You're the one constructing the strawman or engaging in a bait and switch. My definition of subsidy is very simple, are the users of a good paying the full cost or not.
It doesn't matter if other people are getting subsidized else, that's besides the issue. If you get a diamond worth without paying the cost of producing the diamond then you are receiving a net subsidy. If I pay property taxes to which 40% of tax revenue goes to roads that I don't use directly or only benefit from 10% of their total cost then I'm subsidizing someone who is by definition not paying the cost to which they are using it.
It's also noteworthy that you don't address the other meat of my argument in all the other costs drivers don't pay like health, risk, environment, congestion. Do you think society generally should be paying for those as well? Because that would mean you support subsidizing drivers.
Finally, I said that 67% of people own a license but 62% of people pay taxes generally. So those non tax paying people are using a road system they don't pay for at least through income taxes.
|