12-17-2016, 08:20 AM
(12-16-2016, 10:59 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: The point is, since it's paid for by taxes, its subsidized. Basically the general tax base (everybody) pays for those who drive. Why not make those who drive pay. Single occupant vehicle travel is an inherently inefficient method of travel, so why shouldn't it cost more. It also results in substantial social and environmental costs, so why should we subsidize it so much? Yes, there are some external benefits that apply to everybody (economic activity) but the majority of the costs are not incurred supporting goods movement, but instead supporting single occupant vehicle commuting. So everybody, whether you drive or not, pay a whole lot of money so that those who wish to drive by themselves can continue to do so cheaply, despite the social and environmental costs. It's terrible government policy.
I consider that a two-lane (single lane each direction) network of roads should be provided free, on the theory that some vehicle access is needed “everywhere”. Anything past that should be provided on an engineering basis based on demand, or on a user-pay basis — so if an LRT is the efficient way to move the people, that is what should be built, no matter how much people dislike that solution. If a multi-lane road is what is needed, that’s fine, but it will be a toll road and all costs associated with building and operating it must be recovered from the tolls. Note in particular that this implies that all expressways would be tolled and would no longer be a budget item. This also avoids the costs and complexities of tolling neighbourhood streets. I think some sort of arrangement consistent with this would do much to reveal just how much people really value the ability to drive places, and if combined with congestion pricing would also do a lot to reveal just how much people really care exactly when they are able to do things.