(1) it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to do that, and be of pretty much no use to the _vast_ majority of tax payers. Essentially it would be an enor

(1) it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to do that, and be of pretty much no use to the _vast_ majority of tax payers. Essentially it would be an enormous cost that would primarily be shouldered by people for whom it had no value. (2) all the things that "FSD" vehicles need are things that degrade quickly to the point where they don't work for said "FSD", so the highway maintenance costs would skyrocket (3) Even if you were to say the costs of 1&2 were reasonable, that money has to come from somewhere, and what that will essentially mean is that the already underfunded infrastructure will have even less funding for things that are the also already underfunded freeway things, so your normal streets end up in even worse condition, and based on existing spending the brunt of _that_ cost will be born by low income people. The cost for low income being exacerbated by their presumably cheaper and poorer condition cars taking more damage from poorly maintained roads, and so increasing their direct maintenance costs. (4) Fundamentally single car travel is an inefficient way to move people around, it simply does not scale as well as good public transport, and always will be: the amount of people a road system can transport is directly proportional to the area of the road that each person takes up, and cars are just not efficient. The average car is 8m^2 and in commute traffic the vast majority of them are single occupant, the average bus is ~30m^2. If we were extremely optimistic and assume an average of 2 people per car you have 4m^2/person vs 1m^2/person in a bus. This is excluding following distances, which if we were to include (say) 2m of following distance you get a conservative 3.5-4m^2 of additional wasted space so lets just say your total for a car is maybe 5m^2 per person. I think :D