A Modest Proposal
No!...Not That One
........................................................................................................................................................................
First some background.
The United States Department of Transportation's budget request for 2017 is $98.1 billion.
Now pick a state...for example...say...Texas.
The Texas Department of Transportation plans to spend 70$ Billion.
Now pick a county...let's say Travis County in Texas.
Travis county plans to spend over $19 million.
Now pick a city...how about Austin?
Austin Texas plans to spend..... a bunch...
(note...these numbers are NOT all that easy to come by...wonder why?)
So...add it all up and it comes to a BUNCHATON(technical term) of money.
So...how much are the roads worth?
Once again...it requires some digging...not worth my time to be TOO precise...in 2012 the US transportation assets were guesstimated (face it..the gubment has no clue where they spend all of that money..or what they buy is worth) to be over $7 TRILLION.
Ok..that's a pretty big chunk of change..
Wonder how much of it is spent on 'administrative costs'? THAT number is well hidden..when I did a search for "Government Administrative Costs"...i got buried in gobbley gook....so apparently they don't want us to know what they spend.
I'd hazard a guess that it's a BUNCH...
All of which is unnecessary..
VE HAF ZE Technology to get rid of the whole lot...save ALL of that tax money (for just the combined departments dealing with roads) and get BETTER roads while paying a bunchaton (technical term) less.
Here's how.
ALL over the country..there are toll roads, privately owned. The technology for collecting tolls has become VERY sophisticated.
In texas we have what is called a TxTag...it's a small electronic gizmo that sets on your dash (or clips to your sunvisor...or whatever). The driver of the vehicle does NOT even have to stop...(no toll booths)...just whiz on by...and at the end of the month he receives a bill in the mail.
Other states have something very much similar.
But WAIT..there's more.
I'm a retired trucker....ALL truck pay 'by the mile'..some states charge more..some charge less...that's in addittion to all of the federal taxes and 'road usage' taxes...it's a bunchaton (techical term) of money. The Feds, and the states TRACK big trucks electronically. Most truck now have something called "qaualcom'..or something similar...at any given time...big brother knows where they are.
That's happening NOW. It has been for some years.
You think you're exempt because you don't drive a truck? Guess again. You have a cell phone right? How do you think the cell phone service provider knows where you are in order to route your calls? (I'll leave that as an exercise for the student)
So you see..the technology is already in place...nothing new need be added...it just needs to be used in a slightly different way.
Now imagine this...suppose you get in your car. Turn on the ignition...and the car connects to the local 'toll road owner'...when you back out of your driveway you begin to get charged. Some roads...let's say the residential streets with very low speed limits and weight limits (already in place) ..charge less. Some roads...let's say the superhighway with very HIGH speed limits and weight limits (already in place) charge MORE.
When you drive out of one 'toll road provider area'..your car is 'handed off' to the one into which you enter (just like cellphones do now)...the price per mile is adjusted...at the end of the billing period...you get a bill.
The advantages are...no fuel tax...which currently runs a BUNCHATON (technical term) of money.
Guberments are woefully ineffecient at anything/everything they do. So much so that they don't want us to know just HOW bad (see above)...Toll road owners , just like cell phone service providers...have an incentive to do a good job. If they do a poor job..they go broke. If you feel that 'road A' is charging too much, or is not kept in good repair....then alter your route to take 'road B."
But wait..there's MORE.
since the toll road owners ALREADY know how fast you are going...why do we need speed cops? Let's say that if you are going ten mph over the speed limit...(everyone does) you get charged a premium..your cost per mile goes UP. At the end of the billing cycle you pay.
if you go faster...a great many people do...the price goes up..and up..and WAAAAAY the hell up...depending on the speed.
No cops..no courts...no 'administrative costs'...no muss no fuss.
But WAIT..there's MORE..
Recall that $7Trillion (much more) value of the roads?
The Feds have no business owning that...nor do the States , the Counties or the Cities...put it all up for auction to private enterprise...The Feds would then get a BUNCHATON (technical term) of money ...way..way.. WAAAAAY more than $7 Trillionthat could be spent on the deficit and lower taxes...Ditto the States, the Counties and the Cities...
But WAIT..there's more..
Trucks pay MORE ...so the toll operators would want more TRUCKS and less cars...so what to do?
Business is 'the art of the deal'..that's what they do. Unlike guberments they're VERY good at it.
Ever hear of Elon Musk...and his hyperloop?
well those medians between divided highways are just sitting there.
The art of the deal.
The owners of the toll road 'make a deal' with a hyperloop contractor to put in hyperloops to take...cars...
Imagine something like this.
We don't NEED no STEEKING FREEWAYS... leave it to the TRUCKS.
that can be done NOW.
It's a WIN/win/win/win/win....
everyone benifits...
except for guberment...it'll get smaller...
A lot of what you are saying sounds nice and dandy and I see that you've addressed some of the possible issues with a system like that. But you realize that in many places what you described would lead to local monopolies.
For instance, how many roads does your driveway connect to? I guess it's just one. What do you do if the owner of that road just spends zip on maintenance and just banks on the tolls. What about the roads less traveled? Roads that are not making money for their owners would be left into disrepair.
It seems to me that a fully privatized system leaves the door open to two main problems. The first problem is how do you make smaller roads profitable enough for them to be kept in good condition and how do you stop local monopolies from happening. With roads you don't always have an unlimited number of possibilities and it's quite possible the all your options could be owned by the same bad road-keeper that just collects tolls and spends nothing on upkeep. Or all the roads you have access to might have their prices jacked up.
Btw the "qualcom" thing in the trucks you mentioned probably makes Qualcomm that much richer, where is the free market competition with those gizmos?
Do you realize that the hyperloop is a concept that is starting to seem unfeazble for now because of prohibitively high costs. And we are talking about prohibitively high costs for an enerprenuer that is sending rockets into space while disrupting the automotive industry. So the art of the deal might be a lot of wishful thinking as well.
Additionally, the concept that businesses left to their own means always provide the consumer with the cheapest possible service is not realistic. You mentioned cell phones for instance. The corporations providing you will cell phone service is charging you WAY more than what providing you with the service actually costs. Cell phone technology is actually extremely cheap and they could easily provide you with the services you are getting right now at a fraction of the cost you are paying. But they aren't since they want to be making the biggest profits possible and they are keeping their margins huge. Same goes for internet providers. Broadband internet access can be provided with a profit at the $5 mark and you can look at other countries to verify that. I pay just a bit more than that for an internet connection that will probably blow your mind. Yet no provider in the US is charging anywhere near to that price and the consumers are literally getting raped on those services. How do you stop that from happening with roads? Government regulation maybe?
Shirley you know that a monopoly is impossible in a free market? They can only exist with the help of government. And no...I'm retired.. I don't GO anywhere. But my wife works and she has the choice of...oh...maybe forty different routes to chose from.
But wait...you totally ignored what I said about 'the art of the deal' and 'new technology'....I'm expecting a. autonomous air taxi's....b. Virtual Reality c. hyper-loops...to make massive inroads (pardon the pun) real soon...each of which is in prototype stage right now...
we don't need no steenkin rhoads..!
I surely know monopoly is ABSOLUTELY possible in a free market and I find nothing but wishful thinking to support the opposite, hopefully you'll enlighten me on that. What is the fundamental principal to allow the free market to correct for monopolies because I can't think of any? If there is a limited resource and you control it, that's a monopoly and that's not something that the free market can inhibit.
If a single company owned all of the 40 possible routes your wife could take to go to work, wouldn't that be a localized monopoly? How is that impossible? It's absolutely and undisputedly within the realm of possibility at least in my book.
Why do you think I "ignored" your art of the deal points. I see them all as wishful thinking and that's what I told you supporting it with additional info. It seems that you were the one to ignore my comments and points on this, not me. Aircars are even more of that as they are even less attainable right now as much as they might be "in the works".
You also ignored my final paragraph and my questions there.
P.S.: If we don't need roads, why do we need to perfect them? ;)
study the link I sent you regarding logical fallacies.....pay particular attention to 'personal incredulity'.
regarding monopoly...give me a few examples of such that existed without government help.
oh..that's right....the GOVERNMENT is a monopoly.
You made the claim, the burden is on you to provide arguments to prove that something we have seen occur many times (monopoly) cannot exist under some specific conditions (the free market). Which logical fallacy is it when you try to shift the burden of proof here. If it's something so basic, it should be very easy to defend or explain, yet you haven't done so.
Look, Everitt, it's obvious many of the things we are discussing depend on interpretation, that's why I'm using language that show that I'm talking about my opinion. Are there facts on the matter? Maybe, but you seem to be ignoring them like the fact that the hyperloop project is currently on hold and it's fiasability remains questionable for the time being.
certainly.
cable TV...a monopoly...the price goes UP..BECAUSE it is protected by the US government..
Amazon...Walmart...etc..the price goes DOWN...because of competetion...they are NOT protected by anyone...anyone can start selling 'stuff' on the internet...(does ebay ring any bells?)...but Amazon offers the LOWEST prices...how is that bad? If Amazon (or Walmart or HEB ...a big grocery store) raise their prices...well Supply and Demand is just sitting there...waiting to eat them alive.
Say...what country are you from anyway?
Just like to know...you seem very free about criticizing MY country and MY state...I'd kinda like to know where you are coming from? How's that GNP of yours by the way?
I really don't think you answered my questions. Looks like you are the one to ignore inconvenient stuff. What makes a monopoly IMPOSSIBLE with a free market especially for resources where the supply can be limited and controlled. Please spell it out.
I'm criticizing the country that's being heavily referenced in the course of the conversation and OF COURSE I'm absolutely free about criticizing any country, all of us should be, shouldn't we? I'm sorry you are taking it personally and I do apologize that you felt insulted. I'm just being honest about what my views are and a main reason for me to participate in a conversion like that is for them to be questioned by somebody with a different perspective.
I would rather not share my location right now, but this doesn't mean I have a problem with somebody criticizing it, quite the contrary - outsiders are usually closer to being impartial on things like that. Additionally, I actually criticize my own country and government more than the US, it was just going to be irrelevant to the particular conversation. I'm also quite free about admitting that my own country is being governed in a worse way than the US both in the long and in the short term.
Does any of that have any bearing on my points? Of course not.
I would rather not share my location right now,
gotcha
You said you were a high school teacher I believe?
Here's something you might enjoy. I particularly like
You attacked your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.
Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone's case without actually having to engage with it.
after all...we all KNOW that the Cato Institute is right wing...how can a right wing organization EVER have anything useful to say...and that chart is compiled from data from the US govrnment..that's not a credibile source....
Did you read the paragraph all the way through? It seems like you didn't.
P.S.: genuinely like the link :)
P.S.S.: the studies of any "scientific" institution with a political leaning should be viewed with particular caution
Plus when the driverless cars/trucks come in operation there will be no more accidenrs, far less ambulance /fire rescue people, less repair shops. Because there will be no drivers the truckies wont be there to do long overtaking manouvers, just 'cause I am a couple of mph quicker.
I wonder where people are going to get the money to pay their monthly toll bill, they have been put off work by the improvements that they can't afford to use.
you didn't read the article did you? I SAID..that the Costs will COME DOWN...and I presented data to support my hypothesis...
it they can pay it now..they'll have money left over then.
You didn't read the reply, shortly when driverless vehicles go on the road who is going to pay the truckie?. With no more accidents, who will pay the car workshop/panelbeater? There will not be the need for so many medics to attend roadside accidents, because there are none. Who will pay them for not working?
Do you have any monopolies in the US that lower their fees , from past experiance they will ratcher up the costs all the time. How is the unpaid trucker/medic/mechanic going to be able to drive anywhere?
and how will the buggie whip manufacturer make a living? What about the hurly -gurly maker?
progress is a bugger isn't it.
just hope our government keeps paying me my pension.
good luck with that.
It's very likely that toll road owners would strike special deals with driverless truck and logistics companies, so they get their bulk business, but the little guy would still have to pay full price. Special driverless roads might be a good improvement actually and might work well for everybody alleviating traffic on roads where humans are driving.
About the costs, I think Everitt means that you will pay your toll road bill instead of paying some taxes that you are paying now. Of course, I find that quite optimistic and I think the toll road corporations will be very quick to price gauge people so they are squeezing maximum profits out of their investment and with the limited nature of the transit system, it's quite possible that prices will skyrocket and will end up making driving more expensive instead of cheaper.
Put it down to old age, any time a politician says "this is good for you"or similar, I get suspicious, they don't give a dam for the worker, just how can I screw more money out of him?. The theory of saving money sounds good, but tthere will hooks in it somewhere, and they are pointing at the poor worker.
Being suspicious about what politicians say is prudent and quite rational I think. Corruption is a huge problem and this is the hardest thing to deal with even with the most deeply though out system. A lot of things hinge on humans and humans tend to be very easy to corrupt.
We have a saying around here that roughly translates to "If a politician tells you 'Good afternoon', you should look outside and check if the sun is out at all".
you forgot to check the contents of your pocket before he got out of reach as well. lol
lol
Maybe I am getting old. while you have a totally different system in the US to NZ corporates, and monopolies, the world over do not drop their prices.
The original idea was good, but, his opening statement 'The United States Department of Transportation's budget request for 2017 is $98.1 billion.' followed by
'Now pick a state...for example...say...Texas.
The Texas Department of Transportation plans to spend 70$ Billion'.
from my rusty mathematics that I was taught seventy years ago, this would leave $28.1 billion for the other 49 states to scrap over. I don't like Texas's chances.
One of the biggest differences is you guys have toll roads all over the place, whereas we have very few, ours are used to pay for the road/ bridge building costs then removed and the road becomes a freeway I think you call it.
Again because of scale, the thought of each state charging different prices for the same product is strange.
Maybe because they missed out on the spare $28 Bil.
Who builds. maintains, improves your roads? the government? the toll chargers. nobody?
I did like his idea of charging the speeding drivers on their phones GPS syatem.
That has great merit and probably could be done cheaply, if all the states agree on the same deal.
As an ex trucker he must have seen some of the crashes into the median barriers. would you like to be in a car, in the median tube where a B train or bigger ignores the corner and plows straight ahead?
thanks for the info, its alot to take it haha. Its too bad that for the average person toll roads would be completely unappealing just because they already have roads that they indirectly pay more for. I mean why pay for a toll road when you can take a road built by the state if your an average person. But if the market was freed up completely i could see it benefiting regular people alot, as long as monopolies dont take over.
you didn't read the article did you?
(sigh)..perhaps I'll work on a DR;TL version?
didnt see an article but I will check it out. i dont think you meant the "modest proposal" or the hyperloop link. If you meant your article itself, I read the entire thing. I agree with your point of view for the most part, I just know that as an average car driver, given the choice right now, I would drive down a free road instead of a toll road. the only way regular people would take toll roads is if every road is a toll road. if every road was a toll road, and the roads werent all owned by one central company, free market economics would provide massive and rapid improvements on the technology currently being used.
Sorry if I gave the impression of a title browser.
I know Right?