Privatized Roads and Highways

[Zero001]

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/03/roads-and-highw.html

Roads and Highways Will Go Private, Thanks to the Iraq War

At the outset of the Iraq war, the Bush administration estimated that it would cost roughly $50 to $60 billion to oust Saddam Hussein and set that nation on the road to democracy. Five years later, the price tag is $600 billion and counting. As the economy sours, it becomes clear that one overlooked casualty of this war will be America's creaking infrastructure.

Free markets may be the only way to save the nation's roads and highways. They might even be the best way to save them. The Department of Transportation, under this Administration, has made no secret of its desire to lease highways to private companies, to use tolls and congestion pricing, to auction off fast access to those willing to pay and to otherwise let free markets drive transportation. Under this view, breaking up the government monopoly on transportation could lead to innovation and more choices for the public. Let those who use a resource pay for it, without burdening everyone else with the costs. Let the pain of price ease gridlock. It will reduce both fuel consumption and emissions. Heck, it might even drive down your insurance premiums.

This is a sunny scenario, of course. Private companies who own rights to a crucial artery have no incentive to maintain it. They could charge extortionist's tolls during peak hours. In short, they could become slum lords. The trucking industry is already up in arms over privatization. The poor will take it on the nose. And public transportation, which remains the best solution for reducing imported-fuel dependency, emissions, gridlock and highway death tolls, is left out of the equation. New rail and bus projects eligible for federal funding dropped from 48 in 2001 to 17 in 2007, even as ridership hit a 50 year high.

Regardless of who wins the White House, privatization seems to be the inexorable path. There is virtually no political will to raise the gas tax. And the war in Iraq, with its staggering costs, grinds on . . .

Sources: Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, Bloomberg, BBC

Privatizing roads = bad idea
The free market will just end up hurting the public in this situation. I don't think there is serious thought to put this into action just yet, but if it does come down to it I hope the government makes the right choice.

[Itch]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...861259,00.html

EVERYBODY agrees that the U.S. needs more and better roads, but almost nobody agrees on how to pay for them. While the argument rages, Texas has gone ahead and devised something new: the nation's first privately owned and privately financed modern toll roads. This week the Texas Turnpike Co. will start constructing a 223-mile, four-lane thruway from the Dallas area to Houston, at a cost of $140 million. At the same time the Sam Houston Toll Road Corp. will start building the first leg (Dallas-Waco, 83 miles) of its $140 million. 246-mile Dallas-San Antonio Thruway. The two corporations, franchised as nonprofit public utilities by the Texas legislature, will float 40-year bonds at 4-5%, pay all costs of construction and operation, including salaries for the promoter-operators. When the bonds are paid off, the turnpikes will become state property.

This has been done before and if I'm not mistaken more than once.. depending on how it is done it is not necessarily a bad thing. We just need to be very careful on how it is implemented to avoid gouging etc.

[Italian Jew]

The problem is Bill Gates buying up all the roads or a company that is not interested in maintaining the road. The greedy companies will squeeze whatever they can from the people, so some Gov't regulation is needed. I would prefer a completely gov't funded and maintained road structure because it would have no interest in creating certain choke points to squeeze money out of people. If they did, they would be in a major shit storm over it.

However, if we were not wasting so much money on the war we would not have issues like this right now... creating more problems does not solve problems.

[Slavic]

I'm going to buy my road and succeed from the United States : D

[VirDeBello]

As long as the roads stay in order and what not I could care less if its owned by a corporation or government. I just hope its taken care of.

[Zero001]

This has been done before and if I'm not mistaken more than once.. depending on how it is done it is not necessarily a bad thing. We just need to be very careful on how it is implemented to avoid gouging etc.

That's just it. I wouldn't trust them to be very careful. Even if they did somehow manage to do it right the increase in cost of travel would still be detrimental.

The problem is Bill Gates buying up all the roads or a company that is not interested in maintaining the road. The greedy companies will squeeze whatever they can from the people, so some Gov't regulation is needed. I would prefer a completely gov't funded and maintained road structure because it would have no interest in creating certain choke points to squeeze money out of people. If they did, they would be in a major shit storm over it.

However, if we were not wasting so much money on the war we would not have issues like this right now... creating more problems does not solve problems.

Agreed, but I'm kinda iffy on the war thing. It just should have been and currently should be better managed. I actually highly disagree with the fear mongering the article it giving off. Again, this is why I said there's no serious thought in putting this into affect.

I'm going to buy my road and succeed from the United States : D

Good luck on that.

As long as the roads stay in order and what not I could care less if its owned by a corporation or government. I just hope its taken care of.

Of course you should care. That is unless you're prepared and willing to be ass raped by tolls.

[Itch]

Although it can and has worked in the past.. it seems like corp. corruption is at an all-time high.. The real solution is public transportation fewer vehicles = less need to invest in roads...

Just my 2 cents..


btw - I'm writing this from the bus! (free bus pass + free wireless for teh win!)

[Italian Jew]

yeah, Europe has some nice public transportation. Wouldn't mind some over here...

[Zero001]

Unfortunately public transportation isn't an option for me as well the majority of the population. Public transportation is decent at local levels, but getting anywhere beyond that is a nightmare in many parts of the U.S.

[Captain Colon]

Although it can and has worked in the past.. it seems like corp. corruption is at an all-time high.. The real solution is public transportation fewer vehicles = less need to invest in roads...

Even without corruption, the aim of a business is to turn a profit, not provide everyone with high-quality public works out of the goodness of their hearts...so you'll get to pick two of the three to have: cheap, good, fast.

Mass transit isn't really an option in the majority of the country like it is in Europe...which is gonna be cheaper...maintaining a bus route to bumfucksville USA, population 1500, or just maintaining the road? Our population is far more spread out so that mass transit only shines in majorly congested population centers like NYC or Boston where it really is faster to take the subway or bus than to drive most places.