[smoll]

Depends on if you think in purely capitalistic terms (most but not all Americans) or not (again, most Europeans). I mean one way to think about it is the sidewalk is exploitable by businesses as a potential source of revenue for people who want to ride electric scooters (and other businesses that directly grow the economy) and they can pay lobbyists who drive the engine of American economic growth (lol), whereas you as a pedestrian is hardly doing an activity on that sidewalk that directly contributes to economic growth, so yeah, in a way you are getting your walk down the “free” sidewalk subsidized.

[ddingus]

Walking on the way to the bank, to get a loan, to start a business qualifies as economic activity.

As does going to the store, and a whole bunch of other things.

The USA built the Interstate Highway System for exactly the reason of economic growth. The ideas behind it are no different from the ones that justified sidewalks.

Should any small town evaluate their sidewalk projects, like we have the Interestate Highway Project, assuming they have the records and they probably don't, they would find those sidewalks probably returned a couple times their cost already, and will continue to deliver that, easily funding their upkeep.

(something we seem to have forgotten about roads, which has allowed tolls to encroach on and marginalize said growth and value)

[timerol]

Note that not all roads induce enough development to sustain the relevant maintenance, which leads to a fair amount of municipal funding problems: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/12/4/5-ways-federal...

[ddingus]

That is almost all entirely do to people who should be paying more not doing so.

[scarejunba]

Dude. Nobody talks like this. Sidewalks are free. Roads are free except when tolled. The library is free. Facebook is free.

This is a ridiculous conversation.

[C1sc0cat]

They are paid for by taxes