4 ms·

In New York, less than half of the cost of roads is borne by drivers via the gas tax. In California, drivers pay less than a quarter of the cost. There are no

In New York, less than half of the cost of roads is borne by drivers via the gas tax. In California, drivers pay less than a quarter of the cost. There are no states in the US where gas taxes cover more than 60% of the cost of roads. This is another form of racism/classism. White people have no problem paying for white people transport (cars!). They object to "city" transport which often carries poor and other-colored people.

coredog64 10y ago
If only there was a way to charge for the privilege of driving on the road. Maybe we could stamp out steel plates to affix to vehicles. Those plates could signify that the owner has paid an annual fee for using the road. As I understand it, cars can be fairly expensive. Maybe some kind of tax on the sale of each one could bring in a few bucks.
pyridine 10y ago
So it's racist to drive now?
- ocb 10y ago
  The comment you're replying to did say "classist" as well. I'm sure you're aware of the US's unequal spread of wealth among different racial groups in its population... You are not personally being called racist. People in the US are generally completely unaware of how subsidized their drive-everywhere, segregated-zoning lifestyles are. Land use choices have very real effects and in the vast majority of the US, you HAVE to own a car or you are completely handicapped in terms of access to jobs and services. Public transit infrastructure proposals in the US are routinely downscaled/defeated because a lot of people think that anything other than building roads = money pit subsidies for the dumb uneducated poor people who live in the city. If you don't agree with the egalitarian side of the argument for making cars less necessary to living in America, you should at least be able to see the hypocrisy of the general attitude towards transit given the fact that gas taxes and other car-related usage fees that fund roads don't come anywhere near making the road network "pay for itself". I suspect that as Millennials age and gain political power, given their left-leaning politics and greater preference for urban living, this situation will change to look more like Canada does now, which is similarly car-dependent but also generally has cities with more reasonable public transit options.
graycat 10y ago
Here at HN, your point could convince a lot of people if you gave some solid references to original sources for your statements about costs and how they are covered. I'm in NYS and have been for 20+ years, and what I've seen in the last time or two I renewed the license on my car was that I paid a surtax to support the commuter trains, the MTA. So, it looks like the car owners are supporting the trains whether they use the trains or not. Only once did I ever get on one of those trains. And I'm proud to say that I've never been on a NYC subway. E.g., I live on a nice street in the suburbs. There is maintenance on the streets and snow plowing in the winters. My impression is that my local town is paying for that out of real estate taxes -- if so, then that's fair since everyone in the suburbs needs the streets, even if they shop at Amazon and get deliveries via FedEx or some such. But passenger trains? People in the suburbs don't need passenger trains so much, and even if they do they still need the local streets to go between the trains and the doors. So, again, using real estate taxes to pay for the local streets is fair enough. I don't have good data on what the costs are for Federal highways, bridges, trains, capex, opex, and how those costs are being covered, but my impression is that the gas taxes and tolls pay for what the cars and trucks use and that in the US it's just hopeless for the train tickets to pay for what the trains cost -- but again that's just my impression. Since I'm not in either the car or train business, I haven't gotten the data. But if you are for trains and want to convince people, then having the data on costs and how they are being covered would help, really, is crucial. Uh, writing this, it occurs to me that to be fair the Federal gas taxes should need to cover only the Federally supported highways and bridges, e.g., the Interstate highways. In that case, sure, local real estate taxes and not Federal gas taxes may be the main source of funding for local streets.
- jschwartzi 10y ago
  If you consider that passenger trains remove other people from the road, drivers actually do benefit from their construction. It's not necessary for the train to serve you personally for it to be beneficial. It just has to remove enough people from the road that driving is easier for you.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  Why is never having ridden the subway a point of pride.

coredog64 10y ago

If only there was a way to charge for the privilege of driving on the road. Maybe we could stamp out steel plates to affix to vehicles. Those plates could signify that the owner has paid an annual fee for using the road. As I understand it, cars can be fairly expensive. Maybe some kind of tax on the sale of each one could bring in a few bucks.

pyridine 10y ago

So it's racist to drive now?

ocb 10y ago
The comment you're replying to did say "classist" as well. I'm sure you're aware of the US's unequal spread of wealth among different racial groups in its population... You are not personally being called racist. People in the US are generally completely unaware of how subsidized their drive-everywhere, segregated-zoning lifestyles are. Land use choices have very real effects and in the vast majority of the US, you HAVE to own a car or you are completely handicapped in terms of access to jobs and services. Public transit infrastructure proposals in the US are routinely downscaled/defeated because a lot of people think that anything other than building roads = money pit subsidies for the dumb uneducated poor people who live in the city. If you don't agree with the egalitarian side of the argument for making cars less necessary to living in America, you should at least be able to see the hypocrisy of the general attitude towards transit given the fact that gas taxes and other car-related usage fees that fund roads don't come anywhere near making the road network "pay for itself". I suspect that as Millennials age and gain political power, given their left-leaning politics and greater preference for urban living, this situation will change to look more like Canada does now, which is similarly car-dependent but also generally has cities with more reasonable public transit options.

graycat 10y ago

Here at HN, your point could convince a lot of people if you gave some solid references to original sources for your statements about costs and how they are covered. I'm in NYS and have been for 20+ years, and what I've seen in the last time or two I renewed the license on my car was that I paid a surtax to support the commuter trains, the MTA. So, it looks like the car owners are supporting the trains whether they use the trains or not. Only once did I ever get on one of those trains. And I'm proud to say that I've never been on a NYC subway. E.g., I live on a nice street in the suburbs. There is maintenance on the streets and snow plowing in the winters. My impression is that my local town is paying for that out of real estate taxes -- if so, then that's fair since everyone in the suburbs needs the streets, even if they shop at Amazon and get deliveries via FedEx or some such. But passenger trains? People in the suburbs don't need passenger trains so much, and even if they do they still need the local streets to go between the trains and the doors. So, again, using real estate taxes to pay for the local streets is fair enough. I don't have good data on what the costs are for Federal highways, bridges, trains, capex, opex, and how those costs are being covered, but my impression is that the gas taxes and tolls pay for what the cars and trucks use and that in the US it's just hopeless for the train tickets to pay for what the trains cost -- but again that's just my impression. Since I'm not in either the car or train business, I haven't gotten the data. But if you are for trains and want to convince people, then having the data on costs and how they are being covered would help, really, is crucial. Uh, writing this, it occurs to me that to be fair the Federal gas taxes should need to cover only the Federally supported highways and bridges, e.g., the Interstate highways. In that case, sure, local real estate taxes and not Federal gas taxes may be the main source of funding for local streets.

jschwartzi 10y ago
If you consider that passenger trains remove other people from the road, drivers actually do benefit from their construction. It's not necessary for the train to serve you personally for it to be beneficial. It just has to remove enough people from the road that driving is easier for you.
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
Why is never having ridden the subway a point of pride.