4 ms·

>All I'm saying is that we have to be careful with subsidies. Don't forget the subsidies on the other side of the equation: As the poster above mentioned, buil

>All I'm saying is that we have to be careful with subsidies. Don't forget the subsidies on the other side of the equation: As the poster above mentioned, building larger roads to handle increased traffic is very expensive.

300bps 13y ago
>Don't forget the subsidies on the other side of the equation: As the poster above mentioned, building larger roads to handle increased traffic is very expensive And the users of those roads pay tens of billions of dollars per year by paying or the Federal Gas Tax on every gallon of gas they buy: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/00gastax.pdf http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/00gastax.pdf They also pay local and state tax that pay for the maintenance of local and state roads. They also pay tolls which make so much money that they pay for roads, bridges and a sizable portion of many state's general funds. Car drivers are more than self-sufficient. Bus riders rely on subsidies or they wouldn't be able to afford bus travel. I'm not passing a value judgement on this, but let's at least acknowledge reality.
- stormbrew 13y ago
  You can't argue that drivers are self-sufficient because they pay taxes and turn around and argue that bus riders aren't because they're tax subsidized. Neither are paying the true cost of their transportation in direct fees.
- SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
  >Car drivers are more than self-sufficient. The state of Colorado just announced that there are some roads that will never be fixed, because there isn't the money in the budget, and at the current rate there will never be (because the higher priority roads that the budget does fix will use up the budget perpetually). I've heard that at least one big city has a "97 year" road fixing rotation, again because the budget isn't there to keep the roads fixed. This is not even close to self-sufficiency for cars. If everyone took a bus there would be a small fraction of necessary road surface and wear-and-tear to repair. The reality is that cars have hidden costs paid by everyone, and that shifting some of those subsidies to public transit saves money.

300bps 13y ago

>Don't forget the subsidies on the other side of the equation: As the poster above mentioned, building larger roads to handle increased traffic is very expensive And the users of those roads pay tens of billions of dollars per year by paying or the Federal Gas Tax on every gallon of gas they buy: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/00gastax.pdf http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/00gastax.pdf They also pay local and state tax that pay for the maintenance of local and state roads. They also pay tolls which make so much money that they pay for roads, bridges and a sizable portion of many state's general funds. Car drivers are more than self-sufficient. Bus riders rely on subsidies or they wouldn't be able to afford bus travel. I'm not passing a value judgement on this, but let's at least acknowledge reality.

stormbrew 13y ago
You can't argue that drivers are self-sufficient because they pay taxes and turn around and argue that bus riders aren't because they're tax subsidized. Neither are paying the true cost of their transportation in direct fees.
SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
>Car drivers are more than self-sufficient. The state of Colorado just announced that there are some roads that will never be fixed, because there isn't the money in the budget, and at the current rate there will never be (because the higher priority roads that the budget does fix will use up the budget perpetually). I've heard that at least one big city has a "97 year" road fixing rotation, again because the budget isn't there to keep the roads fixed. This is not even close to self-sufficiency for cars. If everyone took a bus there would be a small fraction of necessary road surface and wear-and-tear to repair. The reality is that cars have hidden costs paid by everyone, and that shifting some of those subsidies to public transit saves money.