ArrieS wrote:You're statement relies on the assertion that the primary reason for the highway system is to promote commerce. I reject that based on facts.
From your source:
"National Highway System (NHS) roadways are important to the United States economy, defense, and mobility."
While in my view, the original intent of the highway system was to facilitate the rapid movement of troops and supplies for defense, the Federal Highway Administration made it a point to have "economy" as the first item on its list of the primary importance of the highway system. That, in a way, contradicts your previous statement as the economy and commerce are pretty integral to one another.
ArrieS wrote:Of the roads under the Federal Highway system.
"...65 percent are in rural areas and 35 percent are in urban areas..."
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl11028/chapter1.cfmBut,
In the United States urban land is, "60 million acres (2.6 percent)."
2.6% of the land in the United States has 35% of the Federal Highway in it. That alone shows a disproportionate amount of the budget is to service Urban Areas. Add to that the roads with the largest cost to maintain are roads with the highest traffic, which would be urban areas.
The Federal Highway system spends money to subsidize the moment of people, not commerce. They just claim it's a part of commerce. But it's an unnecessary spending required that allows the economics of home ownership to get distorted.
I'm curious about all of the goods and commodities (commerce: an interchange of goods or commodities, especially on a large scale between different countries (foreign commerce) or between different parts of the same country (domestic commerce) trade; business.) on those tractor trailers that use the highway system and how that is not considered an increase in commerce by improving the infrastructure by which goods are transferred. Isn't the highway system a more efficient way to move goods between parties thus creating the more efficient economy you seem to seek in your previous post? Not to mention that the public transportation you argued for in another post provides no means to transport those same goods and commodities.
The other part of your argument that is incorrect is based on the assumption that the Federal Highway system is spending money to provide access to residential homes. This is a false assumption. Again, directly from your source, "The NHS includes all Interstate highways (arterials), the Strategic Highway Network (defense purpose), intermodal connectors (roads connecting to major intermodal facilities), and other principal arterials." None of those items are local level roads and streets.
While I hate to source wikipedia, I feel like they have a pretty good definition of arterial road just in case you want to argue that point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arterial_road"An arterial road or arterial thoroughfare is a high-capacity urban road. The primary function of an arterial road is to deliver traffic from collector roads to freeways or expressways, and between urban centres at the highest level of service possible. As such, many arteries are limited-access roads, or feature restrictions on private access."
You may be able to bring your argument to the state and local level where the roads are being funded to provide access to residential homes with yards and trees, but it does not apply to the federal level as you are suggesting.
I find myself asking why I am even taking the time to write this.
I suppose that every once in a while I like to brush up on my argument skills and I fully expect to get some sort of reply where you find a "chink in my armor" so to speak. I guess I just feel like the Lorax in that someone must speak for the roads and the trees in the yards at the houses in rural areas which for some reason you despise the idea of people living in.
I agree with you that it would be better to subsidize small businesses instead of regulating them out of existence. As a matter of fact I would be ok without the government subsidizing small businesses and instead just staying out of their affairs almost completely. There are however, some things that I am ok paying taxes for with infrastructure and defense being two of those as opposed to the gross over payment of welfare, "disability", Obamacare, Medicade, etc. which create a lazy entitled society of succubi.