December 11, 2006

YEAH, BUT THAT'S MY FREE LUNCH:

Free roads are anything but free (Edward L. Glaeser, December 11, 2006, Boston Globe)

Historically, we've spent billions on roads and provided them for free. This approach has given us endless traffic jams, because as any former Soviet commissar can tell you, if prices are too low, endless queues follow. Our free roads end up being anything but free, as massive congestion causes us to pay with time instead of cash.

Tolls should be used to charge people for the congestion they create. [...]

Whatever the benefits, implementing a London-system in the Bay State would be daunting; adding tollbooths would be expensive and unpopular. But we can make two simple improvements to toll policy, which make a lot more sense than ending tolls on the Western Turnpike.

First, we should acknowledge that, because congestion changes from hour to hour, the social cost of driving varies over the day. Time-sensitive tolls can help move drivers from commuting during peak hours to less congested periods. We could double tolls during peak hours and cut them to zero during off-peak hours. Alternatively, the toll could rise slowly from 6 a.m. to 8 a.m. and then decline as traffic eases off. Since trucks use up the most space, tolls should rise particularly steeply for trucks driving during rush hour.

Second, we should recognize that the administrative costs for cash payments are about three times higher than the same costs for payments made with fast lane devices. Since people who use fast lanes save the system money, their tolls should be reduced. Tolls on those who pay cash should be substantially increased, perhaps even doubled. Already, some tolls are lower for fast lane users, but this effort needs to be expanded. Alternatively, higher tolls on cash-paying drivers can be used to make transponders free.


it arguably makes some sense to allow trucks to deliver goods--there's no reason to accommodate commuters who just don't want to use public transportation.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 11, 2006 8:19 AM
Comments

What a great plan! Another "can't miss" proposition. Lets do this: we'll combine it simultaneously with METRIC WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

Posted by: Lou Gots at December 11, 2006 8:33 AM

Ah Lou. The voice of reason. You are a national treasure.

Posted by: erp at December 11, 2006 8:56 AM

Hardly a coincidence that highway signs are the only place in America you find kilometers.

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 9:07 AM

That's because roads are considered fair game for social engineers both Left and Right, as demonstrated by this site.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at December 11, 2006 9:31 AM

"Free" roads? What the heck is my gas tax money going for then?

Posted by: Steve White at December 11, 2006 10:51 AM

What public transportation? Do you mean the bus that stops every 20 minutes at a stop that is a 20 minute walk (for six months in 100 degree heat) from my house? Oh and the bus that takes two hours to make the 45 minute trip downtown?

Posted by: Brandon at December 11, 2006 11:26 AM

Just that 40 minutes of walking would end the obesity problem.

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 11:32 AM

You've got to be pretty far up your own fundament to object to public roads as locii of social engineering.

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 11:35 AM

No more so that a person who thinks that a higher gas tax will "end the obesity problem".

A sure sign of the social engineer (or a medical quack, they're closely related) is that a simple solution to a particular problem quickly becomes a cureall for everything and for everybody.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at December 11, 2006 12:02 PM

"Second, we should recognize that the administrative costs for cash payments are about three times higher than the same costs for payments made with fast lane devices. Since people who use fast lanes save the system money, their tolls should be reduced. Tolls on those who pay cash should be substantially increased, perhaps even doubled."

Ah yes, the attitude behind monthly bus passes. Which most cash-strapped poor people for whom bus transit is meant cannot get, as any trip down Denver's East Colfax Ave. can show you.

Somewhere in the bowels of Harvard, there are position papers that frown on such subsidizing of the lower/middle classes by the cash-economy poor. Not that OJ or Edward Glaeser would notice.

Posted by: Brad S at December 11, 2006 12:22 PM

If you're not using an EasyPass transponder or haven't recently driven during the Boston rush hour, you may be at a disadvantage in considering the proposals made in the article. The "hidden hand" lives on.

Posted by: Genecis at December 11, 2006 12:23 PM

OJ,
It's 45 minutes by car. Generally, walking 15 miles takes 4 hours.

Posted by: Brandon at December 11, 2006 1:08 PM

"20 minute walk "

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 3:15 PM

You'll just have to get one to drive there.

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 3:22 PM

So speaks out Betters, who think that they should dictate how their Lessers should arrange their lives.

OJ, tell you what. Come out to my house in Algonquin, Illinois, in February and commute to my job-site in Schaumburg. It's only 12 miles, a straight shot down Rt 62. Any way you want except private automobile. Walk, ride a bike, wait for a bus, whatever. After you recover from the frostbite and the toe amputations, wait a few months and do the commute in August. Don't forget to take plenty of water and salt tablets.

Oh, sure, you say---just get IDOT to run a bus line. Well, the bus commute should not take much more than 2-3 hours, vs. my 35 minutes by car during rush hour. 'course, that bus line will take care of the few hundred of us who live northwest of Schaumburg, but you'd also need lots of other lines, to handle the other 19,000 employees who live at all the other compass points.

Posted by: ray at December 11, 2006 3:32 PM

Sorry. I misunderstood you.

Posted by: Brandon at December 11, 2006 3:38 PM

ray;

Only the janitor needs to be on-site.

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 5:50 PM

OJ, nice to know that you know how our company should be run, without even knowing what it is or what we do.

You know, the founders had the idea of letting each state experiment on its own. How about let's start off with New Hampshire? You guys ban cars and force everybody to use buses and trains. In a few years, tell us how it all worked out.

Posted by: ray at December 11, 2006 9:13 PM

So why get your panties in a knot over MA or London?

Posted by: oj at December 11, 2006 9:27 PM
« IF HE'S THE ONE BLASTING HOW COME HE'S THE ONE FLEEING THE BUILDING?: | Main | JUST NOT IN THE THIRD WORLD: »