2 ms·
the retort comes up because charging egregiously to use public roads that they're all paying for with their tax money makes no sense.
by endisneigh 4y ago
the retort comes up because charging egregiously to use public roads that they're all paying for with their tax money makes no sense.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoThe idea that a single person is paying a specific part of infrastructure makes no sense. My taxes do not pay for a specific road, they pay for the operations for society as a whole. Sometimes, that would mean my taxes are going to pay for something which hurts me in the short term, if I want to get to a future where individual cars are not used as much and walking/bicycling/public transit are possible.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> the retort comes up because charging egregiously to use public roads that they're all paying for with their tax money makes no sense. So, stop paying for the roads with tax money. Fully internalize the costs with user fees, directing tax spending elsewhere, and the argument about fairness of tax spending goes away. In fact, raise the user fees high enough that the road users are subsidizing other public projects, specifically mass transit, as well as paying the full cost of the roads.