PDA

View Full Version : Only government builds roads, except in New Hampshire



Alyosha
10-19-2013, 11:07 AM
https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1385538_10151974933376489_1689432339_n.jpg



These turnpikes, built by private corporations, sold shares to the general public. The money raised was used to construct these toll roads. The actual term “turnpike” refers to a barrier built across the highway, to be opened only after the required tolls were paid. These tollgates were set up at every mile. A typical charge in the early days of NH, for a horse and rider, was one cent.
In the palmy days of the Turnpike fair,
With its toll-gates, and keepers ever there,
And latter days of the “New Road” to Weare–
Four daily, twelve passenger, six-horse Coaches,
Here, up and down, made pleasant approaches,
Foretold by the notes of the winding horn,
Cheerfully ahead on the breezes borne.
Old Wheat was first, of whom we will speak:
He drove to Boston, and back the same week!
Once, fording the swollen Souhegan, his team
Was carried away and lost in the stream.
A monstrous long nose his phiz did adorn–
They said “he blew it, instead of a horn!”
– from poem, Fragrant Memories, by Edward D. Boylston, from book, “Colonial Amherst” by Emma P. Boylston Locke, 1916


The First New Hampshire Turnpike, was incorporated in 1796, and was completed in 1801. It connected Portsmouth, New Hampshire’s only seaport, with the state capitol, Concord. It ran thirty-six miles from the Piscataqua Bridge in Durham through Lee, Barrington, Nottingham (http://www.nottingham-nh.gov/Pages/NottinghamNH_Historic/townhistory), Northwood, Epsom, Chichester, and Pembroke to the Federal Bridge over the Merrimack River in Concord NH. This ancient turnpike is much of the present Route 4. New Hampshire Historical Marker #181 commemorates this turnpike.


Second New Hampshire Turnpike, was chartered in 1799, and completed in 1801. This was the connecting route between Boston MA and Vermont. Some New Hampshire towns on this route include Unity, Francestown, Mont Vernon, and Amherst, among others. It stretched from Claremont and Cornish NH to to Amherst NH. Teams from a portion of central Vermont began to pass over this route, and instead of the older two-horse coach of Joseph Wheat, which made a weekly trip from Amherst to Boston and back without a change of horses, a line of four-horse coaches began to run tri-weekly from Windsor VT to Boston, returning on alternate days. Large droves of cattle and sheep went to market over the road, and the amount of freight in both directions soon became so large that six-horse teams were employed at all seasons of the year. Ox-teams grew out of use, and when the farmer, ignoring the professional teamster, still continued in winter to take his own produce to market, he used the double “pung” with steel shoes an inch thick. The town of Francestown NH once collected a toll of one cent per mile from traveling coaches and wagons. For nearly thirty years a vast amount of travel from Canada, Vermont and western New Hampshire passed over this road, and great quantities of merchandise were transported over it.




To read more...http://www.cowhampshireblog.com/2006/08/23/new-hampshires-turnpike-history/

Chris Axiomatic figured you would like this.

Captain Obvious
10-19-2013, 11:16 AM
Live free or die, motherfucker!

Chris
10-19-2013, 11:19 AM
Yep, most roads were initially built by the people or private concerns.

In the past it's been argued you need government to build levees. Government does that now, but in the past, not so, they were built by private citizens or companies whose sole interest was to protect their property and business, with everyone in the area sharing in the protection and contributing in higher prices for the goods and services they wanted. It was a good local system. Now government manages it and we all pay. Violation of the general welfare clause.

Chris
10-19-2013, 11:24 AM
Live free or die, motherfucker!

NH has always had that attitude.

It's the home of the Free State Project where libertarians are trying to get 20000 to move there and make it a stronghold for libertarian ideas.

http://i.snag.gy/0x8xw.jpg

KC
10-19-2013, 12:12 PM
Private highways make sense to me. You can charge someone a toll for driving on a highway and most people will pay, since the savings in time and gas alone will make it worth your while. What I don't understand is how the free market could possibly build and maintain roads through a community, or those you take just to get through town. It seems like it would be extremely burdensome and time consuming if you had to pay a toll every time you went to work, to buy groceries, to school, etc. If you didn't pay a toll you'd literally have a free rider problem. I just don't understand how that would work.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:24 PM
Private highways make sense to me. You can charge someone a toll for driving on a highway and most people will pay, since the savings in time and gas alone will make it worth your while. What I don't understand is how the free market could possibly build and maintain roads through a community, or those you take just to get through town. It seems like it would be extremely burdensome and time consuming if you had to pay a toll every time you went to work, to buy groceries, to school, etc. If you didn't pay a toll you'd literally have a free rider problem. I just don't understand how that would work.

How often are the roads in your subdivision maintained? We all chip in at the beginning and then when we need maintenance.

There is a group of roads in VA --not access roads--that a builder proposed, paid for, and maintains in order to get building permits. They city council didn't want him to build the monstrosity because the state didn't want to maintain roads there. It benefited him to see customers go to his properties so he volunteered to supply actual roads, not access roads, but roads.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 12:34 PM
I'm sure some of the investors made money but probably the majority didn't. And the model was unsustainable in the long run. Dinky little tolls can't keep up with the constant maintenance needed on mountain roads. I wonder what year the private companies gave up the ghost and turned the roads over to the state.

KC
10-19-2013, 12:35 PM
How often are the roads in your subdivision maintained? We all chip in at the beginning and then when we need maintenance.

There is a group of roads in VA --not access roads--that a builder proposed, paid for, and maintains in order to get building permits. They city council didn't want him to build the monstrosity because the state didn't want to maintain roads there. It benefited him to see customers go to his properties so he volunteered to supply actual roads, not access roads, but roads.

There is always some kind of maintenance work being done on the roads on my city block. That's another thing. It's easier for me to imagine private streets in a rural community than in the more urban type of community I grew up in.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 12:39 PM
Ah, I answer my own question.

The Jefferson Turnpike did not last long as a toll road. As was the case with the 10th NH, the August 1826 storm that killed members of the Willey family, also did substantial damage to the Jefferson Turnpike. The Turnpike was not repaired but it would seem that the road may have remained in use for horses or possibly wagons. Ethan Allen Crawford's day books make frequent mention of "work on the Mountain Road" or "work on the Cherry Mountain Road".

Although it's life as a toll road was brief, it survives today and can still be driven on. It's the Cherry Mountain Road and nearly of all of it is in the White Mountain National Forest. The Cherry Mountain Road is maintained as a seasonal road by the Forest Service. It's probably the longest surviving piece of a 19th century turnpike in New Hampshire.

http://whitemountainhistory.org/Jefferson_Turnpike.html

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:39 PM
There is always some kind of maintenance work being done on the roads on my city block. That's another thing. It's easier for me to imagine private streets in a rural community than in the more urban type of community I grew up in.

Do you truly believe that corporations will not build roads to get people to their stores and/or offices?

Chris
10-19-2013, 12:39 PM
There is always some kind of maintenance work being done on the roads on my city block. That's another thing. It's easier for me to imagine private streets in a rural community than in the more urban type of community I grew up in.

Why can't maintenance be done by private companies? I mean, what you're talking about are roads shared by a community. Why can't the community contract a private company to do that and renew the contract or go with a competitor based on performance? It sure would beat 3 shovelers, 2 traffic wavers, 5 safety inspectors, 6 supervisors fixing a pothole that goes back to being a pothole in a week anyway.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:42 PM
Ah, I answer my own question.

The Jefferson Turnpike did not last long as a toll road. As was the case with the 10th NH, the August 1826 storm that killed members of the Willey family, also did substantial damage to the Jefferson Turnpike. The Turnpike was not repaired but it would seem that the road may have remained in use for horses or possibly wagons. Ethan Allen Crawford's day books make frequent mention of "work on the Mountain Road" or "work on the Cherry Mountain Road".

Although it's life as a toll road was brief, it survives today and can still be driven on. It's the Cherry Mountain Road and nearly of all of it is in the White Mountain National Forest. The Cherry Mountain Road is maintained as a seasonal road by the Forest Service. It's probably the longest surviving piece of a 19th century turnpike in New Hampshire.

http://whitemountainhistory.org/Jefferson_Turnpike.html


Did you get the part about the storm and family dying? No. Reread.



Most forget that the first New Hampshire turnpike system was created through turnpike corporations which built 500 miles of toll roads, and more than 80 New Hampshire turnpikes during the years 1796-1830.

For 34 years they did that all by themselves. Your welcome for educating you.

KC
10-19-2013, 12:44 PM
Do you truly believe that corporations will not build roads to get people to their stores and/or offices?

Corporations do build roads to get people to their stores and offices. Wal Mart recently built a few in the county. What I can't see is small businesses building or maintaining roads.

I'm talking about roads in residential areas.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 12:45 PM
Did you get the part about the storm and family dying? No. Reread.




For 34 years they did that all by themselves. Your welcome for educating you.
500 miles in 34 years. I imagine most New Hampshirites are thankful that the government finally stepped in.

KC
10-19-2013, 12:51 PM
Why can't maintenance be done by private companies? I mean, what you're talking about are roads shared by a community. Why can't the community contract a private company to do that and renew the contract or go with a competitor based on performance? It sure would beat 3 shovelers, 2 traffic wavers, 5 safety inspectors, 6 supervisors fixing a pothole that goes back to being a pothole in a week anyway.

They could, assuming that everyone in the community would chip in, but if a single person doesn't chip in you've got the free rider problem all over again. Not to mention a road benefits everyone in the city who uses it, which is a fantastically large number of people. Would they be expected to chip in? For example, there is an elementary school literally one block from my house. While a lot of children do take the bus, a great many parents actually drive their children to school in the morning. How would you expect all of those drivers to chip in to the maintenance of the roads?

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:52 PM
Highway 91 in California is a privately owned toll road where people pay to access it rather than sit on public freeways.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=7057982&page=1


Private road builders are doing this kind of work across the world, such as the double-decker underground highway in Paris, complete with 350 cameras watching for traffic delays or accidents. Any incident is detected in less than 10 seconds. Once the camera detects a problem authorities rush to tow the obstacle away so traffic keeps moving.


They do the same thing in California, too, on at least one road: Highway 91. Instead of building a brand-new road, they added two lanes in the middle of an existing highway. Drivers can choose to use them, or not.


If you want to go this fast, you have to pay. Different amounts depending on the time of day. Sometimes $1.50, sometimes $9. But by paying you save time. Traffic moves. And for some people, time is money.


Were these traffic speeding innovations created by government road-builders? No. They were created and paid for by private road-builders.


Their success has made politicians from other states want to try leasing roads. Mayor Richard Daley did that with the Chicago Skyway. Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels leased the Indiana toll road to a private company. He got back billions for his taxpayers.


"We received $4 billion, free and clear, no taxes, no debt left to our kids," Daniels said during our interview in January about the lease agreement signed in 2006.


It sounds like a good idea to me. But most people can't even imagine the idea of leasing out one of their roads to a private company.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:55 PM
They could, assuming that everyone in the community would chip in, but if a single person doesn't chip in you've got the free rider problem all over again. Not to mention a road benefits everyone in the city who uses it, which is a fantastically large number of people. Would they be expected to chip in? For example, there is an elementary school literally one block from my house. While a lot of children do take the bus, a great many parents actually drive their children to school in the morning. How would you expect all of those drivers to chip in to the maintenance of the roads?

We have a free rider problem now in the US. 49% of all Americans don't pay income taxes (http://money.howstuffworks.com/only-53-percent-pay-income-tax.htm), so they're not paying for these things anyway and receiving benefits.

When it's a road that you paid money for you're more apt to say, "Dude, stay off my road." When you lose sight of your money (goes in a bucket) you don't bother.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:55 PM
500 miles in 34 years. I imagine most New Hampshirites are thankful that the government finally stepped in.

I'm sure that they rode their horses to the state house and complained a lot to the government that only met a few times a year that it should step in.

Chris
10-19-2013, 12:56 PM
They could, assuming that everyone in the community would chip in, but if a single person doesn't chip in you've got the free rider problem all over again. Not to mention a road benefits everyone in the city who uses it, which is a fantastically large number of people. Would they be expected to chip in? For example, there is an elementary school literally one block from my house. While a lot of children do take the bus, a great many parents actually drive their children to school in the morning. How would you expect all of those drivers to chip in to the maintenance of the roads?

We already chip in with property taxes. Just use the funds to contract out the road work and maintenance. Entire cities have done this, even outsourcing city management.

Outsiders use local roads just as locals would use their roads. The traffic amounts to trade in goods and services, trade that leads to prosperity.

Chris
10-19-2013, 12:58 PM
We have a free rider problem now in the US. 49% of all Americans don't pay income taxes (http://money.howstuffworks.com/only-53-percent-pay-income-tax.htm), so they're not paying for these things anyway and receiving benefits.

When it's a road that you paid money for you're more apt to say, "Dude, stay off my road." When you lose sight of your money (goes in a bucket) you don't bother.



The community could have a simple contract, like homeowner's associations do, that says you agree to certain fees for roads and other community maintenance--the purpose of which would include keeping the value of property higher.

Free riders apply elsewhere.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 12:59 PM
Corporations do build roads to get people to their stores and offices. Wal Mart recently built a few in the county. What I can't see is small businesses building or maintaining roads.

I'm talking about roads in residential areas.

This is what it looks like

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7110/7427007178_4bdb465bfe_z.jpg


Go figure...we have roads.

KC
10-19-2013, 12:59 PM
We have a free rider problem now in the US. 49% of all Americans don't pay income taxes (http://money.howstuffworks.com/only-53-percent-pay-income-tax.htm), so they're not paying for these things anyway and receiving benefits.

When it's a road that you paid money for you're more apt to say, "Dude, stay off my road." When you lose sight of your money (goes in a bucket) you don't bother.

You don't think those Americans pay other taxes, such as state income taxes or property taxes? Generally residential roads are maintained by state and local levels of government (as they should, imo).

I'm with you on highways and freeways, I've seen it highways maintained by private companies work very well. I'm happy to pay the $3.50 round trip to get to Chicago if it saves me time and gas, as it often does. I'm just skeptical about the notion of privately maintained roads through cities and residential neighborhoods.

KC
10-19-2013, 01:02 PM
We already chip in with property taxes. Just use the funds to contract out the road work and maintenance. Entire cities have done this, even outsourcing city management.

Outsiders use local roads just as locals would use their roads. The traffic amounts to trade in goods and services, trade that leads to prosperity.

But now you're talking about paying for it with public funds. Of course you can contract maintenance to private firms, but in order to initially collect the funds you need local government to pay for it, as you said, with the funds from property taxes. That's how it works here.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 01:06 PM
You don't think those Americans pay other taxes, such as state income taxes or property taxes? Generally residential roads are maintained by state and local levels of government (as they should, imo).

I think that what they pay in via taxes is less than what they get back, yes. I lived in a project neighborhood and they had free food, free bus fare, free phones, free rent in many cases, and free public schools for their kids, and free roads. What money they spent each year that wasn't first given to them wouldn't even total what it cost to educate one child in that household.

Mind you, whether this should happen or not isn't the question. You are assuming they pay into the system and are not free riders.

Chris
10-19-2013, 01:07 PM
But now you're talking about paying for it with public funds. Of course you can contract maintenance to private firms, but in order to initially collect the funds you need local government to pay for it, as you said, with the funds from property taxes. That's how it works here.

Yes, giving the people choices in how their taxes are spent, and keeping the spending of those taxes local.

Next post I offer another contract-based model to deal with the problem of free riding.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 01:07 PM
But now you're talking about paying for it with public funds. Of course you can contract maintenance to private firms, but in order to initially collect the funds you need local government to pay for it, as you said, with the funds from property taxes. That's how it works here.

We all chip in for our road. The first time someone doesn't chip in I'm going to be on his front porch.

KC
10-19-2013, 01:09 PM
We all chip in for our road. The first time someone doesn't chip in I'm going to be on his front porch.

You must not live in a city.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 01:12 PM
You must not live in a city.

I'm sorry, didn't you ask me about "rural"?

In a city, you have people who own the buildings that the roads sandwich between. Those property owners don't have to "pay" to have those roads built now and benefit from the people paying so that they can make money off of their business.

This makes no sense. The people living and shopping in those buildings are paying twice: to live/shop there, and in taxes for access.

The property owners should pay for it and they will if forced, ie "can't make money otherwise".

jillian
10-19-2013, 01:17 PM
Yep, most roads were initially built by the people or private concerns.


for horse and buggies and when travel didn't go much beyond your back door.

KC
10-19-2013, 01:17 PM
I'm sorry, didn't you ask me about "rural"?

In a city, you have people who own the buildings that the roads sandwich between. Those property owners don't have to "pay" to have those roads built now and benefit from the people paying so that they can make money off of their business.

This makes no sense. The people living and shopping in those buildings are paying twice: to live/shop there, and in taxes for access.

The property owners should pay for it and they will if forced, ie "can't make money otherwise".

No, earlier I stated I could see it working in a rural community. I could also see it working in a small subdivision outside the center of the city. Where I'm skeptical is the residential parts of cities.

KC
10-19-2013, 01:18 PM
I think that what they pay in via taxes is less than what they get back, yes. I lived in a project neighborhood and they had free food, free bus fare, free phones, free rent in many cases, and free public schools for their kids, and free roads. What money they spent each year that wasn't first given to them wouldn't even total what it cost to educate one child in that household.

Mind you, whether this should happen or not isn't the question. You are assuming they pay into the system and are not free riders.

Whether or not they pay into the system is not the same question as whether or not they receive more than they pay in.

jillian
10-19-2013, 01:33 PM
We all chip in for our road. The first time someone doesn't chip in I'm going to be on his front porch.

you can do that when you live in a commune. it's very charming on a small scale. not particularly applicable to anything of any real size.

Chris
10-19-2013, 01:35 PM
for horse and buggies and when travel didn't go much beyond your back door.

Yea, the recent toll road privately built in TX is just for horse and buggy that can travel up to 85 mph. Uh huh.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 01:48 PM
Whether or not they pay into the system is not the same question as whether or not they receive more than they pay in.

Uhhh, that's a technicality. So, if I put money in on a pizza and then I take more money out than I put in and still ate the pizza...am I free riding that pizza?

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 01:48 PM
you can do that when you live in a commune. it's very charming on a small scale. not particularly applicable to anything of any real size.

Except that they are doing it now in Paris and Moscow. Sure, it's not New York but big cities nonetheless.

jillian
10-19-2013, 01:48 PM
Yea, the recent toll road privately built in TX is just for horse and buggy that can travel up to 85 mph. Uh huh.

privately built by whom, chris?

Dr. Who
10-19-2013, 01:51 PM
There is always some kind of maintenance work being done on the roads on my city block. That's another thing. It's easier for me to imagine private streets in a rural community than in the more urban type of community I grew up in.
Then there is also the issue when a road is just newly paved and some utility has to dig something up, which happens frequently. Might not have been an issue back when there was no piped water, or sewage or underground electrical cables, but today most roads are constantly being hacked up for one reason or another.

KC
10-19-2013, 01:53 PM
Uhhh, that's a technicality. So, if I put money in on a pizza and then I take more money out than I put in and still ate the pizza...am I free riding that pizza?

It doesn't matter if it's a technicality, you cannot assert that someone doesn't pay any tax if they actually do pay state and local taxes but still receive more than they pay in. I'm also willing to bet that more than 49% of Americans receive more government services in their lifetime than they pay for. I would argue that more of this needs to be delegated to local authority rather than federal authority, but it's the case whether we like it or not.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 02:00 PM
It doesn't matter if it's a technicality, you cannot assert that someone doesn't pay any tax if they actually do pay state and local taxes but still receive more than they pay in. I'm also willing to bet that more than 49% of Americans receive more government services in their lifetime than they pay for. I would argue that more of this needs to be delegated to local authority rather than federal authority, but it's the case whether we like it or not.

Okay, well...let's go out to dinner then. I'll pay into the meal, but I want my money back after I eat.

KC
10-19-2013, 02:08 PM
Then there is also the issue when a road is just newly paved and some utility has to dig something up, which happens frequently. Might not have been an issue back when there was no piped water, or sewage or underground electrical cables, but today most roads are constantly being hacked up for one reason or another.

True.

Chris
10-19-2013, 02:10 PM
privately built by whom, chris?


SH 130 Concession Company, LLC (http://mysh130.com/about-developer/)

jillian
10-19-2013, 02:12 PM
SH 130 Concession Company, LLC (http://mysh130.com/about-developer/)

ok... private company... got it... with lots of government workers in it... (government contractors?)

what road did they build that isn't paid for with government funds at all?

Chris
10-19-2013, 02:13 PM
Then there is also the issue when a road is just newly paved and some utility has to dig something up, which happens frequently. Might not have been an issue back when there was no piped water, or sewage or underground electrical cables, but today most roads are constantly being hacked up for one reason or another.


I recently witnessed that. The city rebuilt the road four lane. A few months later they dug it all up to put in water, electricity, etc for housing development out that way. Then they dug it all up again for business development to meet the demands of the housing development and made it divided four lane. Central government planning, just can top that!

Chris
10-19-2013, 02:14 PM
ok... private company... got it... with lots of government workers in it... (government contractors?)

what road did they build that isn't paid for with government funds at all?

Uh, that's what I said, jillian, private company, privately built.

KC
10-19-2013, 02:14 PM
Okay, well...let's go out to dinner then. I'll pay into the meal, but I want my money back after I eat.

Your analogy to buying dinner would be more accurate if I didn't pay your entire meal afterward. Yes, what you ate was worth more than you paid for in the end, but the fact is you still contributed a small portion of the bill, even if it's just the tip.

What often happens is that property owners will pay taxes on their property, and maybe state income taxes, but they still consume more than they pay in. They are still paying in, but the amount they pay in is less than the value of the goods and services they consume. This partly due to the fact the government provides a great deal many more services than the average person can afford.

Chris
10-19-2013, 02:17 PM
Your analogy to buying dinner would be more accurate if I didn't pay your entire meal afterward. Yes, what you ate was worth more than you paid for in the end, but the fact is you still contributed a small portion of the bill, even if it's just the tip.

What often happens is that property owners will pay taxes on their property, and maybe state income taxes, but they still consume more than they pay in. They are still paying in, but the amount they pay in is less than the value of the goods and services they consume. This partly due to the fact the government provides a great deal many more services than the average person can afford.

Are you considering what those property owners produce and contribute to society otherwise?

jillian
10-19-2013, 02:19 PM
Uh, that's what I said, jillian, private company, privately built.

i know. and i acknowledge that. with whose money? and what road? so i can look into it

somebody paid them...

Dr. Who
10-19-2013, 02:20 PM
I recently witnessed that. The city rebuilt the road four lane. A few months later they dug it all up to put in water, electricity, etc for housing development out that way. Then they dug it all up again for business development to meet the demands of the housing development and made it divided four lane. Central government planning, just can top that!
Truly there should be more interaction between the interested parties, but some things are just fortuitous. An underground water main or sewer pipe springs a leak - have to cut up the road. Something wrong with a gas pipe - cut up the road. Sure they repave, but the road still becomes a patchwork quilt of repaired areas and consequently the whole thing has to be redone much sooner, because the patches usually turn into potholes. That would be pretty expensive for the private owners of the road.

KC
10-19-2013, 02:20 PM
Are you considering what those property owners produce and contribute to society otherwise?

No, just talking about how public works, goods and services are funded.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 03:07 PM
Your analogy to buying dinner would be more accurate if I didn't pay your entire meal afterward. Yes, what you ate was worth more than you paid for in the end, but the fact is you still contributed a small portion of the bill, even if it's just the tip.


I'm not contributing to the tip, either.

Okay, I'll use a real case scenario. The lady who lived next to me off Mr. Elliot paid no personal property tax on her house and owned no vehicle. Because she had 4 kids she qualified for free housing in this area

@zelmo1234 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=588) who lives in MI can tell you why Mt. Elliott is free housing.

...She also qualified for $850 in assistance per month for food (Michigan has no food tax --or didn't)
...Her four kids went to public schools

Personal property taxes for similar shitholes in Detroit are $2k a year, schooling is $22k per student, she received $10,800 a year in assistance, and free housing which rent on it should be zero since its a shithole, but the city paid the owner $500 a month so another $6,000 in benefits

All out she and her kids received from the system $102, 800 when you include the fact that her kids were all in school.

No way did her occasional purchases at Kmart or Farmer Jacks make up for what she got out of it.

nathanbforrest45
10-19-2013, 03:17 PM
Do you truly believe that corporations will not build roads to get people to their stores and/or offices?
No, corporations are greedy. They would rather their customers died than to build a road for them



Disclaimer: The above post is pure bullshit designed to piss off the left.

KC
10-19-2013, 03:19 PM
I'm not contributing to the tip, either.

Okay, I'll use a real case scenario. The lady who lived next to me off Mr. Elliot paid no personal property tax on her house and owned no vehicle. Because she had 4 kids she qualified for free housing in this area

@zelmo1234 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=588) who lives in MI can tell you why Mt. Elliott is free housing.

...She also qualified for $850 in assistance per month for food (Michigan has no food tax --or didn't)
...Her four kids went to public schools

Personal property taxes for similar shitholes in Detroit are $2k a year, schooling is $22k per student, she received $10,800 a year in assistance, and free housing which rent on it should be zero since its a shithole, but the city paid the owner $500 a month so another $6,000 in benefits

All out she and her kids received from the system $102, 800 when you include the fact that her kids were all in school.

No way did her occasional purchases at Kmart or Farmer Jacks make up for what she got out of it.

In that scenario that person is not contributing very little if anything at all to society, and based on the info you gave, isn't contributing anything to public funding. That person is a free rider.

The free rider problem also exists in the free market. Let's say you and a couple neighbors decide pay to put up streetlights in your neighborhood in order to prevent accidents on your street. If just one neighbor doesn't contribute to the initial cost of the lights or their maintenance, wouldn't he be a free rider? Wouldn't he be benefiting from having a safer neighborhood without contributing to the monetary costs of having a safer neighborhood?

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 03:40 PM
In that scenario that person is not contributing very little if anything at all to society, and based on the info you gave, isn't contributing anything to public funding. That person is a free rider.

The free rider problem also exists in the free market. Let's say you and a couple neighbors decide pay to put up streetlights in your neighborhood in order to prevent accidents on your street. If just one neighbor doesn't contribute to the initial cost of the lights or their maintenance, wouldn't he be a free rider? Wouldn't he be benefiting from having a safer neighborhood without contributing to the monetary costs of having a safer neighborhood?

He would, but since I live in this scenario I can tell you how I would handle it...shaming. Works almost every time.

KC
10-19-2013, 03:45 PM
He would, but since I live in this scenario I can tell you how I would handle it...shaming. Works almost every time.

That's great! I can't imagine it working very well in a densely populated area though. In order for shaming to work you have to be on speaking terms with your neighbors to begin with.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 03:52 PM
That's great! I can't imagine it working very well in a densely populated area though. In order for shaming to work you have to be on speaking terms with your neighbors to begin with.

Well as I've said in a densely populated area businesses wanna business, know what I'm saying. We would all love to not pay for roads, but they have to have roads or no customers. The apartment building, the business offices, etc. they need ways for people to get there.

Why should you or I pay for Goldman Sachs or Macy's to have easy access to their customers?

KC
10-19-2013, 04:14 PM
Well as I've said in a densely populated area businesses wanna business, know what I'm saying. We would all love to not pay for roads, but they have to have roads or no customers. The apartment building, the business offices, etc. they need ways for people to get there.

Why should you or I pay for Goldman Sachs or Macy's to have easy access to their customers?

Because it's not just Goldman Sachs that benefits, but every other business and indeed everyone who needs to use that road everywhere, not just to get to the banks. Indeed, that road might be necessary for me to get to a friend's house, I may not patronize Goldman Sachs at all.

Cthulhu
10-19-2013, 04:23 PM
I'm sure some of the investors made money but probably the majority didn't. And the model was unsustainable in the long run. Dinky little tolls can't keep up with the constant maintenance needed on mountain roads. I wonder what year the private companies gave up the ghost and turned the roads over to the state.

Than why do they have them all over in NYC? Want to go to JFK airport? You better pack some pocket change.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 04:41 PM
Because it's not just Goldman Sachs that benefits, but every other business and indeed everyone who needs to use that road everywhere, not just to get to the banks. Indeed, that road might be necessary for me to get to a friend's house, I may not patronize Goldman Sachs at all.

Yes, but again they will either pool and collaborate or someone will pay for it. Businesses find ways to bring customers in. The drug war should prove the ingenuity of people who want to sell their products. They literally tunnel for miles, buy submarines, etc.

Libhater
10-19-2013, 04:50 PM
Only government takes your tax monies to spend on projects you may or may not want and need. I was born in NH not far from that highway in which you speak, and the reason its motto is 'Live Free or Die" is to keep big government out of our lives. NH had always been a Republican/Conservative state until there was a MASS exodus of high tax paying liberal individuals under governor Mike Dukakis escaping from Taxachusetts so as to live in NH where there is no sales tax. Unfortunately, these same liberals continued to vote for democraps in the state of NH, and thus the reason why my beloved NH has recently turned blue so as to accommodate the welfare crowd.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 04:52 PM
Highway 91 in California is a privately owned toll road where people pay to access it rather than sit on public freeways.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/story?id=7057982&page=1
Bought by the county in 2002. Read what the state allowed while it was privately owned. Shameful.

In April, 2002, the Orange County Transportation Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_County_Transportation_Authority) (OCTA) reached an agreement in concept to purchase the private toll road project for $207.5 million. The OCTA took possession of the Toll Road on January 3, 2003, marking the first time the 91 Express Lanes was managed by public officials. Within a few months, OCTA turned the lanes into the HOT / tollway hybrid that it is today.[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_91#cite_note-13) One of the primary investors in CPTC, Cofiroute USA, continues to manage and operate the lanes under a management contract with OCTA.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_91#cite_note-14)
Opening in 1995, the 91 Express Lanes is the first privately funded tollway built in the United States since the 1940s, and the first fully automated tollway in the world.
The express lanes have been controversial because of a "non-compete" agreement that the state made with CPTC. The clause, which was negotiated by Caltrans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caltrans) and never was brought to the legislature, prevent any improvements along 30 miles (48 km) of the Riverside Freeway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverside_Freeway) to ensure profit for the express lanes. This includes restricting the state from widening the free lanes or building mass transit near the freeway. CPTC filed a lawsuit against Caltrans over freeway widening related to the interchange with the Eastern Transportation Corridor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_241) interchange, which was dismissed once the purchase with OCTA was finalized

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_State_Route_91

Ravi
10-19-2013, 04:55 PM
I'm sure that they rode their horses to the state house and complained a lot to the government that only met a few times a year that it should step in.
I don't know about back then, but when I lived in NH every town had a council and everyone had good access to the council men/women. I doubt it was much different before then.

But that's just a distraction. 500 miles in 34 years? LMAO

Ravi
10-19-2013, 04:59 PM
It doesn't matter if it's a technicality, you cannot assert that someone doesn't pay any tax if they actually do pay state and local taxes but still receive more than they pay in. I'm also willing to bet that more than 49% of Americans receive more government services in their lifetime than they pay for. I would argue that more of this needs to be delegated to local authority rather than federal authority, but it's the case whether we like it or not.
I'd go as far as saying 100% of Americans receive more government services in their life time than they pay for.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:00 PM
i know. and i acknowledge that. with whose money? and what road? so i can look into it

somebody paid them...
And with what land?

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:03 PM
Than why do they have them all over in NYC? Want to go to JFK airport? You better pack some pocket change.
That's supplemental income. I don't know if you've noticed or not, but many of our highways are crumbling.

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:04 PM
i know. and i acknowledge that. with whose money? and what road? so i can look into it

somebody paid them...

It's a toll road. The toll is very high. But avoiding Austin traffic is, I'm told, worth it.

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:06 PM
Truly there should be more interaction between the interested parties, but some things are just fortuitous. An underground water main or sewer pipe springs a leak - have to cut up the road. Something wrong with a gas pipe - cut up the road. Sure they repave, but the road still becomes a patchwork quilt of repaired areas and consequently the whole thing has to be redone much sooner, because the patches usually turn into potholes. That would be pretty expensive for the private owners of the road.

No, this was just typical poor central planning.

It's expensive public, so that's not an argument against going private which would afford economies of scale if not greater efficiency and effectiveness based on the profit motive. None of that exists with government.

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:07 PM
No, corporations are greedy. They would rather their customers died than to build a road for them



Disclaimer: The above post is pure bullshit designed to piss off the left.



LOL, missed the disclaimer when I clicked to say Nonsense!!! :-)

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:11 PM
KC and Alyosha, great discussion! :icon_thumleft:

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:16 PM
I'm thankful for this thread. It made me realize that the commune faction, or voluntereerists, or libertarians, or whatever you want to call them are trying to reinvent the wheel. They want communities where everyone pitches in for the common good, if they so choose.

We already have that. It's called the USA. Sure, there are always going to be freeloaders or people that try to scam the system. Be they libertarians, the Amish, or socialists. And all these people CHOOSE to give or not to give.

This entire mad whine fest that passes for right wing politics is just total bullshit.

/end rant

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:17 PM
Earlier I mentioned a model of privatization of government services and cities that have outsourced everything. I found the video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8qFvo2qJOU#t=25

KC
10-19-2013, 05:18 PM
Yes, but again they will either pool and collaborate or someone will pay for it. Businesses find ways to bring customers in. The drug war should prove the ingenuity of people who want to sell their products. They literally tunnel for miles, buy submarines, etc.


Again, the businesses are not the only ones who benefit from the roads. Anyone who uses main roads (where businesses are usually located) might be going to see their family or friends, to visit a park, work or school. They might even just be joy riding. You make it seem as though roads only benefit businesses when in fact most roads are a public good in that they benefit everyone. The only way to regulate who does or does not use a road is by installing a toll, and for me that only makes since if we're talking about highways. The only industries that always benefit from roads are those related to the automobile and fuel industries.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:20 PM
Again, the businesses are not the only ones who benefit from the roads. Anyone who uses main roads (where businesses are usually located) might be going to see their family or friends, to visit a park, work or school. They might even just be joy riding. You make it seem as though roads only benefit businesses when in fact most roads are a public good in that they benefit everyone. The only way to regulate who does or does not use a road is by installing a toll, and for me that only makes since if we're talking about highways. The only industries that always benefit from roads are those related to the automobile and fuel industries.
I will admit that if I had to pay for the road to my business I would not bother being in business.

Chris
10-19-2013, 05:20 PM
I'm thankful for this thread. It made me realize that the commune faction, or voluntereerists, or libertarians, or whatever you want to call them are trying to reinvent the wheel. They want communities where everyone pitches in for the common good, if they so choose.

We already have that. It's called the USA. Sure, there are always going to be freeloaders or people that try to scam the system. Be they libertarians, the Amish, or socialists. And all these people CHOOSE to give or not to give.

This entire mad whine fest that passes for right wing politics is just total bullshit.

/end rant



We want that governance, that natural social order, sans government with its monopoly on force. Somehow you missed that.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 05:27 PM
Again, the businesses are not the only ones who benefit from the roads. Anyone who uses main roads (where businesses are usually located) might be going to see their family or friends, to visit a park, work or school. They might even just be joy riding. You make it seem as though roads only benefit businesses when in fact most roads are a public good in that they benefit everyone. The only way to regulate who does or does not use a road is by installing a toll, and for me that only makes since if we're talking about highways. The only industries that always benefit from roads are those related to the automobile and fuel industries.

And they will pay through the purchase of items from the stores because the other side to lower taxes is higher prices. It becomes a voluntary consumption tax instead of an involuntary tax.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 05:28 PM
I will admit that if I had to pay for the road to my business I would not bother being in business.

Well, you're probably not all about your business then. You're also forgetting that your business will pay less tax since it's not pooling money to pay a public servants to administer contractors to build the road.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 05:30 PM
I'm thankful for this thread. It made me realize that the commune faction, or voluntereerists, or libertarians, or whatever you want to call them are trying to reinvent the wheel. They want communities where everyone pitches in for the common good, if they so choose.

We already have that. It's called the USA. Sure, there are always going to be freeloaders or people that try to scam the system. Be they libertarians, the Amish, or socialists. And all these people CHOOSE to give or not to give.

This entire mad whine fest that passes for right wing politics is just total bullshit.

/end rant

Except once more Ravi you miss the voluntary tax versus involuntary tax and the voluntary agreement part. So...none of what you just said applies.

You're welcome. Again.

KC
10-19-2013, 05:30 PM
And they will pay through the purchase of items from the stores because the other side to lower taxes is higher prices. It becomes a voluntary consumption tax instead of an involuntary tax.

Again, assuming that everyone who benefits from the road patronizes those stores. Everyone who doesn't becomes a free rider.

Alyosha
10-19-2013, 05:34 PM
Again, assuming that everyone who benefits from the road patronizes those stores. Everyone who doesn't becomes a free rider.

Again, how is that different than now? That scenario was by far not an unusual circumstance in my neighborhood.

Will you ever go to prison in your lifetime? Why are you paying for it? Many of the people in prison now, get all of their shelter, food, water, and guards without ever contributing to the money going to pay for their upkeep.

I use an extreme example, but there is no perfect system. There will be free riders. In one system it is a voluntary "tax" and in the other an involuntary "tax". To me, the first is more moral.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:35 PM
Except once more @Ravi (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=698) you miss the voluntary tax versus involuntary tax and the voluntary agreement part. So...none of what you just said applies.

You're welcome. Again.My point flew over your head. I am not surprised.

Ravi
10-19-2013, 05:37 PM
Again, how is that different than now? That scenario was by far not an unusual circumstance in my neighborhood.

Will you ever go to prison in your lifetime? Why are you paying for it? Many of the people in prison now, get all of their shelter, food, water, and guards without ever contributing to the money going to pay for their upkeep.

I use an extreme example, but there is no perfect system. There will be free riders. In one system it is a voluntary "tax" and in the other an involuntary "tax". To me, the first is more moral.

No offense, but LMAO.

Dr. Who
10-19-2013, 05:37 PM
Except once more @Ravi (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=698) you miss the voluntary tax versus involuntary tax and the voluntary agreement part. So...none of what you just said applies.

You're welcome. Again.
Alyosha, who pays for the common roads that link all of these communities together?

KC
10-19-2013, 05:46 PM
Again, how is that different than now? That scenario was by far not an unusual circumstance in my neighborhood.

Because the free rider problem is much more fatal when it's falls on businesses to be the responsible party. Indeed, if the road gets much more usage than the businesses who maintain it get patrons, those businesses are more likely to go out of business. Why is that a problem? Because the roads is still there and still needs to be maintained.

Say a department store opens up and with it a bunch of locally owned and operated small businesses. The coffee shops, specialty stores and restaurants near the department store all contribute to the funding of a road, as does the department store. For a while this goes great, until the department sotre decides to relocate. Suddenly a huge draw for traffic is gone and the local businesses start to fail. I have no problem with loss in a free market, it's necessary, but now there is a road, likely an important road, with fewer and fewer businesses to maintain it. They could close it down, but the road was in fact a public good that served everyone. Wouldn't it make sense for it to be publicly funded instead, so that people may use the road and (most people) pay for it through property, income or sales taxes?


Will you ever go to prison in your lifetime? Why are you paying for it? Many of the people in prison now, get all of their shelter, food, water, and guards without ever contributing to the money going to pay for their upkeep.

I use an extreme example, but there is no perfect system. There will be free riders. In one system it is a voluntary "tax" and in the other an involuntary "tax". To me, the first is more moral.

Very few prisoners pay no taxes before and after their sentence. You're right, they do not pay for it during their stay in prison, but again prison is a public good; everyone benefits from having violent criminals off the streets (of course there are people in there for drug related activities, but I would argue those laws should be abolished anyhow).

Mr. Freeze
10-19-2013, 05:55 PM
So there were no roads before the Department of Transportation?

Dr. Who
10-19-2013, 06:03 PM
So there were no roads before the Department of Transportation?Before the DOT there was the Bureau of Public Roads. Before that there were no highways, because there were no cars. There were just dirt roads between the cities and towns.

KC
10-19-2013, 06:04 PM
So there were no roads before the Department of Transportation?

Road funding and maintenance is properly the role of local and state governments.

Mr. Freeze
10-19-2013, 06:06 PM
Road funding and maintenance is properly the role of local and state governments.

That doesn't answer my question. Are we saying without government there were no roads?

Mr. Freeze
10-19-2013, 06:07 PM
Before the DOT there was the Bureau of Public Roads. Before that there were no highways, because there were no cars. There were just dirt roads between the cities and towns.

So there were no roads until there were cars?

Chris
10-19-2013, 06:14 PM
That doesn't answer my question. Are we saying without government there were no roads?



Or worse, omg!, that without government there were no people!

KC
10-19-2013, 06:14 PM
That doesn't answer my question. Are we saying without government there were no roads?

You asked if there were roads before the federal agency, the Department of Transportation was created. Yes, there were, but many were funded and/or maintained by state and local governments. There are some roads that existed and continue to exist without public support, like the one in the OP, but these are mostly in smaller communities or before the automobile became common.

KC
10-19-2013, 06:17 PM
BTW, roads have been built by governments since before Darius built roads connecting the far reaches of the Persian empire. Most civilizations have had a hybrid private/public model for roads, where some are owned privately and others are owned publicly.

Dr. Who
10-19-2013, 06:19 PM
That doesn't answer my question. Are we saying without government there were no roads?

There were a collection of toll roads built by private interests in the 1700's and 1800's. There weren't that many of them, at least in terms of major access roads.

Mr. Freeze
10-19-2013, 06:33 PM
You asked if there were roads before the federal agency, the Department of Transportation was created. Yes, there were, but many were funded and/or maintained by state and local governments. There are some roads that existed and continue to exist without public support, like the one in the OP, but these are mostly in smaller communities or before the automobile became common.

So the government didn't start building "all the roads" until there were cars? It was the advent of cars which made roads a necessity. So because of cars, the people who had horses had to pay for roads they didn't need. Interesting.

I'm always curious about why people believe they need government to do things they can do collectively without force.

I disagree that government is necessary to build and maintain roads, and I could and may later continue as to why I do not think it's necessary.

However, mine is moreseo a moral argument than practical. I think that it is wrong to involuntarily take from people all over a state to pay for roads that benefit others and not themselves. VDOT paves roads that people in Clintwood VA, a poor Appalachian town, will never use but help to pay for. There is also no agreement as to price, how often or when it is paved, who paves it, etc.

But you feel it is necessary and I don't wish to argue that people are neither helpless, lazy, or immoral enough to cheat others when mine is a hypothetical and the government's actions a reality.

I know the government cheats the taxpayer and as an accountant I see the inefficiency in the government model.

We shall not meet on this and I don't wish to continue in a vein that will only cause people to feel emotional. It's Saturday night and my friends are coming over later.

KC
10-19-2013, 06:41 PM
So the government didn't start building "all the roads" until there were cars? It was the advent of cars which made roads a necessity. So because of cars, the people who had horses had to pay for roads they didn't need. Interesting.

I'm always curious about why people believe they need government to do things they can do collectively without force.

I disagree that government is necessary to build and maintain roads, and I could and may later continue as to why I do not think it's necessary.

However, mine is moreseo a moral argument than practical. I think that it is wrong to involuntarily take from people all over a state to pay for roads that benefit others and not themselves. VDOT paves roads that people in Clintwood VA, a poor Appalachian town, will never use but help to pay for. There is also no agreement as to price, how often or when it is paved, who paves it, etc.

But you feel it is necessary and I don't wish to argue that people are neither helpless, lazy, or immoral enough to cheat others when mine is a hypothetical and the government's actions a reality.

I know the government cheats the taxpayer and as an accountant I see the inefficiency in the government model.

We shall not meet on this and I don't wish to continue in a vein that will only cause people to feel emotional. It's Saturday night and my friends are coming over later.

You quoted "all the roads" which does not appear in my post. Paraphrasing does not require quotations.

The burden of proof lies with you then, to show that the majority of roads were once owned and maintained by privately. I've never disputed that some have been and still are privately owned/maintained, but not the majority are not and were not.

Chris
10-19-2013, 06:44 PM
The historical fact that governments have built some roads does not imply they should.

Peter1469
10-19-2013, 07:53 PM
But they do.

Our current government is hell-bent on destroying the USD. Once that happens we shall see how people get along.

Cthulhu
10-19-2013, 07:55 PM
But they do.

Our current government is hell-bent on destroying the USD. Once that happens we shall see how people get along.

Fact. I check the USD/Canadian Dollar exchange rate. Damn near equal now. I remember as a kid it was a fairly significant ratio. Like 1.60 CAN per USD.

How the mighty have fallen.

Peter1469
10-19-2013, 08:05 PM
Fact. I check the USD/Canadian Dollar exchange rate. Damn near equal now. I remember as a kid it was a fairly significant ratio. Like 1.60 CAN per USD.

How the mighty have fallen.

I am surprised that the Canadian currency (http://coinmill.com/CAD_USD.html#CAD=100) has dropped to USD levels.

Mr. Freeze
10-19-2013, 08:10 PM
You quoted "all the roads" which does not appear in my post. Paraphrasing does not require quotations.

I said "all the roads" to call it out because I can't hit the bold, not to paraphrase you. Meaning it wasn't until cars that government took over road functions.




The burden of proof lies with you then, to show that the majority of roads were once owned and maintained by privately. I've never disputed that some have been and still are privately owned/maintained, but not the majority are not and were not.

I never said made any statement so I have nothing to prove. I asked questions because I think the idea of technology is the crux. There will be a change in technology in the future. Horses neither required gas nor heavy roads. Hover craft which people think we will move to won't either.

KC
10-19-2013, 08:47 PM
I said "all the roads" to call it out because I can't hit the bold, not to paraphrase you. Meaning it wasn't until cars that government took over road functions.



I never said made any statement so I have nothing to prove. I asked questions because I think the idea of technology is the crux. There will be a change in technology in the future. Horses neither required gas nor heavy roads. Hover craft which people think we will move to won't either.

Interestingly enough there are many who now think the next technological innovation will be driverless cars. I'm very excited to see whether or not this will occur, but regardless it is unlikely that it will happen without government interference. Not to say that it could not, just that it probably will not.

You might be interested in the podcast Winston on Transportation (http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/10/winston_on_tran.html) from the Library of Economics and Liberty. They touch on many of these same issues we've been discussing in this thread, including whether or not the government should play a role in building an infrastructure if and when the next technological innovation in transportation emerges.

ChoppedLiver
10-20-2013, 12:55 AM
It seems like it would be extremely burdensome and time consuming if you had to pay a toll every time you went to work, to buy groceries, to school, etc.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbWg-mozGsU

:cool:

AmazonTania
10-20-2013, 03:26 AM
I am surprised that the Canadian currency (http://coinmill.com/CAD_USD.html#CAD=100) has dropped to USD levels.

I my business, we use to refer to the Canadian Dollar as the Canadian Peso.

Yes, it was that bad...

Alyosha
10-20-2013, 07:46 AM
Alyosha, who pays for the common roads that link all of these communities together?

It depends...

When I worked for the firm I did previously I made a sick amount of money. Not wanting to buy a home and not knowing, at first, what I wanted to do with my money I got hit with a HUGE amount of taxes. Crazy taxes between state, local, and income that took close to $46% of what I earned altogether. That should also tell you how much I made, but whatever...

If I had that type of money back and if everyone did to put towards those service they desired or needed as a "voluntary tax" you'd see people invest in roads as tolls, and other services because they would have the money to, it would also create more "producers".
Axiomatic can answer all of these best because I am disingenuous about it.

The accusations of me being a Luddite are true. I think the reason why we are destroying the earth, as well as, ourselves is useless consumerism. I'm not sure that we were meant to have everything we "want". Our fix is carbon credits and trading which is a ponzi scheme. Meh...another thread, this one is about roads. nvm

Ravi
10-20-2013, 08:29 AM
It depends...

When I worked for the firm I did previously I made a sick amount of money. Not wanting to buy a home and not knowing, at first, what I wanted to do with my money I got hit with a HUGE amount of taxes. Crazy taxes between state, local, and income that took close to $46% of what I earned altogether. That should also tell you how much I made, but whatever...

If I had that type of money back and if everyone did to put towards those service they desired or needed as a "voluntary tax" you'd see people invest in roads as tolls, and other services because they would have the money to, it would also create more "producers".
@Axiomatic (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=879) can answer all of these best because I am disingenuous about it.

The accusations of me being a Luddite are true. I think the reason why we are destroying the earth, as well as, ourselves is useless consumerism. I'm not sure that we were meant to have everything we "want". Our fix is carbon credits and trading which is a ponzi scheme. Meh...another thread, this one is about roads. nvm
I applaud your admission.

Alyosha
10-20-2013, 09:05 AM
I applaud your admission.

I don't think that we require as many roads as we think we do. We want convenience and to not have congestion. That is my disingenuous promotion of private roads.

But thank you for not posting in good spirit, as usual. Says a lot about you that we already knew.

Totally off topic...there's this great scene in Mean Girls

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/myb106.com/files/2013/09/mean7.gif

A lot of times--girls, mostly--tend to think that because two other people agree with them 100% of the time they are somehow right or popular. It happens.

AmazonTania
10-20-2013, 10:23 AM
We already have private roads... All over the world.

Is it really such a misconception that no roads at all will be built without the Government?

Dr. Who
10-20-2013, 11:37 AM
We already have private roads... All over the world.

Is it really such a misconception that no roads at all will be built without the Government?
In my experience most of the highway type roads that are privately owned tend to be bypasses that are used by those drivers who feel it's worth the money in tolls to save time. There are alternative free roads that may take longer owing to traffic congestion or distance. There is a place for both, but I don't see private roads becoming the majority.

Axiomatic
10-20-2013, 06:55 PM
It depends...

When I worked for the firm I did previously I made a sick amount of money. Not wanting to buy a home and not knowing, at first, what I wanted to do with my money I got hit with a HUGE amount of taxes. Crazy taxes between state, local, and income that took close to $46% of what I earned altogether. That should also tell you how much I made, but whatever...

If I had that type of money back and if everyone did to put towards those service they desired or needed as a "voluntary tax" you'd see people invest in roads as tolls, and other services because they would have the money to, it would also create more "producers".
@Axiomatic (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=879) can answer all of these best because I am disingenuous about it.

The accusations of me being a Luddite are true. I think the reason why we are destroying the earth, as well as, ourselves is useless consumerism. I'm not sure that we were meant to have everything we "want". Our fix is carbon credits and trading which is a ponzi scheme. Meh...another thread, this one is about roads. nvm

I appreciate the vote of confidence, but everyone is disingenuous to an extent. Our desires influence our beliefs, and there's nothing any of us can do about it. The best we can do is admit it. People who won't admit it are only trying to convince themselves of an additional lie that can only help to screw up their web of beliefs even more. But this thread is about roads, right? So, nevermind, carry on.