What America's highways truly need: More highway traffic tolls

[turbinetree]

Virginia’s recent introduction of high-occupancy tolls (HOT) on Interstate 66 near Washington, D.C., has angered some commuters and politicians. But since gridlock frustrates millions of commuters every day, the introduction of flexible road pricing will help solve this national problem.

Commuters are delayed in traffic an average 63 hours per year in the 15 largest urban areas of the United States. Washington, D.C., is the worst among these, averaging 82 hours. Even in smaller metro areas, with populations under 500,000, commuters are delayed an average 30 hours per year.

Any economist knows that congestion, like long lines, signals a shortage at the legal price. The price for using most roads is zero. Drivers all pay the same gas and excise taxes whether they use a busy highway or an empty stretch of country road, whether they drive at rush hour or late at night. We have a shortage of road space because people do not pay to use roads based on scarcity of space relative to demand.

http://thehill.com/opinion/international/364889-what-americas-highways-truly-need-more-highway-traffic-tolls


In my opinion why can't the taxpayers have workers from the highway department charging this fee and maintaining the road

1) The road is already paid for by the taxpayer
2) Why give this source of income to a third party entity taking a piece of the proverbial pie to charge the taxpayers to maintain the already made system, costs are lower when it is done in house
3) This form of semi-privatization of taking the funds from the taxpayer is wrong, the state can hire human beings to process this money and keep it in house and work the toll road and maintain it, the taxpayers of the already made highway are now in essence paying two bills for one road, it is like a hidden tax, the lost operating costs fee may look good, because it is off the state books, but the toll goes up

[hueymahl]

1. There are a lot of sound economic arguments for tolls

And many liberal and conservative arguments (e.g., tolls decrease trips and encourage mass and alternative transport). Tough to take away "free" from people used to it.

Negatives, of course, are if you don't provide adequate alternative transport or price support for the poor, it becomes just another barrier to their success. They currently trade their personal time for a "free" commute and lower costs of living in the suburbs and exburbs. If they can't afford to get to a job because of the tolls, that can be yet another hardship.

[turbinetree]

2. I agree

with your opinion.

I am a big proponent of elevated train service, along the roads, this country has not looked at models being used in Japan for instance to see, how trains from one city to another or more efficient and by using the bus service to get to those critical points has enabled that country to revolutionize travel, you can live in Osaka, and ride a train to Tokyo.

France and Germany also use that method, this country use of the axiom of freedom by having a car and the individuality of that model is a failure in many ways, just for the fact of space on the road to occupy that moving space and other environmental issues.

I do not think that giving it to a private firm lowers the cost for the poor, it just will not happen.

In my opinion this country needs a major remodel of the highway infrastructure system or a total revamp of the total transportation system, but presently we have a congress, that does not and will not address this issue, unless it can be privatized.

[Orsino]

3. Regressive taxation stinks.

Now, include aid to people who need roads but can't afford tolls, and we can talk.

[msongs]

4. the purpose of tolls is to make $$ for the people charging them. all else is just justification nt