tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post3288618191908679347..comments2024-02-01T04:37:41.878-05:00Comments on Cap'n Transit Rides Again: A gift from Randal O'Toole?Cap'n Transithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17057887736728828646noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-81716188381274559502010-11-29T10:31:38.081-05:002010-11-29T10:31:38.081-05:00The difference between Postrel's point and TXD...The difference between Postrel's point and TXDOT's is not really about depreciation, BTW, it's about the claim that if gas taxes pay all or almost all of the cost of highways, they must not be subsidized.<br /><br />This is bunk, of course, because in Texas gas taxes are constitutionally dedicated to state highways (signed and numbered) but are, as everywhere, accrued when driving on any roadway - including the large networks of major arterials in most urban areas that do not receive any state support whatsoever.<br /><br />In other words, people driving on 'local roads' (really major arterials without a route shield) are subsidizing 'highways'.<br /><br />Also, in metro areas, there are occasional large 'donations' from local and county general funds to get highways built as well.M1EKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03650370583235985527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-62067775509835069552010-11-27T10:58:20.577-05:002010-11-27T10:58:20.577-05:00I don't really have a problem with O'Toole...I don't really have a problem with O'Toole's calculations, although every type of analytical calculation can fall short, as commenters here have shown.<br /><br />My problem with his calculation is his interpretation of it. His rhetoric is basically this: "Sure, roads are subsidized by about $.01 per passenger mile, and thats no good...but transit is subsidized by $.50 per passenger mile! That is terrible, and we need to stop funding transit!!!"<br /><br />The problem with that interpretation is that it ignores very basic microeconomic principles...principles that have been proven empirically a million times over by now. <br /><br />By economic definition, a car is a Normal Good, and transit is an Inferior Good (check the wikipedia entry on Inferior Good before you go flaming me...it is just a name), and they are substitutes for each other. What this means is that when people become wealthier, they tend toward driving, and when they become poorer, they tend toward transit. Again, this is empirically proven. So it shouldn't be any surprise that when we subsidize the normal good, people will switch from the inferior good. <b>Even if we subsidize the inferior good to an equal amount, there will still be a net shift to the normal good.</b><br /><br />Furthermore, transit's costs per passenger drop dramatically with higher usage rates. In fact, unless costs are completely out of control (and in some cases they are), transit can break even at some given load rate. By shifting even a tiny amount of people toward driving, we are explicitly increasing the subsidies to transit. <br /><br />Fact: If we all use our cars more, we will require more subsidies from the government. <i>If we use transit more, we will require less subsidies for transit.</i> O'Toole understands this...but you will never hear him admit it, because it doesn't fit his agenda. As long as he can convince people that subsidies aren't as bad for cars as they are for transit, he has made his employers happy.saosebastiaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12337474756701788664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-45306219234518937312010-11-26T23:49:24.361-05:002010-11-26T23:49:24.361-05:00The biggest load of bullocks in his formula is tha...The biggest load of bullocks in his formula is that it counts all gas taxes as being generated by the use of the roads funded by gas taxes, when in many cases the gas tax revenues are generated <b><i>by driving on other streets that are not funded, either at all or in proportion, by the gas tax</i></b>, so he completely ignores the issue of cross-subsidy, which primarily flows from urban motorists who do the largest share of driving on unsubsidized streets, to rural and outer suburban motorists, who do the largest share of driving on (with respect to the Federal gas tax) subsidized Interstate, US, State, County and Township highways.<br /><br />One reason Ohio ranks so high in terms of degree of user pays in his formula is because of the way that the state gas tax reinforces rather than compensates for the cross-subsidy built into the Federal gas tax. Its not really a 65% of user pays ... it is a smaller percentage of user pays and a healthy dose of a user somewhere else pays.<br /><br />If it was any other mode of transport, O'Toole would call "a user somewhere else pays" a subsidy ... but not for roads.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-86747493851911253332010-11-23T12:26:20.261-05:002010-11-23T12:26:20.261-05:00Yes, as I said, the national numbers I linked to e...Yes, as I said, the national numbers I linked to exclude depreciation. The Texas numbers include depreciation, hence the lower rates.<br /><br />I forgot to mention, another problem with talking in terms of cents per passenger-mile is that it's an unfamiliar measure, which can be made to sound low. It's much more straightforward to say "To make non-local highways pay their operational costs, the gas tax would need to be raised by 43 cents a gallon." It tells drivers exactly what they can expect.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-3190441475553788732010-11-23T04:53:31.770-05:002010-11-23T04:53:31.770-05:00Cap'n don't forget that TXDOT actually cal...Cap'n don't forget that TXDOT actually calculated how much it subsidized roads. It has since disappeared from their site but the evidence remains...<br /><br />http://www.cnu.org/node/2329<br />http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2009/11/09/do-roads-pay-for-themselves/Pantograph Trolleypolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17833159138533550544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-41157107087226822202010-11-23T03:39:40.196-05:002010-11-23T03:39:40.196-05:00Another thing to keep in mind is that all of these...Another thing to keep in mind is that all of these figures leave out local roads entirely. These are near 100% subsidized, and you could argue that they're far more important than highways. Local roads could exist with far fewer highways, but highways certainly couldn't exist with fewer local roads.<br /><br />The best way to reduce subsidies for local roads is to implement a citywide congestion charge, but that's generally not supported by the Kochtopus.<br /><br />- Stephen Smith<br /><a href="http://marketurbanism.com" rel="nofollow">Market Urbanism</a>Stephen Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12118017106106571684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-35957126680227511262010-11-23T01:58:01.819-05:002010-11-23T01:58:01.819-05:00Remember, Cap'n: passenger-miles don't vot...Remember, Cap'n: passenger-miles don't vote. When a mode of transportation is so low-capacity it forces you to travel three times as far, it's inappropriate to compare anything based on distance traveled.<br /><br />If you want, you can find some sort of farebox operating ratio for roads <a href="http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2008/hf10.cfm" rel="nofollow">here</a>. No need to trust O'Toole's calculations; you can straightforwardly see that, excluding property tax-funded local streets, highways generated $122 billion in revenue in 2008, while using $193 billion in direct spending plus $4 billion for collection expenses. And that doesn't include depreciation.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.com