December 12, 2005
BEARING THE COST OF DRIVING:
A Future Free From Gridlock, For a Price: Toll Lane Network Swiftly Taking Form (Steven Ginsberg, December 12, 2005, Washington Post)
Motorists would drive on the Capital Beltway during rush hour at the mind-blowing rate of a mile a minute. Drivers would zip from Fredericksburg to Frederick without hitting a single traffic jam.In this strange, new world, people would run errands whenever they pleased, vacationers would leave town without spending hours in traffic, and express bus service would be launched on the region's major commuter routes.
But these dream scenarios come with a cost: a toll as high as a dollar a mile in heavily traveled areas during peak times. A 56-mile commute between the Fredericksburg area and Washington could cost as much as $30 if a driver chose the traffic-free route, according to one analysis.
These 21st-century traveling possibilities are the result of fast-moving efforts in Virginia and Maryland to build a network of express toll lanes -- roads on which tolls increase when traffic levels rise to manage demand and prevent jams -- that would parallel nearly every major route in the Washington area. The existing routes would remain free -- and packed.
Just privatize the entire road network and business will impose the real costs of driving on drivers. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 12, 2005 7:58 AM
OJ,
This is the first time I've agreed with you on a post regarding automobiles. In fact I couldn't agree more.
The people in those traffic jams are the tax payers who are making this economy work. Why should they pay an exorbitant price to keep on doing it.
Here's far cheaper solution. Build more roads and designate the two or three right lanes for local traffic and the two or three lanes left lanes for those driving through with specially designed exit ramps many miles further apart and which bypass the local exits. Trucks must stay out of the left lane except to pass. Services and rest areas could be provided at internals between the two lanes, so drivers could switch back and forth if they needed to.
We love to drive and have driven all over the US, Canada and Mexico. It has long been my dream to drive to Patagonia, but cranky old bones and the political situation make it look like we won't be doing it in this lifetime.
Maybe next time around.
Posted by: erp at December 12, 2005 3:17 PM"They/We" pay for everything, so might as well be our way.
Posted by: erp at December 12, 2005 5:24 PMdon't drivers already pay for the roads through petrol taxes ?
Posted by: yuke at December 12, 2005 5:29 PMyuke:
OJ wants them to pay for every molecule of rubber that wears from their tires, every atom of carbon that slips out the tailpipe, and every hamburger that the drivers eat while on the Interstate system. He probably even wants to tax them for the volume of urine deposited in rest stops around the country. With the recent mentions of Lennon, perhaps "The Tax Man" is appropriately mentioned here.
Posted by: ratbert at December 12, 2005 10:41 PMNo free lunches.
Posted by: oj at December 12, 2005 10:49 PMOJ is now apparently drifting in to libertarianism, as this is a standard platform for us small-l wackos. Critics should admit that it's better than the standard OJ call for banning automobiles.
P.S. Having recently participated in supporting our existing passenger rail network, I have to say that nothing makes me appreciate cars more than riding on a train.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at December 13, 2005 8:40 AMAOG:
You don't have to ban them. Once folks bear the full cost of them they'll use them less.
Posted by: oj at December 13, 2005 9:23 AMWe're wealthy. We should and will continue to subsidize automotive costs.
Posted by: jefferson park at December 13, 2005 3:22 PMBecause we like to drive our SUVs on gov't subsidized roads.
Oh, and trains are vile.
Posted by: jefferson park at December 13, 2005 9:15 PMBut we don't like being beholden to sheiks, Hugo Chavez, etc., nor letting foreigners lap us in technology, nor paying income taxes, nor time wasted in traffic, nor the ugliness of the highways themselves, etc..
Posted by: oj at December 13, 2005 10:12 PMThe first three are a reasonable trade off for be able to drive your vehicle wherever you want whenever you want. The last two items must be time zone specific -- very little traffic here and our highways aren't ugly at all.
Posted by: jefferson park at December 14, 2005 12:31 PM