The Automobile Subsidy
in [Drive]
|
From: John S on 14 Nov 2009 22:46 Bolwerk wrote: > John S wrote: >> Larry Sheldon wrote: >>> Matthew Russotto wrote: >>>> In article <7luanvF3ffi5sU1(a)mid.individual.net>, >>>> Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> We need a USENET for roundabouts. >>> >>>> They are. >>> >>>> They are not. They are heavily subsidized by drivers. >>> >>> Circulating arguments meet Charlie on the MTA. >> >> Two new light rail projects are moving forward, one in New Jersey, one >> in Philadelphia. What do they have in common? They will be funded by >> the Delaware River Port Authority. Where does DRPA get its money? >> From road bridge tolls. Soak drivers, subsidize trains. In this >> case, one of the trains will roll on top of the Market St Subway. Why >> even build new routes when you can use bridge toll money to build >> transit systems right on top of existing ones? >> >> For other examples of such subsidies from drivers, look at the >> finances at nearly every transit system in the USA, exhibit A is New >> York City. >> >> http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/20091027_DRPA_opts_for_E__Market_Street_surface_line.html > > > And then look at how state and federal balance of payments almost never > favor those transit-centric areas, at least partly because the > cities/states in question pay more in taxes than they get back in > services. At least part of the reason for the imbalance is to fund > highways in faraway places. Soak transit users, subsidize drivers - > just do it differently, and it's all right. Pointing to a few bridge > tolls and the small minority of the highway trust fund that goes to fund > transit is hardly fair. Fascinating analysis. By the way, the state of Massachusetts just found that throwing 20% of the statewide sales tax to the MBTA transit system just wasn't enough (on top of the property tax levies and general fund levies and massive federal monies), so they just raised the sales tax by 25%. Much or all of the increase is to fund the MBTA.
From: hancock4 on 14 Nov 2009 23:01 On Nov 14, 5:53 pm, gpsman <gps...(a)driversmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps motorists like being employed and do not share your disdain > for the contributions of trucking to the economy on which those jobs > depend. Maybe they don't like waiting for trains at crossings, > especially at switchyards. Maybe they don't like being stuck behind > buses. What about those motorists and pedestrians who are forced to wait behind huge trucks blocking streets as they make turns? What about those motorists who have to pay for the damage trucks do to the highways?
From: hancock4 on 14 Nov 2009 23:05 On Nov 14, 10:42 pm, John S <joh...(a)no.spam> wrote: > hanco...(a)bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > On Nov 11, 9:10 pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) > > wrote: > >>> Except there are many freeways and Interstates in NJ that are not toll > >>> roads. > >> Sure, there's I-295 in the northwest, and I-195 across the center. > >> But a rather large proportion of NJs major highways are toll. > > > A very quick look at a road map of NJ shows: > > > I-80, I-287, I-280, I-78, free segment of GSP > > > NJ 15, NJ 21, NJ 3, NJ 18, NJ 42, NJ 55 > > > Notably, many of these roads carry extremely high volumes of traffic. > > Listing random route numbers is very interesting, but doesn't change the > fact that toll lanes make up a very high percentage of overall freeway > lane miles, relative to other states, which helps explain the points > made a few posts ago. Is it really that high a percentage? Quite a few lane miles are free. Further, the free express roads carry quite a bit of traffic. The AC Expy is a busy road, but I don't think it comes up to the traffic volums carried by I-80. Don't forget there are segments of the GSP that are free.
From: hancock4 on 14 Nov 2009 23:08 On Nov 14, 10:46 pm, John S <joh...(a)no.spam> wrote: > Fascinating analysis. By the way, the state of Massachusetts just found > that throwing 20% of the statewide sales tax to the MBTA transit system > just wasn't enough (on top of the property tax levies and general fund > levies and massive federal monies), so they just raised the sales tax by > 25%. Much or all of the increase is to fund the MBTA. The MBTA gets 20% of all sales taxes collected in Massachusetts, and property tax levies, and 'massive' federal monies? Sure that's accurate? Geez, with all that, how did they pay for the Big Dig?
From: John S on 14 Nov 2009 23:32
hancock4(a)bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > On Nov 14, 10:46 pm, John S <joh...(a)no.spam> wrote: > >> Fascinating analysis. By the way, the state of Massachusetts just found >> that throwing 20% of the statewide sales tax to the MBTA transit system >> just wasn't enough (on top of the property tax levies and general fund >> levies and massive federal monies), so they just raised the sales tax by >> 25%. Much or all of the increase is to fund the MBTA. > > The MBTA gets 20% of all sales taxes collected in Massachusetts, and > property tax levies, and 'massive' federal monies? Sure that's > accurate? No, the MBTA now gets over 30% of state sales tax with the recent statewide tax increase. > Geez, with all that, how did they pay for the Big Dig? What made you think that it was paid off? |