Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Juniperhouse"] As a typical example, in 2004 the US governments--federal, state, and local, combined--spent about $148 billion on highways.  The same boides only collected $76 billion in fuel taxes, and another 6.5 billion in tolls.  The difference of $44 billion, spread over 175 billion gallons of motor fuel consumed that year, works out to a subsidy of 37 cents per gallon.  This is only based on what was spent; it doesn't include deferred maintenance, 'wimpy engineering' (a la Don Phillips), or poor system design.  I estimate these costs to bring the underpricing of the road system to about $1.00 per gallon of fuel consumed, and we haven't even started on external costs such as air pollution, unrecovered accident costs, and an oil war. [/quote] Clearly, fuel taxes do not cover the total cost of driving.  Accordingly, motorists don't know how much it really costs them.  If they did they would probably modify their behavior, i.e. drive more fuel efficient vehicles, use public transport, etc. Your numbers are reasonably accurate.  For example, in 2007 $39.8 billion was transferred from the General Fund to the Highway Trust Fund, of which approximately $9 billion was transferred to the Mass Transit Administration.  But on a per mile basis the federal subsidy received by motorists was approximately .0138 cents per mile compared to an average of 24.45 cents per mile for Amtrak's passengers.  The numbers were even worse for commuter and light rail.  The key is cost per mile, which is an indictor of functionality, as opposed to gross figures, which are useless for comparsion purposes. In Texas, where I live, the state fuel taxes pay for most of the state highway system, although in a roundabout way.  The country roads and 90 per cent of the cost of most city streets are paid for with property taxes.  Over the past decade the state has turned increasingly to toll roads because the gasoline tax has not been sufficient to cover the cost of building the highways that the state needs.  According to the late Texas Transportation Commissioner, Texas would have to increase the gasoline tax to $1.40 per gallon to meet Texas' road needs without resorting to toll roads.  This translates into 6.2 cents per mile for a typical personal vehicle in Texas.  When added to the federal gasoline tax, plus the federal subsidy, the fuel tax for the feds and state would be 7.0338 cents per mile.  Assuming that the per mile cost of county roads and city streets doubles the per mile cost, the total would be 14.0676 per mile, which is considerably below the per mile subsidy for Amtrak.  Translated back to gallons, this would result in a tax of approximately $3.17 per gallon.  Adding it to the current price of a gallon of gasoline in Texas would bring the total to approximately $4.87 cents, which is well short of $6 to $8 per gallon.  Many supporters of expanded rail (intercity, commuter, and light), including yours truly, argue that these modes of transport would be more viable if the true cost of gasoline was passed on to motorists in the price of fuel at the pump.  However, the argument misses two important points. When gasoline gets too high, the manufactures will rush to alternative fuel vehicles and the cost of petroleum will become less important.  We are seeing the makings of that move now.  The other point is more subjective, but very import to consider.  The average American, except for those in a few of the country's largest cities, will not give up their car to sit on a croweded train, next to a person who bathes once a week, jabbering on a cell phone and munching on a twinkie.  It is simply not going to happen.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag