/n/ - Transportation » Thread #1333626

[181 / 12 / ?]

37KiB, 551x366, congestion pricing nyt.jpg

Congestion Pricing

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 14:22:46 No.1333626 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>1333627 >>1333628 >>1333688 >>1333708 >>1333713 >>1333951 >>1334055 >>1334210 >>1334490 >>1334590 >>1335019 >>1335058 >>1335612 >>1335618 >>1340772

What are /n/'s thoughts on it?

I think it's a good way to make cars pay for their infrastructure, and encourage drivers to drive elsewhere.

我愛吸妹妹的腳趾

我愛吸妹妹的腳趾 Sun 19 May 2019 14:35:30 No.1333627 Report

Quoted By: >>1333632 >>1333693

>>1333626
In principle it's a shitty band-aid and in practice its also shit.

Congestion isn't even a problem if your city is built properly from the outset (i.e. has good transportation options).

What ends up happening more often than not is that it just fucks up the lives of people who work in town but lack decent transportation options.

Also it doesn't even work half the time.

Fuck this retard concept.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 14:37:10 No.1333628 Report

Quoted By: >>1333631

>>1333626
>congestion pricing nyt.jpg
That's a very irrelevant title.
>make cars pay for their infrastructure
Pay for the opportunity and environmental cost of roads and its use, yes. Concerning financing and maintaining to make people rethink how much roads they need, is another matter. That is achieved with more toll roads directly to reflect its supply, not exactly the point of demand management from congestion pricing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 14:46:15 No.1333631 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333628
>* demand management by dynamic pricing
Maybe I should differentiate them more clearly: There's the broader road pricing in the city center, and congestion pricing to manage demand. While the latter is often envoked to justify the former, congestion doesn't necessarily occur at the city center. Detering vehicles from entering doesn't directly (although it's effective in results) relate to pricing a congested road. That's what should be done with HOT lanes (is there any fixed charge example?) and dynamically-priced toll roads.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 14:46:58 No.1333632 Report

Quoted By: >>1333705

>>1333627
>Congestion isn't even a problem if your city is built properly from the outset (i.e. has good transportation options).

You sound like a moron.
Name one decently-sized city without traffic congestion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 16:40:34 No.1333675 Report

Quoted By: >>1333698 >>1333801 >>1334531

In a perfect world your trips would be logged by how many miles you travel on each road and what time of day you travel. You would be charged based on jurisdiction (municipal, county, state, federal) and time of day (rush hour or not). The appropriate amount of money would be debited from your Universal Payment Account chip implanted on your wrist and paid to the appropriate jurisdiction. Costs could also be adjusted based on your vehicle weight because heavier vehicles cause massive amounts of more damage to our roads.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:00:58 No.1333688 Report

Quoted By: >>1333730

>>1333626
I feel that the goverment should just subside housing close to your workplace, subside homeworking etc. Pretty sure it'd end up being cheaper than building a buttload of infrastructure, which would also make it less communist

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:01:33 No.1333689 Report

Quoted By:

Roads should be free, parking should cost you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:14:58 No.1333693 Report

Quoted By: >>1334159 >>1335617

>>1333627
Why are people on this board so hostile lately?

Congestion pricing worked on I-66, it'll work in other places. Stop being mad and use your head my dude.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:17:56 No.1333697 Report

Quoted By: >>1334433 >>1341580

It's a shitty cash grab that most impacts the middle class.

>>>/o/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:18:57 No.1333698 Report

Quoted By: >>1333904

>>1333675
>He loved Big Brother.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:21:41 No.1333705 Report

Quoted By: >>1333726 >>1333735 >>1333739

>>1333632
Hanoi.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:24:45 No.1333708 Report

Quoted By: >>1333728 >>1335613

>>1333626
Fine with me. Driving is massively subsidized and there should be disincentive from driving more in urban centers. And I say that as someone who one a car in a dense city. In fact, they're going to ban private cars and rideshares altogether from the big main street in my city.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 17:28:51 No.1333713 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333626
>I think it's a good way to make cars pay for their infrastructure, and encourage drivers to drive elsewhere.
Encouraging drivers to drive elsewhere than on their infrastructure sounds like a really terrible idea. I certainly don't want them anywhere else but on their infrastructure.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 18:02:20 No.1333726 Report

Quoted By: >>1333802

>>1333705
Have fun in Vietnam kid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 18:04:57 No.1333728 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333708
It's worked well wherever it's been implemented.

To me it just means drivers might actually start thinking about the costs they incur.

It would also divert traffic to other neighborhoods and encourage development there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 18:07:19 No.1333730 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333688
That's such a dumb idea I'm not sure if it's a troll.

But effectively the government subsidizes suburbia, which is housing far from your workplace, and builds a buttload of infrastructure to support/spread suburbia.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 18:10:26 No.1333735 Report

Quoted By: >>1333802

>>1333705
Weren't there too many motorbikes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 18:12:50 No.1333739 Report

Quoted By: >>1333802

>>1333705
>Communist shithole
LMAO retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 19:45:59 No.1333796 Report

Quoted By: >>1333828 >>1334055

Congestion pricing is regressive taxation meant to make public transport economical, by punishing the competition

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 19:51:10 No.1333801 Report

Quoted By: >>1333904

>>1333675
>in a perfect world my every move will be tracked by the gubment
Nice try, gotta hire better shills.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 19:51:30 No.1333802 Report

Quoted By: >>1334512

>>1333726
>>1333739
lol I appreciate the (You)s!

>>1333735
Yeah, but they seem to spend less time in traffic than Americans do on average. I'd love to visit there, some day, even if it's just for a couple of days.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 20:24:53 No.1333828 Report

Quoted By: >>1333833 >>1333841 >>1334055

>>1333796
No, it’s meant to fund the roads on a per-use basis. Currently the gas tax doesn’t pay for the roads so states have to dip into other parts of their budget to cover the massive cost.
If a road was privately-owned they would charge you a toll to use it.
When you use Uber at peak hours they charge you more.
If you don’t want to pay for the product, don’t use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 20:27:16 No.1333831 Report

Quoted By: >>1333911 >>1334156 >>1334404

A gas tax charges rural residents unfairly because they drive more but they pay for all the maintenance of roads in densely-populated areas.
Congestion pricing just charges people in dense city centers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 20:28:45 No.1333833 Report

Quoted By: >>1333848

>>1333828
>If a road was privately-owned they would charge you a toll to use it.
If all roads were privately owned, you wouldn't have to pay a massive tax on fuel, either.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 20:48:17 No.1333841 Report

Quoted By: >>1333851

>>1333828
>No,
Stopped there. You fundamentally are wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 21:10:58 No.1333848 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333833
But they’re not, and you do have to pay for them somehow. So we have to use the most effective tax system possible.

If all roads were privately owned most of the ones in America wouldn’t have been built and they’d be much narrower.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 21:14:37 No.1333851 Report

Quoted By: >>1333897

>>1333841
You apparently don’t believe in paying for goods you use. You sound like a communist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 23:11:08 No.1333897 Report

Quoted By: >>1333913 >>1334156 >>1334402

>>1333851
At your very core you think you know what's best for everyone and think inhibiting everyone's ability to travel will benefit everyone when in reality it will lead to economic and cultural stagnation, which is precisely what happened in Communist countries

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 23:23:11 No.1333904 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333698
>>1333801
Driving a cage is a privilege not a right. You give up rights by agreeing to be licensed, have insurance, registering a vehicle, said vehicle passes inspections etc. lol if you don't think you're already being tracked right now. Besides all pilot demonstrations of this have used private contractors who monitor mileage so your data would be safe with Facebook/Google instead of big brother.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rural urban survey vmt.jpg, 21KiB, 480x323

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 23:39:20 No.1333911 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333831
The difference is honestly minimal. Rural drivers may have to drive further for trips but they make fewer trips than urban drivers. Many researchers think people have a "time budget" that they are willing to spend on travel every day. Urban may have shorter base trips but they use up more of that budget by doing pointless trips to pick up coffee, buy a snack etc. Rural drivers may drive less fuel efficient vehicles but they also cause more damage to roads.

In most areas urban tax dollars flow out to the rural areas. In Minnesota the DOT plans for 60% of transportation revenue to come from the cities and only spend about 35% in the cities in 25 years. This was after significant pushback by cities to increase the % from 30.

Source:
My experience working for an MPO.
http://www.startribune.com/metro-vs-outstate-which-counties-pay-most-taxes-and-which-get-most-aid/289629981/
https://usa.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/09/Back-of-the-Bus.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 23:41:58 No.1333913 Report

Quoted By: >>1333917

>>1333897
Do you know what inhibits a persons ability to travel? Forcing them to pay for infrastructure, goods, and services they don't use. Communists make everyone pay for shit whether they benefit or not. You just happen to be on the receiving end of subsidies to support your unsustainable lifestyle.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 19 May 2019 23:51:21 No.1333917 Report

Quoted By: >>1333960

>>1333913
Nice backpedal. Roads are a common good and an economic multiplier and should be free for the public to use, even if they lose money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 01:18:03 No.1333951 Report

Quoted By: >>1334075

>>1333626
Just another cash grab by politicians.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 01:59:56 No.1333960 Report

Quoted By: >>1334001

>>1333917
like transit?

His post sounded weirdly AnCap to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 03:52:09 No.1334001 Report

Quoted By: >>1334401

>>1333960
Roads and highways objectively provide more utility to the average person than buses and trains ever will

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 05:14:13 No.1334055 Report

Quoted By: >>1334066

>>1333796
>by punishing the competition
Yeah, because using roads and cars, that are polluting and inefficient, where there's congestion and many sensitive receivers affected, doesn't deserve to be punished and charged for its costs.
This isn't an efficient market or fair competition in the first place.

>>1333626
>make cars pay
>>1333828
>gas tax
Fuel tax loss from BEVs is an issue on the table. Negative externality from driving an automobile alone can be greater than the pollution and environmental damage it costs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 05:57:32 No.1334066 Report

Quoted By: >>1334076 >>1334147 >>1334148

>>1334055
>roads and cars, that are polluting and inefficient

Think about that: despite cars being polluting and inefficient, buses and trains are still not capable of economically competing with them

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 06:47:01 No.1334075 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333951
do you actually believe politicians get to keep money from taxes and fees privately? do you live in a corrupt third world banana republic? (the US counts)

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 06:47:29 No.1334076 Report

Quoted By: >>1334107

>>1334066
>buses and trains are still not capable of economically competing with them
Guess why?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 09:22:09 No.1334107 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334076
People fundamentally enjoy the freedom to travel and increased utility that comes with private vehicle ownership

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 09:53:03 No.1334120 Report

Quoted By:

I think congestion pricing is an idea worth considering, not only now but for the future. As others have pointed out, gas tax funds are dwindling; the rates haven’t been raised in years and would be political suicide, cars are becoming aggressively more efficient and hybrids and electric vehicle numbers are growing every year. The money for desparately needed infrastructure is not there. Congestion pricing could be a multifaceted solution: increasing the cost of driving could increase revenues for DOTs, also could reduce the number of vehicles driving on roads which would lower maintenance costs and allow the DOTs to actually spend money on maintenance instead of expansion (which is stupid in its own right but unfortunately the norm), and encourage people to demand alternatives and improvements to those alternatives, and may increase funding for those alternatives because now they’re more economically viable and being more heavily used. I could even see congestion pricing encouraging employers to be more flexible with the hours worked and locations worked from by their employees. There are a lot of other possible benefits I see especially as autonomous vehicles come closer to reality. We’ll never know for sure what kinds of effects implementing these types of policies have unless we try. The most important thing imo is that the current system for financing our infrastructure is not viable moving forward and we’re going to need to do something different to compensate for that.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO car_vs_public_transit.png, 895KiB, 2376x636

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 11:26:53 No.1334147 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334066
>design you city around the car
>car is more convenient

>design your city around public transit
>public transit is more convenient

pottery

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO car_vs_public_transit.png, 970KiB, 2376x636

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 11:29:28 No.1334148 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334066
>design you city around the car
>car is more convenient

>design your city around public transit
>public transit is more convenient

pottery

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 12:21:40 No.1334156 Report

Quoted By: >>1334433

>>1333897
You’re just getting weird now with your presumptions.
Congestion pricing is just paying for the good you use.
Gas tax does not. For example see >>1333831

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 12:23:10 No.1334157 Report

Quoted By: >>1334437 >>1335615

Isn’t it weird how roads and highways are subsidized by the government at a huge loss, but supposed “free marketers” are adamantly opposed to paying for them?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 12:28:32 No.1334159 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333693
No hes right. Fuck you

anonymous

anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 15:32:52 No.1334210 Report

Quoted By: >>1334400

>>1333626
You could just like, use tax money to fix the fucked up roads

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 17:49:17 No.1334254 Report

Quoted By: >>1334263 >>1334302

I'm in theory in favor of them as an anti-congestion measure. We could always use fewer cars on the road. My fear with implementing it though is that it will just drive traffic onto surface streets. I feel like the worsening of surface street congestion would be greater than the relief of freeway congestion. Are there any studies about this?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 18:22:32 No.1334263 Report

Quoted By: >>1334274

>>1334254
I don't personally see anything wrong with diverting some traffic to surface streets. Why do you?

Actually my city's downtown doesn't have much traffic during the day, but really wide lanes (sometimes 5 lanes +onstreet parking). Many American cities are similar.

There are studies showing positive effects of congestion pricing, but they're all in western europe, which is a little different from American cities. NYC will be the first American case study.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 18:41:06 No.1334274 Report

Quoted By: >>1334424

>>1334263
Cars idling on surface streets have a lower fuel efficiency, increase maintenance costs, and bring pollution and noise from the relatively centralized freeways into neighborhoods where people live. As much as I detest having a freeway it's healthier for more people than having freeway amounts of traffic spreading through the city.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 18:59:43 No.1334284 Report

Quoted By:

Traffic shaping is one thing. I'm sure that idiots in the future will make harmful decisions making everything worse in pursuit of short term revenue.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 19:31:20 No.1334302 Report

Quoted By: >>1334427 >>1334467

>>1334254
It may decrease trips overall. People who don't want to pay OR divert their trip may either elect not to take the trip in the first place or perform a modal shift (i.e. change to transit). This can happen when you remove roads, for example. Trips may dissipate entirely instead of divert cause people don't want to waste the time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 22:51:07 No.1334400 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334210
That's the current system via the gas tax. The problem is, it hasn't been raised sufficiently in recent history to cover current expenses, and now with the rise of hybrids and EVs the revenue from the tax is being chipped away.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 22:53:25 No.1334401 Report

Quoted By: >>1334431

>>1334001
It depends on the locale. In dense cities, where congestion pricing will be mainly applied, I disagree. The cost of a car (storage, gas, insurance, fees) will outweigh its utility when viable alternatives such as transit are available. In cities without viable transit, congestion pricing can act as a catalyst to jump start the construction of new transit, even if it's just improving buses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 22:54:51 No.1334402 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333897
Congestion pricing has been applied in other cities previously and last I heard London did not collapse or stagnate economically.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 22:56:38 No.1334403 Report

Quoted By: >>1334404 >>1334420 >>1335665

Good thing in many urban cores, the most impoverished citizens are not the ones who own cars i.e. this charge literally can only benefit them by improving what they use: transit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 22:57:39 No.1334404 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334403
Meant to reply to >>1333831

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:38:59 No.1334420 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334403
Urban cores are mostly full of rich people.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:42:34 No.1334424 Report

Quoted By: >>1334467

>>1334274
Yes but the idea is you only implement it during rush hour.
It’s not like traffic idling on the highway is any cheaper.
Having people take routes through town would aid businesses in those neighborhoods too. Cars bring noise but they can also bring some economic stimulus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:45:03 No.1334427 Report

Quoted By: >>1334467

>>1334302
I think it would have two effects:
1. Business relocate from the urban core to nearby parts of town, taking their money and workers with them
2. People move closer to town to avoid having to pay the toll and sit through traffic less.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:53:27 No.1334431 Report

Quoted By: >>1334435

>>1334401
>The cost of a car (storage, gas, insurance, fees) will outweigh its utility when viable alternatives such as transit are available.
Even in the cities with the best transit on Earth, traffic is a problem. People still find utility in private vehicles rather than public transport.

>In cities without viable transit, congestion pricing can act as a catalyst to jump start the construction of new transit,
Like I said, transit fags literally have to make driving too expensive to get people to switch

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:56:23 No.1334433 Report

Quoted By: >>1334436

>>1333697
>It's a shitty cash grab that most impacts the middle class.
Bingo

>>1334156
>You’re just getting weird now with your presumptions.
Nope

>Congestion pricing is just paying for the good you use.
We already paid for them. Raising tolls and congestion fees only helps the government collect more revenue, it doesn't automatically go to transit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:56:30 No.1334435 Report

Quoted By: >>1334437

>>1334431
They find utility in vehicles AND public transport you mean.
The more people use cars in an area, the less useful that car becomes, because cars cause a lot of traffic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 20 May 2019 23:57:51 No.1334436 Report

Quoted By: >>1334437

>>1334433
Think you proved yourself wrong. Congestion pricing does NOT automatically go to transit because it has to pay for the roads, because the gas tax doesn’t cover all the expenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 00:01:35 No.1334437 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334157
>Isn’t it weird how roads and highways are subsidized by the government at a huge loss, but supposed “free marketers” are adamantly opposed to paying for them?
No. Roads give more people the ability to travel than trains and are an enormous economic multiplier

>>1334435
>They find utility in vehicles AND public transport you mean.
Irrelevant

>>1334436
>Think you proved yourself wrong.
Hmm you failed to prove your point

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 00:02:16 No.1334438 Report

Quoted By:

OP’s article is great btw. Shows how many fallacies we apply to road that we don’t apply to anywhere else, and how the gas tax was conceived by the auto industry lobby.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 01:07:21 No.1334467 Report

Quoted By: >>1334473

>>1334302
>>1334427
Ideally both of these would happen. Traffic being diverted onto side streets is an unintended consequences I could see happening.
>>1334424
The city I'm from (won't name lest /n/ make fun of me) has diversified retail mainly serving the surrounding neighborhood(s). A few destination shopping streets excepted, I think it would do more harm than good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 01:35:07 No.1334473 Report

Quoted By: >>1334486

>>1334467
Congestion pricing’s not going in your city. It’s for massive dense cities.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 02:48:44 No.1334486 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334473
My city is massive and relatively dense, and congestion pricing has been proposed for it, though no action has been taken yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 03:14:04 No.1334490 Report

Quoted By: >>1334679

>>1333626
>more taxation
It only hurts people on limited incomes and otherwise restricts their freedom of movement. Why do you hate living in a free country so much, and why do you love rich people so much?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 03:47:39 No.1334512 Report

Quoted By: >>1341528

>>1333802
Retard good luck getting stuck in a wave of motorbikers

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 04:53:25 No.1334526 Report

Quoted By:

>build your country in a way which requires everyone to own a car
>give them no other options and then tax the shit out of them for owning a car

Kek

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 05:01:14 No.1334531 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333675
I agree unironically.

They're needs to be more disincentives for driving

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 08:45:34 No.1334590 Report

Quoted By: >>1334655

>>1333626
Removing all on-street parking and replacing it with bikelanes would probably have more of an impact.
The less cars can park in the city, the less sense it makes for people to drive there.
With an alternative infrastructure, you have the option to ride your bike safely outside of the traffic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 11:43:05 No.1334655 Report

Quoted By: >>1334661

>>1334590
Don't forget a nearly draconic towing regime which is meant to guarantee that a car breaking parking law will be removed and detonated in 30 minutes or less.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 12:17:26 No.1334661 Report

Quoted By: >>1334773

>>1334655
That's a good idea as well, but not burcratic enough.
Getting your car back should at least take a few weeks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 12:52:49 No.1334679 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334490
Taxes don’t cover the current costs incurred by roads and highways since we build so much of them.
A massive amount of our nation’s roads and bridges are dilapidated and states are already having to dip into other parts of their budget to make up for it.
This is more fair than a gas tax, sorry.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 12:54:55 No.1334680 Report

Quoted By:

>What are your thoughts on it?

I think this country went crazy building roads and highways and now realizes it doesn’t have a way to pay for them.
I’d support a toll on any busy highway to recoup the costs. If you don’t you’re a moron.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 15:07:22 No.1334720 Report

Quoted By: >>1335025

Strange how hypocritical Republicans are. They’re erecting new toll roads in Georgia and Florida, in sparsely populated places that are expected to see little use.
But when you propose a toll in a densely-populated place where it will actually get some use they oppose it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 May 2019 17:32:10 No.1334773 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334661
Thats why you detonate the car

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO IMG_20190522_114702.jpg, 46KiB, 598x250

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 04:41:13 No.1335019 Report

Quoted By: >>1335037 >>1335127

>>1333626
Congestion pricing make buses use more congested roads

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 04:52:03 No.1335025 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334720
Nigger all the toll lanes in Georgia are in metro Atlanta

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 05:23:51 No.1335037 Report

Quoted By: >>1335086

>>1335019
Stop adding assumptions and conditions.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cunning-plan.jpg, 59KiB, 446x289

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 07:05:44 No.1335058 Report

Quoted By: >>1335620

>>1333626
Just tax all vehicles according to weight end road space usage. A motorbike would be taxed low, a small car average and a van or big SUV more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 11:11:55 No.1335086 Report

Quoted By: >>1335091

>>1335037
What?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 11:27:14 No.1335091 Report

Quoted By: >>1335103

>>1335086
Explain how your irrelevant pic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 11:47:27 No.1335103 Report

Quoted By: >>1335127

>>1335091
There are two main routes that traffic from NWBT can use to access Hong Kong Island. One is via Tuen Mun Road. Another is via Tai Lam Tunnel (Route 3). Tuen Mun Road is free to use while Tai Lam Tunnel cost about 20USD per vehicle for bus. Population distribution between entry of both routes are split rather equally, yet there are more buses that choose to use the free Tuen Mun Road that is more congested than the Tai Lam Tunnel.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 11:50:12 No.1335105 Report

Quoted By: >>1335129 >>1335147

*hits bong*
>LIKE DUDE WE NEED A CONGESTION TAX SO CAGERS PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE
*takes heavily subsized public transport*
>BRO LIKE GETTING TO MY DISPENSARY IS A HUMAN RIGHT, PUBLIC TRANSPORT SHOULD BE FREE

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 13:44:20 No.1335127 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335019
>Congestion pricing make buses use more congested roads
>>1335103
>choose to use the free Tuen Mun Road that is more congested than the Tai Lam Tunnel.
Relevancy?

Relevancy?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 13:49:21 No.1335129 Report

Quoted By: >>1335133 >>1335621

>>1335105
>The road networks aren't subsided to hell and back

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 13:55:31 No.1335133 Report

Quoted By: >>1335155

>>1335129
Yes, now about those public transport subsidies..

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 15:09:23 No.1335147 Report

Quoted By: >>1335203

>>1335105
Nothing’s subsidized more than roads, highways, and oil. Sorry.

Nothing wrong with roads being tolled to cover their massive cost.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 15:33:45 No.1335155 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335133
>For profit companies are subsidized

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 16:09:09 No.1335167 Report

Quoted By:

imagine not ever being able to afford a car haha try not to cut yourself

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:04:56 No.1335203 Report

Quoted By: >>1335209 >>1335211 >>1335222 >>1335225 >>1335226

>>1335147
>says the /n/ public transit weenie who refuses to grow up, can't be bothered to be self-reliant, has to depend on someone else to drive him places in gigantic cages full of filthy smelly street people with diseases
That's the 900 pound gorilla in /n/: buses and trains? Just gigantic cages. Public transit weenies are just proxy-cagers, and worse, they're parasites, leeching off everyone else's tax dollars to subsidize their filthy, noisy, smelly gigantic cages.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:10:24 No.1335209 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335203
>Disliking efficiency

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:13:14 No.1335211 Report

Quoted By: >>1337671 >>1337759 >>1337814

>>1335203
We don't hate cars because they are boxes which transport people. We hate cars because they are inefficient, harmful, lead to horrendous urban planning, and the people who like them actively sabotage better transport options.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:27:43 No.1335222 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335203
Lol now you have to make shit up to defend your shitty erroneous view.

Nice.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO wheeze.png, 58KiB, 441x302

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:29:43 No.1335225 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335203
>the cager relying on the most massive state-sponsored projects for roads and highways talking about others not being self-reliant

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:30:16 No.1335226 Report

Quoted By: >>1335233

>>1335203
I just pointed out that car infrastructure is the most expensive and leeching.
Why do you fail so hard at logic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:34:18 No.1335233 Report

Quoted By: >>1335243

>>1335226
>car infrastructure is the most expensive

Well of course, it's the most popular.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:50:52 No.1335243 Report

Quoted By: >>1335262 >>1335614

>>1335233
Per person carried it is the most expensive as well you absolute tard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 18:51:57 No.1335245 Report

Quoted By: >>1335343 >>1335619

I wonder who goes on a transportation board just to deny all the facts staring them in the face, and tries to claim car-dependent infrastructure is good.

That's gotta be a weird existence.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 19:38:28 No.1335262 Report

Quoted By: >>1335614

>>1335243
What did you expect?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 May 2019 22:45:45 No.1335343 Report

Quoted By: >>1335603

>>1335245
It's like going to /sp/ and saying board games are the best sports and you shouldn't watch any other sport.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:17:21 No.1335603 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335343
Lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:48:55 No.1335612 Report

Quoted By: >>1335629

>>1333626
>I think it's a good way to make cars pay for their infrastructure, and encourage drivers to drive elsewhere.
Bikers should be paying for the infrastructure faggot, drivers already paid for the roads.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1414438900752.gif, 1MiB, 217x217

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:49:59 No.1335613 Report

Quoted By: >>1335629

>>1333708
>Driving is massively subsidized
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:51:00 No.1335614 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335243
>>1335262
lol this board might be worse than /mu/ when it comes to your high and mighty (and incorrect) biased opinions. I smell your bike shorts from here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:52:08 No.1335615 Report

Quoted By: >>1335629

>>1334157
>subsidized by the government
you mean paid for with taxes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:53:35 No.1335617 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333693
>Why are people on this board so hostile lately?
this board is INCREDIBLY hostile to anyone that doesn't love bicyles and cyclists, despite this being a transportation board and in no way dedicated to two wheelers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:55:16 No.1335618 Report

Quoted By:

>>1333626
Why don't we charge cyclists a per route tax? Maybe you guys should be paying everytime you run red lights for instance. Also you should probably be on the hook insurance wise to in the event of an accident (generally it's the biker's fault).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:56:18 No.1335619 Report

Quoted By: >>1337989

>>1335245
>all the facts
you guys are like vegans with your cult shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 16:59:11 No.1335620 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335058
agreed, also tax cyclists on a based on wheel number and average speed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 17:00:12 No.1335621 Report

Quoted By: >>1335629 >>1335632

>>1335129
taxes are not subsidies

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 17:54:16 No.1335629 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335621
>>1335615
>>1335613
>>1335612
My property and income taxes pay for more than 50% of road costs. Drivers pay a fraction of their costs in fees and taxes. This doesn’t even include hidden costs and externalities like pollution emitted from cars.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 18:08:29 No.1335632 Report

Quoted By: >>1335633

>>1335621
>Don't have a car
>My taxes are still used for car infrastructure
How is this not subsides?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 18:13:05 No.1335633 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335632
He's wrong even then, because a subsidy is essentially government money allowing a service to be provided at an artificially lower cost. It does not matter where that government money comes from. Pretending it's not a subsidy just because its funding partly by a gasoline tax is delusion.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO th (9).jpg, 17KiB, 474x355

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 19:38:31 No.1335662 Report

Quoted By: >>1335666

What if I told you, the real way to get rid of cars on the road, is to deport dead-weight foreigners that should never have been imported in the first place, and "congestion pricing" is simply avoiding the issue of urban over-population.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 19:43:51 No.1335665 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334403
Fuck the most impoverished.
I hate them, with their subsidized housing and wic cards, while I have to pay out the ass to live frugally in a windowless basement apartment, even though I make $45,000 a year.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 19:44:29 No.1335666 Report

Quoted By: >>1335685

>>1335662
Are you talking about American cities? If so, there are no American city that have reached the 30 Million population mark yet. We can start talking about "urban over-population" after that
And most increase in urban population come from influx of rural people.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:14:59 No.1335685 Report

Quoted By: >>1335687

>>1335666
>Cities are not overpopulated until they hit the 30 Million population mark.
Why not 100 million if we're going to throw out arbitrary numbers?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:17:40 No.1335687 Report

Quoted By: >>1335693

>>1335685
Because there are already so many cities with 20+ Millions population around the world that they are to be considered normal

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:31:22 No.1335693 Report

Quoted By: >>1335694 >>1335698 >>1338148 >>1340774

>>1335687
>they are to be considered normal
The fact that urban over-population is considered to be the norm, does not mean that cities are not overpopulated.

What are housing costs like in these "normal" cities of 20 million?
How is traffic congestion in these cities?
How much pollution is there?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:36:22 No.1335694 Report

Quoted By: >>1335697

>>1335693
That is the natural result of lack of employment opportunity in rural area. So the increased housing cost and traffic are the cost people pay to stay in urban area to have a chance to find jobs. Pollution are simply stacked that it won't go away even if they aren't urban.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:40:34 No.1335697 Report

Quoted By: >>1335700

>>1335694
None of what you just said invalidates the statement that those cities are overpopulated, or justifies using these cities as models for future planning.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:43:49 No.1335698 Report

Quoted By: >>1335703

>>1335693
In that case, congestion pricing discourages overpopulation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:43:59 No.1335700 Report

Quoted By: >>1335705

>>1335697
Urban planning adopt to people instead of the other way round.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:48:27 No.1335703 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335698
In an inefficient manner when compared to deliberate depopulation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:52:13 No.1335705 Report

Quoted By: >>1335707

>>1335700
Meaningless platitude that doesn't invalidate the fact these hellholes are not overpopulated, and in actual fact reinforces the claim that they are overpopulated as it implicitly means urban planning is perpetually playing catch-up to the increasing population levels of these growing tumor cities.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 20:55:19 No.1335707 Report

Quoted By: >>1335713

>>1335705
Then explain why rural area are losing people to city?
I am saying there's no overpopulation not in the sense that there's no infrastructure problem, instead I am saying they can still grow more

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 21:15:57 No.1335713 Report

Quoted By: >>1335729

>>1335707
>Then explain why rural area are losing people to city?
non-sequitor
The fact that swimming shipwrecked sailors are drawn to the floating lifeboats, does not mean the lifeboats are not currently overladen.

>instead I am saying they can still grow more
So can your tumors.
Your conception of overpopulation is worthless, as it considers everything that is not in a failure state to be within normal working parameters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 May 2019 21:53:50 No.1335729 Report

Quoted By: >>1340659

>>1335713
>The fact that swimming shipwrecked sailors are drawn to the floating lifeboats, does not mean the lifeboats are not currently overladen.
So you want to instate immigration control around cities to keep rural population out?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 May 2019 23:10:54 No.1337671 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335211
This.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 02:40:23 No.1337758 Report

Quoted By:

I can't imagine living in a city anymore. I could a couple of decades ago, but not now. Look at this thread. All the urbanists in it are bugmen who think a central authority (whatever it may be) should be able to have total control over virtually everything that happens in cities.

IRL ant colony

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 02:42:39 No.1337759 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335211
>We hate cars because ... people who like them actively sabotage better transport options.

Liberals sabotage transit far more than cagers because they absolutely refuse to believe that feral urban youths, homeless bums, and literal crazy people that inhabit such systems are a problem.

Fix that and people will use trains.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 04:30:51 No.1337814 Report

Quoted By: >>1337816

>>1335211
I actually love cars. I used to be an /o/tist and have done all kinds of mods on my car from exhaust and intake to the sound system. I follow new car technology regularly.

But I know that planning for cars only is retarded, and it's bad for drivers.
It also wastes an incredible amount of tax dollars and it's just unnatural.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 04:33:47 No.1337816 Report

Quoted By:

>>1337814
>People widely prefer private vehicles over buses and trains
>"It's unnatural"

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 13:49:45 No.1337989 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335619
Never seen a single attempt to refute them though. Petty insults and telling us we should die? Yes. Any attempt at a coherent argument? No.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 May 2019 21:25:20 No.1338148 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335693
Considering Tokyo is like the prime example of a 20 million+ city, and it is known for not being too polluted, well served by public transit, and affordable (on par with Orlando Florida lmao), I'd say your worries carry little weight. I guess the people from your country are generically inferior to asians, but it is still possible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 12:51:22 No.1340659 Report

Quoted By: >>1340668

>>1335729
There already is one and it's called the free market. Housing costs more in the city, so you can't cut it unless you have skills other than "digging a hole and filling it with water for my pigs" and "complaining about minorities and gays keeping me down"

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 13:16:45 No.1340668 Report

Quoted By: >>1340687

>>1340659
edgy af bro

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 13:46:57 No.1340687 Report

Quoted By:

>>1340668
You can just say "fringie as fuck", it's not like I can't tell you're the fringieposter

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 14:06:44 No.1340692 Report

Quoted By:

Housing is expensive in the city because a lot of people want to live there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:15:09 No.1340772 Report

Quoted By: >>1340778

>>1333626
Anything that punishes cagers and claws back even a fraction of what they have cost us is good in my eyes.

Reminder to key cages you pass on the street, knife their tires, and put sugar in their gas tanks. reminder to throw nails on freeways and lean nails under the tires of parked cars. cagers must be harassed until they stop caging. cagers must be fined to pay for their sins and taxed to make up for the tax money they have wasted on quadrillions of dollars of cage infrastructure.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:17:06 No.1340774 Report

Quoted By:

>>1335693
Tokyo has 23 million and you can rent apartments for 800 usd a month there. burgerstan has cities with half a million where the rent is minimum 1500 usd.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:23:27 No.1340778 Report

Quoted By: >>1340779 >>1340782

>>1340772
You're 15 and live with your parents

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:25:40 No.1340779 Report

Quoted By: >>1340780

>>1340778
Not that guy but I agree 100%, my parents live 2500 miles away and Jimmy Carter was president when I was born. The cage must be destroyed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:29:13 No.1340780 Report

Quoted By: >>1340781

>>1340779
Only children get that jealous of others

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:31:11 No.1340781 Report

Quoted By: >>1340784

>>1340780
Only children can look at billions of dollars of taxpayer money getting literally set on fire and think "ha ha, good, quality of life is for cucks"

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:33:11 No.1340782 Report

Quoted By:

>>1340778
nice rebuttal cage scum. die in a ditch.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fringies btfo.png, 62KiB, 1129x489

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:34:40 No.1340784 Report

Quoted By: >>1340789 >>1340936 >>1340956

>>1340781

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tuscany.jpg, 172KiB, 1920x953

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:36:53 No.1340786 Report

Quoted By:

It's better to build places for humans, not cars.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 36853584_-_01_12_2015_-_dcglass02.jpg, 40KiB, 780x520

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 16:38:43 No.1340789 Report

Quoted By:

>>1340784
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Bastiat

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 21:47:24 No.1340936 Report

Quoted By: >>1340939

>>1340784
Is increasing demand even a good thing? Shouldn't the goal be a world where people are happy with that they have? Also who says that trains aren't a better investment, 2x return sounds kinda crappy for massive infrastructure projects.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 21:57:40 No.1340939 Report

Quoted By:

>>1340936
>Also who says that trains aren't a better investment, 2x return sounds kinda crappy for massive infrastructure projects.

It's pretty good. I doubt mass transit comes close.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 02 Jun 2019 22:41:45 No.1340956 Report

Quoted By: >>1340990

>>1340784
Lol that's not a study.

See if you can find a source kid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 00:05:31 No.1340990 Report

Quoted By: >>1341000

>>1340956
Go ahead and refute the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, who made it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 00:39:04 No.1341000 Report

Quoted By: >>1341020

>>1340990
No problem. I'll do something you can't: provide a source.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2011/RAND_MG1049.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 01:24:30 No.1341020 Report

Quoted By: >>1341548

>>1341000
I did provide a source, it's a quick google search to find the article but since the zoomer mind can't imagine doing the least bit of thinking, here u go: https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2012/november/highway-grants/

Btw there is no way you read all that RAND information, you just copy pasted the first search result you found that looked promising

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 13:58:53 No.1341285 Report

Quoted By:

In germany cars make around 50% of all taxmoney.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 16:17:50 No.1341359 Report

Quoted By: >>1341521

I think it could change the face of American planning and development tbph. If you have to stare the cost of your driving in the face you'll rethink driving and car infrastructure.

However it takes a long time to get approved.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 22:11:41 No.1341521 Report

Quoted By: >>1341564

>>1341359
Exactly! Just make it more expensive for the poor, working and middle classes and everything will be better for them. Trust me! (Wealthy people will be unaffected, of course)

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 22:26:53 No.1341528 Report

Quoted By:

>>1334512
>implying you won't use a SAW to mow people down and drive around them

HAVE SEX

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 23:07:36 No.1341548 Report

Quoted By: >>1341552

>>1341020
>can't imagine doing the least bit of thinking
>Btw there is no way you read all that RAND information
hmmm...

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 23:17:33 No.1341552 Report

Quoted By:

>>1341548
Just admit it was the first promising search result you found based on the summary

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 03 Jun 2019 23:43:09 No.1341564 Report

Quoted By: >>1341581

>>1341521
It’s more expensive for anyone who drives there during peak congestion hours and it’s only implemented in rich areas.
Nothing wrong with paying for a service if you use it.
I think you have a learning disability.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 00:27:31 No.1341580 Report

Quoted By: >>1341582

>>1333697
Bull shit, if paying a few dollars to drive your car puts a dent in your budget you should reevaluate how you spend your money.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 00:28:26 No.1341581 Report

Quoted By: >>1341609

>>1341564
You're already paying for the service. It's already been financed. Congestion pricing is simply a regressive tax.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 00:29:30 No.1341582 Report

Quoted By: >>1341589

>>1341580
Liberals show how much they love the working class by taking more of their money

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 00:47:15 No.1341589 Report

Quoted By: >>1341594

>>1341582
The working class loves to show off how the education system failed them by complaining about marginal income tax hikes for millionaires, whose money is really "their" money

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 00:56:51 No.1341594 Report

Quoted By:

>>1341589
More love for the workers from a good ol' liberal! <3

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 01:15:45 No.1341609 Report

Quoted By: >>1341612

>>1341581
Oh, you're just uninformed.

Gas tax hasn't been able to cover the massive cost of our highway system in 20 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 01:24:06 No.1341612 Report

Quoted By: >>1341628

>>1341609
>Oh, you're just uninformed.
Nope. The roads are already financed, otherwise they wouldn't get built and maintained.

>Gas tax hasn't been able to cover the massive cost of our highway system in 20 years.
I know. If you want to make roads pay for themselves, it's only fair that public transit does too. Make the cost of a transit pass reflect the real cost of the service.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 01:54:15 No.1341628 Report

Quoted By: >>1341633

>>1341612
>Nope. The roads are already financed, otherwise they wouldn't get built and maintained.
So you're not uninformed, you're just ignorant. They really need to start teaching personal finance in American high schools. Read an article from a Libertarian blog.
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2019/4/30/my-city-has-massive-infrastructure-liabilities-so-do-99-of-the-cities-in-america

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 01:56:58 No.1341633 Report

Quoted By: >>1341649

>>1341628
Oh, everyone involved in the design, construction, and maintenance of roads must be working for free. Interesting!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 02:11:50 No.1341649 Report

Quoted By: >>1341651

>>1341633
You didn't even make it past the second paragraph... Likely didn't even open the link at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 02:15:47 No.1341651 Report

Quoted By: >>1341659

>>1341649
I can't speak for everywhere of course but the interstate near me just got repaved and all of overpasses are being completely rebuilt. That doesn't get done for free, so obviously it's being funded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 02:23:11 No.1341659 Report

Quoted By: >>1341661

>>1341651
That's like saying the ice caps aren't melting because I have fresh ice cubes in my freezer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 04 Jun 2019 02:26:25 No.1341661 Report

Quoted By:

>>1341659
Highways are clearly being funded adequately. If they weren't, you wouldn't be able to drive on them by now.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Congestion Pricing