Comments on: A better way to fund roads

By: Danny

Danny — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:06:50 +0000

The only responsible choice in this situation is to start a shift that pulls us away from needing such a high Trust Fund for roads. If Americans drive more than any other country it isn’t likely because they all want to do so. If you could get to the same place equally fast (if not faster because of traffic) and save money doing it on your commutes to work… you would. But the sad fact is, that even in the best cities in America rail and other mass transit is a laughable alternative to driving a car. We have to start somewhere, so a rail system that doesn’t hit a lot of places just yet, I’m all for. When it grows, as long as it maintains good speeds and regular departures, you will see a shift away from the individual propulsion pods we call SUVs.

By: Anubis

Anubis — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 02:28:40 +0000

Automobiles are an inefficient way to transport the masses to work. Look at the energy cost per passenger mile( most people do not car pool). Cars are disposable requiring an endless source of resources(metals, plastic, rubber, silica, carbon fiber…). Traffic jams and stop and go traffic in congested cities flush EPA fuel mileage ratings down the commode.

Hey, I like racing around in my BMWs too. I’m afraid it is time to grow up and make a change.

By: Drewbie

Drewbie — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:17:23 +0000

I think the best thing to do with the money for the high speed rail would be not to spend it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:45:13 +0000

“…a tamper-proof device that would track not only miles and time of day driven but also the route selected.” – KGB dream come true.
“Technologies exist to ensure that detailed information on trips is not sent out to motorists so that privacy is preserved.” – I don’t care if the “detailed information on trips” is sent to me the motorist. But I don’t like the idea of this data being stored hell knows where and disclosed to hell knows whom. As for technological protection of privacy – have you ever heard the word “hacker”? These guys may figure out how to use this data for profit, and then it will be only a matter of time before they access and possibly alter the data.
Also I don’t see this system being equitable. A compact sedan inflicts much less wear and tear on the road than a full size SUV, and that, in turn, less than an 18-wheeler. “One size fits all” mileage tax would unduly punish small vehicle owners. Making the tax multi-tiered will only add complexity to the system.
While gas tax is not perfect, the alternative looks worse from almost any angle. Gas tax also serves the purpose of encouraging drivers to switch to more fuel-efficient vehicles. I would even conditionally support gas tax hike – under the condition of equally sized income tax cut. Why not reward people who work harder and drive more responsibly?