All comments posted by users on the Greater Greater Washington post "Lunch links: Bad land use decision edition" http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/ en-us http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10487 There is an article I read on the history of rail transportation in the United States and I think it makes a really good case that policies of the 50's and 60's pretty much intentionally destroyed passenger rail. Taxes assesed on Rail went to building airports and highways all over the country. Onerous regulations limited the speeds at which trains could run (we had 110 mph trains between Denver and Chicago back in the 1930's!!!), all contributing to the pathetic rail network that we have today. At one point we had the best rail and mass transit systems in the world. We can and should do better. This is the link (a long but good read): http://web.archive.org/web/20010614133724/wwics.si.edu/outreach/wq/WQSELECT/TRAIN.HTM http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10487 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:17:21 EDT http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10454 I've taken another look, and I guess I must have read it a bit too quickly since it doesn't really discuss the gas tax in the way I thought it did. Still, considering that the article is focused on "subsidies" and it doesn't subtract how much comes from gas taxes, it never provides any evidence that there IS a subsidy. Not that there isn't, just that it's still kinda fluffy. http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10454 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:17:30 EDT http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10451 Also, the gas tax is not a fee, it is a tax. There is leakage in both directions (i.e. not all gas is used on roads, and not all revenues are spent on roads). It may function somewhat like a fee, but it is not and should not be talked about as such. Gas tax receipts are not tied to a certain area. That's why we have donor states and recipient states. If you were to break it down by metro areas, you'd find that the vast majority of gas is used in metro areas, yet they get a disproportionately small portion of the funds. Similarly, many older, industrial and higher population states donate to rural sunbelt ones. Furthermore, we should stop treating the gas tax like a user fee because of the negative externalities to using gas. Nevermind the obvious environmental and air quality issues, congestion and transportation problems alone justify the use of gas tax receipts for transportation as a whole, not just roads. Mass transit is not only good in its own right, but helps the road network work better for things that transit cannot handle (like delivery trucks, emergency vehicles). http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10451 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:51:34 EDT http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10443 AE: The author of the Slate piece isn't saying the gas tax is a subsidy. He's saying that road spending and tax credits are subsidies, which they are. Gas taxes offset some of that, but not all; plus, gas taxes supplant other sales taxes, so we are foregoing sales tax revenue (which usually goes to general programs) to devote money specifically to roads (and still not cover all the costs). http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10443 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:15:59 EDT http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10441 Regarding the car subsidies...., as much I suspect the author is probably right in the big picture, it doesn't make any sense to consider the gasoline tax as a road "subsidy." Since the vast majority of gasoline is paid for by motor vehicle users and motor vehicles are using roads the vast majority of the time, it's really just a fee. If that fee covered 100% of all road spending by the government, there would be no subsidy. It's like calling a tax levied on an airline ticket to pay for the FAA a "subsidy." No, users of the FAA are being charged by the FAA. Granted SOME flights requiring above average effort from the FAA might be subsidized by flights requiring less than average effort, but the community as a whole is paying for what it's using. Back on the gas tax, I'm sure it DOESN'T cover 100% of all road spending, but calling the gas tax a subsidy really makes me question there rest of the author's arguments. http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/1099/lunch-links-bad-land-use-decision-edition/#comment-10441 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:10:26 EDT