5 ms·
Which, last time I checked, still does not come close to paying for the roads and road-maintenance outside of dense urban areas. And obviously pales in comparis
by Arcuru 3y ago
Which, last time I checked, still does not come close to paying for the roads and road-maintenance outside of dense urban areas. And obviously pales in comparison to the value of the land taken up by the car (and the supporting road infrastructure) in dense urban areas.
- shrubble 3y agoShow your math, as I did... remember that the typical 18-wheeler easily pays over $25k/year in fuel taxes as well.
- selectodude 3y agoDamage to roads scales by weight to the 4th power. So a normal 2000lb car does .00004 percent as much damage as an 18 wheeler.
- ultrarunner 3y agoA 2000lbs car is far below normal. A 2022 Camry weighs 3,340 lbs. SUVS are significantly more. The electric F150 is 8,250 lbs gross (!)
- selectodude 3y agoThat's fair. The electric F150 at 8250lbs, which is obnoxiously heavy, does .011% as much damage as an 18 wheeler. The point is the same, an 18 wheeler does >99.9 percent of all the damage on the roads. Trucks absolutely do not come anywhere even remotely close to paying for the damage they create. The entire transportation system in the US is a trillion dollar subsidy to the trucking industry. That being said, I'm fine with that. I also don't want tomatoes to cost $11.
- ultrarunner 3y agoAgreed— I think a lot of people's perceptions of 1) the size of vehicles, and 2) the sheer amount of resources to them are woefully uncalibrated.
- yamtaddle 3y agoLast I looked into this, those 18-wheelers are among the worst as far as not paying for the damage their vehicles do, despite what they do pay. They do a lot of damage. We effectively provide a huge subsidy to trucking.