let you know before hand??
__________________
For example, I find that a lot of college girls are barbie doll carbon copies with few differences...Sadly, they're dumb, ditzy, immature, snotty, fake, or they are the gravitational center to orbiting drama. - Amnesia620
Amnesia620 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 09:17 AM   #30 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: Amish-land, PA
Here's an idea... why doesn't the government just spend its money on road crews that a) do work and b) don't screw it up. The local expressway near me took SIX YEARS to just add a shoulder and enlarge the on-ramps for just 6 miles of highway. Talk about inefficiency.

Don't punish people for driving hybrids, but don't punish people for driving inefficient cars. The government itself is the problem here, not the users of the roads.
__________________
"I've made only one mistake in my life. But I made it over and over and over. That was saying 'yes' when I meant 'no'. Forgive me."
TM875 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 09:59 AM   #31 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TM875
Here's an idea... why doesn't the government just spend its money on road crews that a) do work and b) don't screw it up. The local expressway near me took SIX YEARS to just add a shoulder and enlarge the on-ramps for just 6 miles of highway. Talk about inefficiency.

Don't punish people for driving hybrids, but don't punish people for driving inefficient cars. The government itself is the problem here, not the users of the roads.

So true, the Gov just wants more money to use to pay their buddies for crappy raod work. We need to stand up against it in everyway.
BUt, down here in Houston we are fighting agasinst "safe and clear."

But I like the tire tax idea, just like a gas tax it charges you for tires. No need to track them from state to state. Just have a small tax on it. people but tires all day, with a small, and I mean small it would help pay for our roads and should only pay for the roads.
wnker85 is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:02 PM   #32 (permalink)
big damn hero
 
guthmund's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TM875
Here's an idea... why doesn't the government just spend its money on road crews that a) do work and b) don't screw it up. The local expressway near me took SIX YEARS to just add a shoulder and enlarge the on-ramps for just 6 miles of highway. Talk about inefficiency.

Don't punish people for driving hybrids, but don't punish people for driving inefficient cars. The government itself is the problem here, not the users of the roads.
Yeah, no kidding there, TM.

The highway dept. in the area has been working on attaching an existing highway to a newly expanded highway. The difference being about 5 miles of two lane road that would have to be expanded on both sides by adding one lane and a shoulder. It officially 'opens' next week and it only took them 3 years to do it. Of course, they're ahead of schedule like six months, so, it's a big success and the highway dept. is 'real excited.'
__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.
guthmund is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 01:20 PM   #33 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Location: Pennsylvania
Hm, I think I'm more up for a tire tax than a road tax, myself, and I'm not quite sure. Both are taxes and do a similar thing, but the tire tax is less objectionable to me. Weird. And yes, the implementation of this idea is ridiculous; there's SO MANY gas stations in the US, and so many cars...I don't even think it's feasible, it would take years or decades before it started making money. Although many new cars already come with GPS; doesn't OnStar use that?

And I also agree with the seeming incompetence of road crews and the similarities between their pace and molasses. I see all the roads in the US, and I think "all these were put up in the past 60 years, but it takes them five to complete a twenty-mile stretch?" Either they used to be more efficient or less careful, or a combination of both.
TheFrogel is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 07:29 PM   #34 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFrogel
Hm, I think I'm more up for a tire tax than a road tax, myself, and I'm not quite sure. Both are taxes and do a similar thing, but the tire tax is less objectionable to me.
Yeah, I remember when I was young and poor. I would drive on my tires until the thread was showing and then I'd rotate them to get even more out of them. At least I wouldn't have to pay this tire tax this way, LOL.
flstf is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 08:19 PM   #35 (permalink)
 
StanT's Avatar
 
Location: Colorado
I prefer taxes that target usage. Generate more garbage, pay more for garbage pickup. Use more water, pay a higher water bill. Drive more, pay more for roads. The regressive nature of the tax could be diluted by an adjustment in income tax.

The GPS device seems far fetched, though. An odometer that is harder to screw with would seem to be adequate.
StanT is offline  
Old 02-17-2005, 10:39 PM   #36 (permalink)
Easy Rider
 
flstf's Avatar
 
Location: Moscow on the Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanT
I prefer taxes that target usage. Generate more garbage, pay more for garbage pickup. Use more water, pay a higher water bill. Drive more, pay more for roads. The regressive nature of the tax could be diluted by an adjustment in income tax.
I don't know. People who don't have kids still have to pay for schools and libraries because we all benefit. Maybe we should do the same for roads and just eliminate the gas tax. Everyone benefits from interstate commerce and transportation even if they don't drive.
flstf is offline  
 

Tags
mile, taxed

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:16 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360