Many people believe that roads, and hence transport, would not exist without a strong central government, and so therefore limited government is impractical.
It’s important to know why roads exist in the first place. Ancient empires like the Persia and Rome built roads to make it easier to move their armies around and also to speed communication between distant cities. These roads were irrelevant to the vast majority of people because, for most of history, it was rare for a person to travel more than a few miles from where they were born. Only a small fraction of people like soldiers, explorers and traders would routinely travel long distances on land. The only practical way to travel long distances for most of history was by horse, and most people couldn’t afford horses.
For most of history, only capital cities had paved roads because kings wanted their cities to look more beautiful. Building roads is expensive now, but it was even more expensive when everything had to be done by hand.
And what roads did exist were usually privatized. The Romans planted olive trees next to their roads and auctioned off sections. Whoever owned the section got to keep the olives in exchange for maintaining the road.
In England, most roads were locally owned or toll roads until the mid 19th century. A typical owner would only own a few miles of road, which was usually nothing more than a gravel path wide enough for a wagon.
In the early years of the US, most roads were built and owned by private companies that sold stock to raise capital, like Pennsylvania’s 1795 Lancaster Turnpike Company. Later, most long distance travel was by rail and canal, the vast majority of which was built and owned by corporations. Competition from rails and canals led to the bankruptcy of many toll roads which became the property of the states.
Since the states lacked money to maintain these roads, they deteriorated.
All the way up until the advent of cars in the early 20th century, most of the roads in the US were unpaved. Outside the cities, roads were dirt or sometimes gravel. They turned to mud in the winter and dust in the summer. Travel on these roads was slow and unpleasant even in the best conditions.
So to recap the history of roads:
1. Paved roads were rare.
2. Most people didn’t travel long distances on roads.
3. Roads were mainly built to aid the movement of armies.
4. Most roads were privately owned.
The better roads we have now are mainly the result of two inventions: the car (invented by Karl Benz in 1885) and tarmac (invented by Edgar Hooley in 1902). Both these came from the free market. If they didn’t exist, the modern roads we have today would not exist, regardless of what the government did.
It’s also worth pointing out that governments around the world do a poor job of maintaining roads. Of the 25 largest cities in the US, about half the roads have been rated as poor. The city governments have plenty of money to fix roads, but for some reason, they never get around to it.
The best roads are generally found in places with low taxes and government spending. The state with the best roads is Indiana, whose government privatized its highways in 2006. In contrast, San Francisco was rated as having the worst roads in the country despite a city budget of almost $9 billion. Indiana, which has 8 times as many people as San Francisco has a budget of about $12 billion and has had a surplus every year since privatizing its highways.
So rather than being a slam dunk for government, roads are yet another example of how something works better when it is left to the market.
Where did the art for that six panel comic originate?
Belgian comic about finding the g-spot.
Thank you.
The original is incredible.
I like how the original has the dad running away on a road (or more like a path), but the edited libertarian version carefully erased said road from the sixth panel. That’s some dedication to the joke on the part of whoever made it. Much more craftsmanship than your average meme.
Has kind of a Twilight Zone vibe to it, too. The kid decides he’s a libertarian, and suddenly the roads vanish.
The mayor of Berkeley has a cat named…..Che. No, really.
His Twitter reads like a parody account.
LOL you’re not kidding
Lose some weight you fat fuck, proper communists don’t have double chins.
Proper communist leaders do, comrade.
Yeah, I gotta go with Vhyrus on this one
“Proper communist leaders” *posts image of Brezhnev*
I’m talkin’ proper revolutionary types, not the fat upper class that results.
Also continuing the tradition of “Holy shit did Lenin know how to pose.”
that brief period when the USSR had a guy who looked like a CPA as it’s supreme leader
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yuri_Andropov_-_Soviet_Life,_August_1983.jpg
Remember his chauffeur ? Peekup Andropov ?
The Politburo is built on double-chindom!
I didn’t realize that Che was such a pussy.
Report to detention!
*narrows gaze*
Send him to Chairman Meow!
Wait, wait, wait just a minute, I can’t believe I have to do this, Swiss, but:
*narrows gaze*
I hope you’re feline good about that one, Swissy.
*Squints – fails*
Report to the hall of mirrors!
OPERA APPLAUSE.
Notice a lot of the complaints are about his ordering cops to stand down while the antifa shit attacked the Trump people. Is this guy aware of what Che was? You bet your ass he is and that pinko bastard will do the same given the chance.
Twitter doing a poor job of removing the wrong thinkers. The comments are good.
This looks the way I would expect the Berkeley mayoral race to look. Except for the white, cishet shitlord.
http://www.berkeleyside.com/2016/10/13/election-2016-berkeley-spotlight-on-the-mayors-race/
Very apropos. Cats, too, are murderous assholes.
Privatized roads? Why, that’s literally fascism, for reasons no one seems to understand
You know who else no one seemed to understand?
Me, in person.
I’m a terrible speaker.
Parents?
The scatman?
Skibby-dibby dop dop doo-n-do, yon do-n-don
Everyone stutters one way or the other.
Nostradamus?
Captain Pike?
Gabby Johnson?
Girlfriends, Grandsons, and people in spaceships?
Absolutely! Everybody knows that the first thing Hitler did was tear up the existing autobahns, and replace them with private highways.
Indeed!
He also privatized healthcare, deregulated the finance sector, and eliminated the national old age pension system.
Just kidding! Hitler supported the exact opposite of all those things.
Wait, that kid in the comic was able to get rid of all of the government roads just by becoming a Libertarian?
Who is this kid, and can we get him to also take a look at the Federal Reserve?
The state with the best roads is Indiana, whose government privatized its highways in 2006.
Well, sort of. Our toll road is privatized, and it is in good shape despite having construction a lot of the time. The interstates are in ok shape but are under construction almost constantly, and local roads are a mixed bag.
I don’t think the word you’re looking for is “Despite” I think it’s “Because.”
This.
Sorry, threading fail.
More to the point, WTF is up with the man’s top?
Did he tuck his suit jacket into his pants? (Not to step on Gilmore’s toes, but I think that is a major fashion faux pas).
Or is it some horror of a sweater-vest?
It’s a suit-printed shirt. The tie is no more real.
It’s the civilian version of the Eisenhower jacket
Yes!
http://freebeacon.com/blog/upside-communism-hunger/
Cosmo has a new diet, ladies! It’s called debilitating starvation under a ruthless tyrant! It’s all the rage in Cuba and North Korea! #Resist thinking, y’all!
They had to upgrade from “Cancer”
Is it an upgrade?
Now only half as many people call them out on being disgusting!
True. Their readers are probably happy to read an uplifting story about communism. “See, my psychology professor was totes right. Socialism is super cool!”
Looks like the Mayor of Berkeley could spend some time on their weight loss program.
I’ve actually heard commie apologists bring up the Western “obesity epidemic” as a counterpoint when I mention mass starvation under communist/socialist regimes, as though people having too much food to eat is just as bad as people dying one of the slowest and most agonizing deaths due to government policy.
Obviously, as a libertarian, I think people have the right to complain about their government and society to their heart’s content; I’m not an “America: love it or leave it” kind of guy. But seriously: when the “progressive” left is saying that almost every single thing about this country is horrible and everything is better in “socialist” paradises like Scandinavia, I have to wonder why they’re still here.
You forgot to mention that federal spending on the US interstate system was originally justified as a military expense (National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956).
Is there a list or map somewhere of the sections that were reinforced to land bombers on? I could see that being useful someday.
It’s a secret; if we told you, you’d have to die.
You have a bomber you need to land somewhere?
Or an airliner. I figured it would be open source by now. I suppose I could to resort to google maps and NWS wind data but I’m too lazy.
Pretty sure that is an urban legend, unless you were trolling, in which case I have just such a map for sale….
It was certainly the case in the UK.
There were a number of places on the “new” Motorway system in the UK where public/ow cost property was ignored, and more valuable private land appropriated, to ensure 4000 yards of straight, flat road surface. I’ll try and dig out a somewhat objective article I read on the topic about 10 years ago.
Maybe that’s where our urban legend comes from. I hear that the highway system was designed to double as runways all the time from random people.
Some countries have done this as a national, public policy.
Note that neither USA or UK are on that list. The problem, I suspect, is that highway construction is rather different from airstrip construction, plus of course you have assorted highway hardware. IIRC, the argument in the UK was for landing the ill-fated TSR-2/MRCA aircraft before the Harrier came along.
And then you have the issue of having a piece of useless junk on the median until someone can bring a bowser alongside to refuel it, and a sled to re-arm it.
In principle, no, but the pavement has to be about 6 times as thick to support landing aircraft. To make all of your roadways capable of carrying air traffic would be . . . expensive and wasteful, to say the least.
In other words, exactly what the government looks for in a pet project?
Check out Singapore. They have whole sections of the highway with automatic rails/barriers, etc – you gotta do what you gotta do if you only have a couple of airfields (especially since they store half their air force in the US).
Yes Scruffy, I forgot about that. The roads here are for the same reason that Paris is the city of light. Troop movement. Eisenhower took some troops and equipment then moved them from one coast to the other to see how long it would take. I am too lazy to look it up but it was 3 months or something like that. The interstate highways were built to facilitate troops, and they still are. I dont remember the specs on them but inside of every xyz miles the interstate has to be capable of being used as an airstrip. We just get to use them when the troops aren’t.
I live in Maine, and not only does the city I live in not repair the roads, but they barely even bothering clearing the streets during snow storms (there’s only two cities, so feel free to guess which). Oh, except for the storm we had at the beginning of April which was clearly going to be the last storm of the year. My little side street that usually sees a plow once the storm is over had a city vehicle clearing the street every 45 minutes. Gotta get that overtime in.
And to add insult to injury: We have a rainfall tax. That’s right. The square footage of my roof multiplied by annual precipitation and the retarded government constant is the amount I pay for a naturally occurring event the city would have to deal with whether there was a house on my property or not. Never mind the taxes paid for the value of the house. And they still don’t plow the goddamn street.
Portland? The one in Maine, obviously, not the douche-bag paradise in Oregon
Correct! And it’s pretty much just a slightly lesser douche-bag paradise. Seems to be getting worse too.
Jesus Christ, even New Jersey doesn’t have a fucking rainfall tax!
Low blow, dude. It’s unbelievably offensive to say something is worse than New Jersey.
Hey, facts are facts.
Still mean
Nothing is worth than New Jersey no matter how bad it might otherwise be.
Having to live in New Jersey is a greater travesty than getting hit with a rainfall tax, agreed.
Ssshhhh! Don’t give them any ideas!
I assume you’d prefer that NJ’s regulators see nothing in here with regard to new and horrible taxes…
Honestly, it was probably the straw that really pushed me towards Libertarian philosophy. Funny how having some skin in the game and suffering from the shit policies of government will help purge you of progressive ideology. Tax day helps a lot too, when you’re paying more in taxes than you used to live off.
Maryland had one, but the GOP gov managed to get rid of it.
Sadly ours is a city thing, and there’s no chance of anyone not a Dem or Green getting in a position of power. I’d consider moving to a different town, but I’ve told myself the next time I move, it’s going to be to a place where the weather is warmer and there’s an economy other than seasonal tourism.
Seems like progs are taking over all of the major cities. I was thinking about Charlotte, but I hear Cali refugees are flooding the place so that they ruin it too and then flee to somewhere else. Maybe they’ll eventually run out of cities to ruin here and have to flee to Mexico or Canada.
It’s strange, isn’t it. None of them are moving to Cuba or Zimbabwe.
I have friends about to move to the Charlotte area and I’m curious to check it out. I think a city in the early stages of decay is probably better than one long after the takeover. Move in, work your way up to Robber Baron status, and then watch as the people serving your coffee also set about ruining the city you now own.
Do that a few times until you can buy yourself an island, complete with tawny, nubile natives to tend to your needs.
The one thing I can say about Charlotte is that it has just about the prettiest downtown area of any major city and as a bonus you can actually get between most of the buildings in it without ever having to step outside into the tropical weather
We have a rainfall tax. That’s right.
Holy fuck, that is just as retarded as the purely subjective View Tax assessed some places in New Hampshire.
hate_speech: is this a separate tax bill that isn’t tied into the property tax? Or are they bundled together?
It’s separate as I recall. It’s a city ordinance or some shit. My roommate (who owns the house) thought we could dodge it by installing a rain barrel, but it turns out it’s not really about the water…
Now we have a rain barrel we don’t use.
it turns out it’s not really about the water
Hehe, it’s never about the water. Is the tax very large, or is it nickle and dime type of bullshit?
Nickle and dime bullshit as I recall. But I’m pretty sure we are already charged for sewage. I just get a lump bill from my roommate that includes all our other utilities, so all of the precise details are a little vague to me. And it got instituted a few years ago, so my white hot ire has faded in favor of the next outrage, which in this case was the city council deciding city taxpayers could foot the bill to cover the refugee subsidies our somewhat infamous governor decided the state wouldn’t pay anymore. Bring us your tired, your sick, your poor…so we can make everyone tired, sick and poor.
You know who else had to pay the Authority to get water, and get rid of it, when the price of wheat at the catapult-head is the same as it was 20 years ago?
Good thing you don’t live in Colorado. Capturing rainfall on your own property for your own use violates someone else’s water rights.
You got me wondering, so I searched this out real quick. Note that the rain barrel thing never happened. But, we managed to hire 5 people for just shy of $300K (bet that doesn’t include benefits).
Yeah, that seems like a scam on the part of the city for sure. I could see a one-time assessment of a rainfall tax to improve the drainage, since building pavement/buildings on a property will increase the runoff, which will have to be handled by a drainage system, but to make it a recurring thing is clear evidence of malfeasance. Once a drainage system is in place, it requires very little maintenance (so little, in fact, that the cities around where I work don’t even have good records of where their drainage lines even are, which makes installing utilities more difficult). Although it did bug me that the tax foundation article you linked kept referring to the improvements as “sewers” instead of “storm sewers” or “drainage”, since storm sewers and sanitary sewers are very different systems, and using the term sewer without a modifier generally refers to the latter.
They are nowadays, but it’s actually an ongoing problem in San Francisco that they’re not separate systems, so that during rain storms raw sewage will back up into the streets. Then that stupidity engendered a regulatory backlash where if rainwater gathers on a construction site and you have to dewater, your pumped water has to go into a sanitary sewer, not a storm drain (if you’re outside SF, obviously).
Wow, that’s a mess. I’m a bit surprised SF hasn’t separated their systems yet, but I guess I shouldn’t be. That’s characteristically stupid they would have a dewatering rule like that applied to areas with separate systems, since sanitary systems are designed to handle far less capacity than storm systems.
I would add, about Rome, the roads were also for commerce which was the lifeline for Rome. And the really kicker is Romans paid little or no taxes to build their great engineering feats from the aqueducts to its road system.
I’m not well versed on the Roman tax system beyond the subcontracting to tax farmers, who’d buy the right to collect in an area for the amount the Republic/Empire thought it should get. Then the Tax Farmer would squeeze a profit out of their district.
Early on, most Roman public works projects were vanity projects by ruling class dependent on euergetism, i.e. donations and funding by wealthy individuals. Censors, who were the ones primarily in charge of public roads, were expected to fund them through their own means and private donation, with taxes only being a stop-gap for what was deemed military or public necessity. A lot of road networks were built by military legions during non-campaign seasons to keep them busy. Maintenance for most roads was the responsibility of the local province/municipality after construction, usually by donations from the local landowners (in some areas this was levied as a tax). Most Roman roads were not ‘free’ and were actually tolled heavily, particularly bridges, to cover repair costs as well.
I’m less familiar with the process in the post-Republic periods.
But other than that, what else did the Romans give us?
Toga parties?
That was partly because public officials were expected to donate public works as part of their official duties. It made public service somewhat unpopular.
I’ve had to spend a lot of time and money at the car dealership because of Chicago’s and Cook County’s inability to maintain their roads. Despite levying a yearly vehicle tax to the tune of 80 dollars, Chicago is the city of potholes.
And the kicker is that they always beg for more money under the guise of fixing our roads.
Trust me, Montreal’s pothole problem is worse from what I observed.
Some asshole smugly once pointed out that since I’m a libertarian, I am being hypocritical for using the roads. He thought that he got me, but my response was that I pay for the roads through my property taxes and through the vehicle tax that I pay yearly along with the outrageous sales tax in Chicago. And I also pointed out that I’m forced to pay the tax and don’t really have any other options for travel, since the government doesn’t allow for any private entity to maintain the roads.
The cherry on top was when I told him that due to me living in a somewhat affluent neighborhood in the city, I am subsidizing his broke ass when he is traveling on the roads in the city.
When force is the only tool you have (or have even heard of), every problem looks like a nail.
(Is there a term for only using half a metaphor?)
metatwo?
The interesting thing is how the roads are pristine in recently gentrified areas. As soon as Mexican families are pushed out and rich white liberals move in, the roads are magically fixed, so as not to ruin the new Priuses, of course.
Squeaky wheels get the grease. How many work-a-day mexicans do you know with time to bitch at city hall? Beyond that, ‘poor minorities’ reliably vote democrat. Hence, fuck em’ and send the road money where it will buy votes – presuming you’re in a city large enough to gentrify and, therefore, also most likely a democratic type political operator.
And the kicker is that they always beg for more money under the guise of fixing our roads.
Of course, that’s the ruse for their shell game. They’ll raise, say, $5 million here to pay for the roads, and thus free up $5 million from the general fund to spend on pet projects. Maryland made a big deal out of taxing the newly legal casinos to pay for the schools. The voters thought that meant more money for schools. The legislators knew that it meant more money for other bullshit.
Well… teacher and administrator pensions are “for the schools”, right?
– Thomas Sowell
It’s the classic shell game:
“AAAAHHHH!!! OUR ROADZ IS FALLING APART!! WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE UNLESS WE WRITE A BIG CHECK!!!”
And, as soon as the check is written, “Well, of course you do realize, that any projects are going to have to go through an environmental impact review. And a community aesthetics panel. And, did I forget to mention, Senator Bumblefuck’s district needs roads. They haven’t had a chance to build out the kind of roads they need. Needless to say, we’re going to have to make sure that any work is done by union labor. And, of course, it goes without saying that we’ll need to award a sufficient number of contracts to historically underrepresented demographics. And, while we’re at it, what’s so special about roads, anyway? Why, the Europeans are doing some amazing stuff with light rail…”
Six month later, the same people are saying, “AAAAHHHH!!! OUR ROADZ IS FALLING APART!! WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE UNLESS WE WRITE A BIG CHECK!!!”
On the flip side, the cost of road building is heavily inflated by the government. The environmental/aesthetics B.S. is only the beginning of it. The government likes to change the contract, constantly, while the road is already being built. They will order things torn out and redone just because of some requirement that didn’t even exist when the contract was originally bid. None of the possible outcomes of this process are good for the taxpayer.
As David Angelo points out, the ‘ROADZ’ funding is almost nothing in the grand scheme of things.
The real kicker for me is that the government doesn’t build the roads, for the most part. Roads, especially the larger and higher volume ones, are built by contractors. The government takes your money, wastes some nontrivial percentage of it, and then gives the rest to a contractor (or two or three, …). The only reason the government is involved is so it can use force (against property owners, against taxpayers, against contractors).
In Chicago, the contractor always seems to be a huge contributor to the mayor and aldermen. it doesn’t matter if they do a good job or complete the road projects in a timely manner. Nope. All you need to have is some connections to city hall.
The CA Dept of Transportation (“Caltrans”) does a lot of their own construction, but they do also farm some out through the public bid system. Needless to say, if you want something done (at least somewhat) well, and on time, you contract it out.
Back when I worked for Berkeley Unified School District on their bond program, I had a co-worker who had a really hard time with deadline pressure. He moved over to Caltrans and found the no-pressure pacing of their projects much more to his liking.
I happen to work for a contractor who constructs roads for the local municipalities, counties and state DOT. It’s mostly hard bid work, and of course no set of bid documents are perfect so inevitably there’s changes and unforeseen conditions that arise. Once in awhile I’ll run into an unreasonable agency project manager and they’ll frame the classic FYTW as “I’m tasked in protecting the public’s tax dollars!” as they attempt to cram extra work into our scope without proper (any?) additional compensation.
OT but very timely. Hours and hours of soul-crushing commute NPR rage-listening present: Muh Public Media.
I had an acquaintance who was bitching about cuts to NPR and public radio. I responded by telling her that instead of going on her yearly major vacation with her husband, why don’t they give NPR the money that they would have spent on travelling.
Motherfuckin’ crickets. If all the white liberals decided to come together and donate money, they could fund NPR without a problem. And while some do that, a lot of them would rather the government force someone to pay for their public radio.
My local NPR affiliate only draws like 12% of its budget (according to them) from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. I will bathe in more prog tears if that funding gets cut and there are 12% more beg-a-thons. The silver lining of the beg-a-thons is maybe they’ll pick up a few more underwriters.
It’s no better than charging you for the bullet they use at your own execution.
This should be told to every damn Hollywood celebrity who squeals ‘more money for X’.
I’d love for someone to respond “okay, we’re going to put a 95% tax on all millionaires in the entertainment industry to pay for it.”
I have heard Penn Gillette speak about things in this vein before although I am not sure if he ever hit it directly.
Was that before or after he pulled the lever for Hillary?
Before. I haven’t listened to a word he has said after he came out for hilldog.
Well, that’s a constant drum-beat from Glenn Reynolds too.
NPRisms: REMIND US
A science guy visits All Things Considered for a lesson in electromagnetic wave propagation.
Audio recording
Transcript
COLE: Well, hold on. We’ll get into that in a second. But first, we’re going to need a little bit of physics. There’s this handy equation for finding the speed of a wave or a microwave, even. The speed is the wave’s wavelength times its frequency.
SIEGEL: And you have to remind us what the wavelength is.
COLE: So that’s just the distance between the top of one wave and the top of another wave.
…
COLE: Well, remember, the distance between the hot spots is half a wavelength. And so we’ve got our half a wavelength, 2.5 inches, double it. You’ve got the wavelength, 5 inches. And now remember our equation?
SIEGEL: (Laughter) No – wavelength.
COLE: The speed is the wavelength of the microwave times the frequency of the microwave.
<<<<<<<
Oh Robert Siegel, I guess the science guy had to remind you again. If you spend extended periods of time listening to NPR like I do, you will notice that “remind us” is a device employed by public radio personalities to tickle the ego of whatever pseudointellectual on the output of the radio receiver. Boy is it ever a clever way to pump money into the beg-a-thons, though.
I heard that on the radio yesterday. And when he said, “You get the frequency by looking at the number stamped inside the oven door, ” I almost ran off the road laughing. IFSL thought processes. Yeah, I got the speed of light by looking inside the cover of a textbook, same cheat, more effective.
LOL nice catch! If they wanted 10% less douche in this experiment, 400% more “remind us again”, and 50% more befuddled pseudointellectual listeners, they could have estimated the frequency from experimental assumptions, then compared to the door.
I love this one too:
<<<<<
COLE: That comes out to 193 miles per second.
SIEGEL: I learned the speed of light was 186,000 miles per second, so…
COLE: So there you go. We’re pretty close.
SIEGEL: And we’re pretty fast, too.
<<<<
Oh Robert Siegel, when will your pre-show Google-Fu twisted to sound like ingrained memorisation ever cease to amaze?
Wait… what? Those are microwaves! How can that be the same as the speed of light?
*grabs microwave, hops on for trip to nearest star system*
Mmmmm marshmallow-vaccum mixed dielectric. *gurgle*
“… you will notice that “remind us” is a device employed by public radio personalities to tickle the ego of whatever pseudointellectual on the output of the radio receiver.”
I think it’s more to help the pig-ignorant-of-science among NPR’s audience understand what is being discussed.
They use “remind us” in all circumstances with public radio.
Now remind us, how many deaths due to drunk driving occur on the highways of the US every year?
Remind us, what percentage of eligible voters cast a ballot in midterm elections?
Remind us again, what’s the wavenumber of a propagating electromagnetic wave?
Remind us again, how many fortune cookies do you stuff a twenty-pound turkey with to celebrate Boxing Day?
Remind us again, when was it that you realized your entire life was a hollow lie?
Remind us again, what was it that brought utter destruction to your once well-reviewed butthole?
hehe
That is hilarious. I can’t believe I never quite picked up on that as a listener flattering device.
One thing I love about NPR hosts and newsreaders is how if they have to say something silly, they’ll change the inflection to make it more serious.
“Now remind us, how many deaths due to drunk driving occur on the highways of the US every year?”
Someone in the comments on The Old Site once said that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration considers a fatal crash to be a “drunk driving fatality” if 1) someone dies, and 2) one of the involved individuals had consumed alcohol. It doesn’t factor in whether or not the person who drank alcohol was actually at fault, and it doesn’t consider how much alcohol was consumed. If this is true, this means that if you went to dinner, had one glass of wine, then got crushed by a semi truck on the way home, that’s a “drunk driving fatality”.
I’ve been looking over their website trying to verify that claim, but I can’t find any info on their criteria. Go figure.
How do you do it? I spent last summer listening to NPR to and from work and I found it constantly pushing me into frothing rage. Not just from the flagrant bias while presuming to be neutral but also the unbelievably shitty quality of the journalism. Just amateur level work. Drove me mad.
Sad thing is, I used to think they were really good (like 2005ish). I don’t know if they’ve gone downhill or if I’ve changed so much that their flaws are more obvious now.
I am basically a pretty patient dude, and from time to time I get rewarded with some human interest pieces. In the 9-10am time slot, there’s also an NHPR show where the host is actually extremely balanced, and challenges liberals and conservatives alike with honest questions and doesn’t attempt to be adversarial/biased. I wish NHPR would trade out some of the crap they do carry (Diane Rehm 2 hour festival now branded ‘1A’ – get it, first amendment?) for the BBC world news that Maine NPR carries.
Also, since the election it’s been a shower fountain of delicious progressive tears, so tasty and salty that the benefits greatly outweigh the intellectual dishonesty and lazy journalism. The tears are refreshing and rejuvenating.
Diane Rehm, famed for leading questions about racist Republicans (or anybody else that opposed Obama in any way whatsoever).
I won’t miss her in the least.
They’ve gone downhill, particularly over the last year (like so many outfits). Part of it is getting older and wiser and realizing that their “smartness” is mostly posturing (like the “remind us” technique, which reminds me of a line I heard recently to the effect “I don’t know about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people, but I know for sure you can make a fortune helping slightly-above-average people feel super-duper smart”).
Anymore, though, I can only listen to Marketplace, which is derpy enough but at least is a venue that makes gestures toward the concept that economics is relevant to anything. The rest of it I’ve had to just turn off for the most part because it’s gone from just annoyingly smug and narrow-minded to downright shitty reporting and hyperventilating hit pieces on various Trump administration officials that are generally based on some willfully misunderstood offhand comment.
NPR is so precious. When the market is up they play Happy Days and when it’s down they play Stormy Weather. So clever.
Could be worse. They could prefix every article on Trump with the Horst Wessel Song.
It’s a level of subtlety worthy of their hyper-educated audience; the ones who need to be reminded every few days how bonds work.
Marketplace is produced by APM, which is not NPR. Not that I disagree about the preciousness.
Christ, did they want to make their supporters look like effete pretentious douches?
I find that the local roads in my town are far better maintained than the state / federal interstates in New Jersey. Maybe because everyone in my small town knows the Mayor and he wants to keep his job.
It’s almost like small, local governments are less terrible than a centralized bureaucracy overseeing a nation of ~325 million people.
@dril makes two grand a month from Patreon.
well, he provides quality absurdist content so I’m not surprised there
I’m not convinced that limited government isn’t necessary for a large-scale transportation system.
But that point aside, I always find it interesting that it’s often the same species of Progressive that finds “muh roadz!” to be the last, most convincing line of defense for government who also condemns the government for making us auto-/fossil-fuel-dependent by building all those paved roads.
You just haven’t derped hard enough. it’s that same government’s fault for not banning those nasty dinosaur burning monstrosities and mandating everyone use God’s gift to humanity, the Tesla model S. To a prog we’re always just one more step away from utopia.
Well, if a need is there for a road, and there are sufficient consumers prepared to fund its building and upkeep, the investment can lead almost directly to building the roadway. Anticipated payback on the investment might be (as little as) decades, so there’s nothing hard about funding a road. For example, every time I drive over the Whitestone Bridge or Throgs’ Neck Bridge over Long Island Sound, I *have* to believe those fuckers are solidly net-profitable by now, with a toll of $4.50 in each direction. And yet they’re operated by the the state.
I see it as being far easier than funding – say – a border wall, where there’s no direct mechanism for paying down the investment costs, because you can’t identify a “willing customer base”.
I was struck by this paragraph:
I have no problem with localized experiments in private roadways, since, as you say, “investment can lead almost directly to building the roadway” and “payback on the investment might be (as little as) decades.”
I also think local communities should be allowed to form their own local funds to repair their own local roads (which is currently illegal pretty much everywhere). The whole thing is way too top-heavy, but I need more real-world examples of sustained operation of privately owned transportation systems to be convinced that that’s not one of those areas where limited government is a ‘necessary evil.’
What do you mean by “limited government”? To me, that means protection of private property and enforcement of contracts (among other things). So, limited government might be necessary in the sense that it protects would-be road-builders from theft, coercion, and dishonest dealing. But that still leaves the construction of major roads as private affairs, insofar as they are voluntarily funded.
Home developers would probably build cul-de-sacs and boulevards in the suburbs because who would buy a house that you can’t get to? In downtown areas, local businesses would chip in for road construction since they want people to physically access their business. These businesses might earn back some of the money by offering paid parking spots on the side of the roads.
This has actually occurred in real life; there was an incident in Hawaii where a certain part of the island was cut off from a lot of traffic due to a bridge becoming unusable. This was very detrimental to the businesses in this area since they all depend on tourist revenue. The state government was dragging its feet on getting the bridge fixed, so the businesses and residents got together and built a new bridge.
Highways are an even simpler issue because in wide open spaces, it would be easy to have two highways. They would most likely run on tolls. They could be funded by selling “subscriptions”, which would consist of your licence plate being stored in a “good to go” database. Along this highway, they would have license plate readers, and if you’re subscribed, you’re good – if not, they mail you a bill.
Infrastructure is expensive, but since your bridges are both almost 80 years old (thanks Wiki!) they are most definitely profitable. Texas has experimented with private highway improvements, wherein an existing highway will be upgraded by adding tolled express lanes, the construction being paid for and managed by the private developer in exchange for said developer being granted the right to collect the tolls for 50 years. It is said that it takes approximately 30 years for the tolls to pay for the construction costs of the road, so it’s a good investment for companies with enough capital to think long-term (although the construction companies do tend to turn around and sell the toll rights to investment firms). Government involvement is still necessary in this process, however, as it is practically impossible to expand highways without the use of eminent domain to obtain the land on which to build.
I would find the eminent domain argument a little more compelling if the government didn’t take whatever it saved by forcing people out of their homes/land and then turn around and waste 10 times that much (and I’m being optimistic here) on turning every road project into a massive jobs program.
In Romania a local town tired of trucks on main street passed the hat and built a bypass for less money then the government was going to pay for a feasibility study for making the bypass. Another bunch of people rebuild a bridge that was destroyed by a flood and left their village isolated and they state made them tear it down or face jail for unauthorized infrastructure. So yeah… roadz
That is not to say that there would be a lot less infrastructure with lower government. A lot of it is a waste of resources, some of it is useful. It is clear that there are things that would be different, but it does not mean that there would be the same level of infrastructure with lower government.
You have managed to capture the full essence of the fusion between rage and fascination. So thank you.
There’s an interesting history of skateboarders repurposing fallow public space and the state Not Appreciating it. There’s a Thrasher mid-length documentary about the phenomenon, called “Under the Bridge.”
Fuck roads. I want my flying car. Does anyone think about the huge amount of land gobbled up by roads? Flying cars would mean a lot of trees…
Have you seen the idiots driving on this planet? You want them flying? I want hovering car, no more than 20 cm over the ground
It’s harder for someone to cut me off in the open air.
Have you not seen the fifth element? Bruce Willis will cut you off from all directions.
See the civilian drones – flight rout and destination is pre-programmed by using your finger to draw lines on a map on your iPad. No reason we cant scale that up. Hop in, tell the computer where you want to go then enjoy the view.
The problems with driving in 3D is fixed by driverless technology. I don’t trust myself and especially not everyone else to drive in 3D. Even Khan couldn’t figure it out.
An anime I watched called space brothers had a novel solution to that: Holographic roads. A HUD was installed that would project an image of a road on your windshield. Simply follow the road and you’re set. If everyone uses the same map pack and only deviates to pass and make destination changes then it would work quite well I think.
Flying car tax ftw. Reason.tv had an interesting featurette about supersonic commercial carriers that I had no clue about.
For most of history, only capital cities had paved roads because kings wanted to move their troops around and put down rebellions. See: the city of light.
Fixed it.
The roads around here – Michigan cold/thaw cycle – are just terrible. The newly laid roads are garbage within a few years.
The local streets, however, are usually the worst. In March the potholes got bad enough that my car windshield cracked from the front pillars flexing. Add in the newer cars with low profile tires and you’re looking at a high potential for cracked rims.
It makes me wish I still had my ol’ Toyota T100 – sure the ride was jittery but it could take the ruts and potholes a lot better. Maybe it’s time to get that 4Runner.
I’m surprised at you – Lord Humungus – missing the obvious vehicle. Truckasaurus.
Something really big! And really fast! And gets really shitty gas mileage!
Or a Canyonero.
You might take a look at a used FJ Cruiser (at this point, they are all used). Those were built entirely in Japan, are overengineered AF, and seem designed for winter driving – you could boil water on the heater, and all the controls look like they were designed for people wearing mittens.
Noted – the FJ Cruiser, for a discontinued model, really hold its value. Of course that’s the same with all Toyota full-frame trucks/SUVs.
I would love to have a Landcruiser/LX470 but the mpg for this things makes my departed Buick Roadmaster look frugal.
There’s the added bonus of an awesome aftermarket parts, err, market.
Mrs. Dean is rocking a lift kit, cold air intake/supercharger/catback exhaust, tweaked ECU, bumpers that would make a Panzer beg for mercy, etc. Of course, adding a hundred horses to the stock engine has knocked her mileage down, but hey, gas is cheap and Mrs. Dean is happy, so all is good in the world. She’s got around 140K miles on it, and it looks like its good for another 140K.
Downside – the seats are kinda small.
Outside the cities, roads were dirt or sometimes gravel. They turned to mud in the winter and dust in the summer. Travel on these roads was slow and unpleasant even in the best conditions.
My grandfather and his father took a road trip through Florida in the 1920’s, and my grandfather told me that’s exactly how the state was then. Only the cities were paved, between them was nothing but dirt or gravel roads.
I even read the journal my great-Grandfather kept of the trip. Unfortunately, while he was meticulous book keeper, he wasn’t much of a diarist. So it didn’t describe much of what they saw, but could tell you exactly how much a bottle of milk or a quart of gas cost at the time.
How much was a quart of gas at the time?
It varied some, but it wasn’t much, something like five cents a quart. I remember that milk was definitely more expensive.
My mom saved a city map from when we lived in Boise, ID in the early 70s. There was key showing which roads were paved, gravel, or dirt – and this was in the city.
Your grandfather? Hell, Louisiana was like that when I grew up.
My grandfather (if you feel like looking on a map) said a trip from Manifest, La to Jonesville, La was an all day trip. They spent half the day riding a mule from Manifest to highway 8 which was then not a highway but a railway. You waited on the tracks for the train to come along and when it did you flagged it down. Since the train was always stopping for people it went very slow. All day in an exhaustive and dangerous trip that I now make in 15 minutes in my air conditioned jeep.
Hell, Minnesoda was like that when I was a kid, too. The highway was paved and the main street in my grandparents town was paved from the railroad tracks to the courthouse.
The 15 mile drive to my other GP’s house involved about a mile of paved roads and gravel for the remainder. Gravel held up to the snow and cold a lot better and the traction was a lot better.
The fastest way around was a snowmobile along the ditch, though.
My house is a half mile from the nearest paved road.
When I lived in Baldwin County. AL, about ten years ago, there were still a surprising number of dirt roads.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn#After_the_World_Wars
You know who else mandated speed limits?
No true libertarian uses ROADZ anyway. All of my vehicles are hovercrafts.
I never took you for an Eel keeper.
I still use roads. It’s difficult for my orphan slaves to pull my chariot on any other type of surface.
File under: Goddammit.
I hate everyone and everything after reading this news. At least I get to die one day.
You don’t like The Waterboy?
I nearly spit tea out laughing at your reaction. Last year I was excited when The Do-Over came out on Netflix. An R-rated Sandler comedy movie exclusive to Netflix? Was I going to see the rebirth of the great Billy Madison? HUGE stinker. YUUUUUUGEEE
Wow. I’m actually glad now that I let my subscription lapse.
Adam Sandler movies, regardless of how terrible you find them, make piles and piles of money.
what people fail to appreciate about hollywood is that, like the Mafia, “reliable earner” (e.g. sanitation extortion) is far preferable to “hugely popular one-off hit” (think Lufthansa heist)
Sandler movies aren’t gigantic, but they consistently rake in 2-3x their budget.
Also helps that he’s a successful massive whore conman.
I don’t like his movies, but I can damn well respect him. He basically makes movies so he can have fun with his friends, they cost nothing to make and bring in a fortune.
Actually the link above pointed out that they are actually sort of expensive from the POV of the average “bullshit comedy film” (~$80-100m); but that they nevertheless keep earning their keep =
As John Titor showed, it’s because they’re scams.
He basically makes movies so he can have fun with his friends,
He makes obscenely expensive movies for what they are so he can pay off his buddies and himself with fat paychecks. Almost all his movies could be made for a tenth of the cost if it wasn’t for his blatant nepotism. I’m not ‘there ought to be a law’ about it, but he’s still a fundamentally disgusting human being from an artistic perspective.
You charge what the market will bear, always.
When was he accused of being an artist?
You can hate his movies, but you have to admit he is an AWESOME friend. Just ask Rob Schneider.
Oh, I wish I was one of his movie star friends. I’d be wealthy, I’d be famous, and because I was rich and famous
hotwomen would want to have sex with me.One of my darkest secrets is that I once laughed at You Don’t Mess with the Zohan
I like to cook; I like good food. I prefer red meat and seafood. But sometimes, there is nothing better than dipping a chicken nugget in sweet and sour sauce. Cheap, savory, and low-effort. I will not apologize for enjoying McNuggets, nor laughing at Adam Sandler Movies.
Perspective?!? Get tha fukk outta here!
“1. Paved roads were rare.”
These are still rare in Baltimore. Well, fully paved roads are rare. What you have are some roads that are mostly gravel and asphalt patched giant potholes, with some big metal plates (WTF? I don’t even know) and a strip or two here and there of actually paved roads. So people mostly drive in the bike lanes, which are actually maintained fairly well.
Sigh… one more try…
These are still rare in Baltimore. Well, fully paved roads are rare. What you have are some roads that are mostly gravel and asphalt patched giant potholes, with some big metal plates (WTF? I don’t even know) and a strip or two here and there of actually paved roads. So people mostly drive in the bike lanes, which are actually maintained fairly well.
Wow – that’s an almost-perfect image of government efficiency right there. Trench plates cost about $1,000 a month to rent. Yet, it’s infinitely easier for a city official to simply rent a trench-plate than to actually coordinate repair of the road; but it would be way cheaper in the long run just to fix the damn road.
They fixed a road I have to drive on everyday I go into the city, that was gradually deteriorating over the last decade or so. One lane was so bad that everyone drove in the bike lane. You could seriously break a wheel. It had been like that for at least 3 years. So what did they do? They patched sections of the very worst parts and left the rest, which will all be just as bad in a few years.
But those trench plates as you call them are all over the city. They also have big railroad spikes sticking out of them that you have to be careful not to hit or you might puncture a tire. It’s fucking shameless and the taxes in the city are sky fucking high. What are they doing with all that money? Not fixing the roads for sure.
“The state with the best roads is Indiana”
It’s also the state that is the best example of why we need flying cars now. It’s a pain in the ass spending almost your entire commute to work both ways waiting to get around a tractor that’s doing a top speed of 5 MPH.
Also, why no mention of bridges here? Libertarians don’t hate just roads, they hate roads and bridges.
Hey, for libertarians (as opposed to anarchists), that’s just a bridge too far.
I wish there would be a suspension of these corny puns.
Just for clarity, I think we should distinguish roads from streets.
For example “Roads were mainly built to aid the movement of armies.” is true for Roads but not Streets.
My definition to distinguish between them:
Roads are a way to get between Point A and Point B as fast as reasonably possible. A and B are usually two different towns/cities, but could be a bypass too.
Streets are a destination. Houses, businesses, shops, offices, government buildings, etc are usually located on streets, especially in urban areas.
This was true in ancient times and today.
Anyway, only nitpick on article is that capital cities had paved streets, not roads.
I think it’s also worth touching on the point that when Progressives raise these points, there’s a motte-and-bailey going on where the Progressive says “is there even one thing that we might need government to do? Yes, maybe, you say? Therefore, you’re arguing in favor of total Federal control of every aspect of our lives!”
Where I think most libertarians get more comfortable with government in proportion to how local that government is. I have considerably less problem with city-level ordinances and regulations (even when I disagree with them) than I do with the Federal government needing to involve itself in every damn thing. But the discussion with Progressives tends to be “absolute Federal control vs. Somalian anarchy.”
Exactly. Most libertarians seem to be fine with certain levels of subsidiarity. Minarchists see some value in Federal action, a bit more in state, a bit more in local, even more at the neighborhood level and dictatorship at the home level.
I may bitch about my HOA, but in that case I really did sign the social contract.
“is there even one thing that we might need government to do? Yes, maybe, you say? Therefore, you’re arguing in favor of total Federal control of every aspect of our lives!”
I’ve gotten this before. It’s usually when I argue that some proposed government expansion presents a danger to personal liberty, and the “progressive” says in response, “well, it’s just a slight expansion of things that they do already” or “we regulate X, so what’s the big problem with regulating Y in the same way?”
Then, if I say that regulation tends to self-compound and snowball out of control, they look at me like I have three heads.
Around here: Instead of concrete or tar, they’ve been returning to an older (the road outside my house in the 70s had this) method: Chip Seal
Which, as far as I can tell, consists of laying a layer of tar down and then a whole bunch of loose gravel. The traveling cars – like me – are expected to tamp down the aggregate with our tires. Great hilarity if someone is tailgating you and you’re driving a RWD vehicle.
Wow – they do a pretty good job of presenting a half-assed patch-job intended to kick the maintenance can down the road a few more years as a real construction practice. Those are some bureaucrats who know what they’re being paid for!
The street I mostly grew up on, from age 8 all the way through college, was paved that way. They’d drop a new layer of tar and gravel about once every two years. Took forever to harden in the summer – I can remember getting tar and pebbles stuck to my shoes.
I can remember playing basketball on that in the summer and it sticking to my sneakers. I had a way higher tolerance for heat as a kid.
Chip Seal was my nickname in preschool.
As a developer, I should add, that developers (entrepreneurs) build a tremendous amount of the roads people drive on. In addition to paying for the improvement and/or widening of any road that crosses or fronts your property, in master planned communities, all those roads are paid for and built by developers, developers, developers.
In addition, you’ll find that the public roads in your city are originally built by a development tax specifically for roads. If I’m building industrial warehouse units, they have a road use fee that’s ostensibly tied to the amount of truck traffic that warehouse will generate (per thousand square feet of warehouse). They have another figure for traffic caused by business office (typically four cars per thousand feet of building). It’s the same way they pay for new schools, as well. There’s a fee associated with every single family home you get approved by the city based on how many people children are expected to live in that home (how many children are likely enroll in the local public school). The reason senior housing (+55) is substantially less than other housing is because by restricting it to residents without children above that age, they guarantee no kids will be in that development will enroll in the local school–so the developer didn’t have to pay that fee.
Why do developers have to pay a development fee to the school district for putting up industrial warehouse?
Fuck you, that’s why!
Anyway, the point is that it’s irksome to hear statists say that the government pays for the roads–when government is an unprofitable endeavor. Taxpayers pay to maintain most everything–not government. To that observation, I would also add that for the streets many of us use on a regular basis, across and around town, those roads were probably not originally constructed at any cost to the taxpayers. They were paid for by developers who were reimbursed by adding those costs to the price of the homes they sold. When you go to insure your brand new house against fire, if you’re not getting ripped off, you’ll notice that you only need to insure for a fraction of what you paid for the house. The reason for that is because the cost of your house includes the cost of the storm drain, the sewer lines, the grading of the project, and, yes, the sidewalks and the roads through your development. In addition, the cost of your house includes enormous fees that went to pay for the local school district’s construction plan, to pay for new fire houses, to pay for new roads! Those things won’t be destroyed if your home burns down–so you don’t need to insure against losing their value if you forget to turn off the stove.
But the government doesn’t pay for those things to be built. Those things were paid for by consumers (home buyers).
If I had my way, streets (see above) would be maintained by the local *OA and roads would be handled by tolls (or privatized, but I am not assuming libertopia here) or the like. So the government would build and maintain roads between cities/towns/etc and tolls or whatever would fund them. Streets would be handled by the local owners along the street (I would recommend neighborhood associations about 1 mile on a side).
*Home, Business, Mixed Use, whatever you want the * to be.
I’m not sure if that’s the core of the argument. I think they say that it’s the institution of government that has the organizational power to… make roads happen. That sans that central authority, roads would be disorganized or only usable to those that paid for them (Billionaires!).
I don’t agree with that sentiment of course, but ultimately that’s the argument.
Those local roads are being built without taxpayer funds by entrepreneurs. Those entrepreneurs are being reimbursed by consumers.
No, I know that. I think when the roads argument pops its head, they’re thinking of the broad network of urban streets that connect neighborhoods, highways and byways across open country etc.
Ehhhehehe. hehehe. Hehemmhehe.
http://www.reuters.com/article/venezuela-oil-tankers-seizure-idUSL2N1HD1MI
REFILE-Despite alliance, Russian shipper holds Venezuela oil hostage over debts
Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA, sent a tanker in October to the Caribbean with the expectation that its cargo of crude would fetch about $20 million – money the crisis-stricken nation desperately needs.
Instead, the owner of the tanker, the Russian state-owned shipping conglomerate Sovcomflot, held the oil in hopes of collecting partial payment on $30 million that it says PDVSA owes for unpaid shipping fees.
The oil price crash starting in 2014 hit Venezuela particularly hard. Once a paradise of oil-fueled consumption, the OPEC nation is now a Soviet-style economy of empty supermarket shelves and snaking food queues.
Russia has consistently supported President Nicolas Maduro with financing arrangements and oilfield investments. State-run oil firm Rosneft has lent money to PDVSA since 2016 and last month was in talks to help PDVSA make a hefty bond payment, according to Venezuelan government and banking sources.
Smart move but I think you can count on a $10 MM write off as you aren’t ever going to see the rest of the money owed. But probably better than a $30 MM write off.
Something I didn’t know was a thing: the bat bomb.
If it can be weaponized, it will be.
If it can’t be weaponized, people will admit it only after dozens of failures, and some asshole will probably try again in twenty years anyway.
And while we are on the subject, there is no way privately owned automobiles would be allowed to develop today. Private citizens piloting their own vehicles ? To their chosen destination on their own schedule ? Chaos !
This is actually a really good point and I suspect there’s a good chance you’re more right than you know.
I’m 100 percent sure that there will be a push to ban privately owned, human-driven automobiles. Some Swedish lefty rag already published an op-ed saying that private automobiles should be banned in urban areas.
https://youtu.be/nq2jY1trxqg
Boulder has pretty bad roads. When they are decently paved, the manhole covers are sticking 2-4 inches above or below the surface. It causes a lot of the nice cars to replace rims, and bounces my truck because my suspension is very stiff.
we also use a lot of segmented concrete blocks or something. blocks maybe 5-8 feet long, and they just line them up on the ground. this also causes my short wheelbase to start rocking in rhythm with the blocks. I suppose I am not in the majority for having that problem, but I see a lot of jeeps here.
Good article, small quibble. Not sure if it was mentioned by someone else, because there are almost 300 comments above me. But, the traders using the roads were maybe as important as the soldiers, at least for Rome. The pax Romana owes much to the trade within the empire, and the roads made that possible.
Goods were transported across the Roman world but there were limitations caused by a lack of land transport innovation. The Romans are celebrated for their roads but in fact it remained much cheaper to transport goods by sea rather than by river or land as the cost ratio was approximately 1:5:28.
Interesting, here in VA, as I understand it a considerable number of housing developments/HOAs own/maintain their own roads – charging internal fees, etc. I’ve seen a number of “gated” areas, and one of my coworkers is always bitching about one of her neighbors. Apparently he keeps driving his 18-wheeler and tearing up portions of the road without paying his dues to get it redone (or right after they fixed it – I don’t remember the details).