This is a common carbrain argument
“I already pay the gas tax”
The problem is that it’s false.
In a recent study, researchers Stefan Gössling, Jessica Kees, and Todd Litman calculated the social costs of driving. They found that the social cost is about 30-40% higher than what car owners are actually paying
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921003943?via=ihub
That cost is paid by non-drivers.
[Citation Needed]
That’s such an obviously false claim, i only need to front window to see how laughable, but it’s also ahistorical, too.
Road maintenance is for freight.
The roads are built for the heaviest users and besides the natural frost damage, the only reason why roads wear down is heavy traffic. Roads that are only used by personal vehicles can last a lifetime while the larger cargo routes needs repair constantly and complete overhauls every 5 years or so. That’s where the costs of road maintenance comes from.
We can bitch and moan about cars and traffic all day for all kinds of reasons, but when the question is about who should pay the insane price of road maintenance, the arrow points in one direction: Cargo.
Aye, that is the historical progression: We built roads and highways for automobiles, and the logistics companies took advantage of the subsidized “free” ways. We should absolutely make them pay for what they use. It may seem like this system is “good for the economy,” but this kind of subsidy distorts the supply/demand equilibrium and creates deadweight loss. Furthermore, the effect it’s had on logistics favors just-in-time inventory systems, distant manufacturers, and large, centralized distribution centers. Wal-Mart and Amazon are one visible result.
Perhaps if we priced the cost of transport into the price of goods, it would be better for most people, as manufacturing and distribution (with the associated jobs) moved back closer to the consumers?
Yeah, also if road transport cost the actual price, more goods would be transported by rail and water, which is much better for the environment.
“We can’t afford rails, large infrastructure bla.bla.” Ah… Okay … but how then can we afford to replace the current roads every 5 years? It’s like everyone just take roads from granted because it’s a socialized cost.
Did they mean train tracks?
I remember driving out West in Arizona and New Mexico, the Interstate paralleling the train tracks. There were at best a handful of trucks on the road, while I’d see these mile-long trains out of the ports of LA or Long Beach every half hour, or less.
I also walked on a section of the original Route 66 that they’ve preserved in Flagstaff. The U.S. numbered highway system was conceived and built for private cars. As was the Interstate Highway System.
IME, “roads are for freight” is one of those things people just say because it sounds good, and they want it to be true at some level, even though it’s so obviously false if you just look around. (I was out there to buy a boat, and buying a tow vehicle and driving it myself was much cheaper than any LTL freight service.)
Because the rail companies have taken a short -term approach of eliminating competition and min-maxing current profits instead of investing in infrastructure, the rail isn’t really competing with road freight
Rail freight displaces what is can carry, and the rest is done by road. The mile long train cars are moving a lot of goods, but if you parked by the side of the highway and counted semi trucks you’d see tons of them
Technically, the highway system was designed for military response and to stimulate the economy… But if you look at what it’s used for? It’s totally fair to say it’s to transport goods