[bpt3]

It is built in major metro areas, and requires endless subsidies to stay afloat in all but one of those areas.

Public transit cannot compete with private transit outside of cost unless you have a very, very high population density, which makes it unpopular with people who can afford alternatives (i.e. almost all Americans).

[cycomanic]

> It is built in major metro areas, and requires endless subsidies to stay afloat in all but one of those areas.

So how do you thing roads are build? Is that not a subsidy? Especially out in rural areas where people always complain the loudest that public transport doesn't work because it requires subsidies. If you would make people pay for their road use, rural living would very quickly become unsustainable for most.

Let's not even talk about all the externalities like land cost of those roads especially in metropolitan areas.

[bpt3]

> So how do you thing roads are build? Is that not a subsidy?

No? In my area, new local roads are normally built by developers and maintained by HOAs, with fuel taxes covering most state and federal road work (I think it should all be covered by fuel taxes personally).

> Especially out in rural areas where people always complain the loudest that public transport doesn't work because it requires subsidies.

Public transportation makes absolutely no sense in rural areas, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

> If you would make people pay for their road use, rural living would very quickly become unsustainable for most.

People do pay for road use, via fuel taxes, so again I'm not sure what your point is here.

> Let's not even talk about all the externalities like land cost of those roads especially in metropolitan areas.

Feel free to talk about it in detail, instead of playing the usual "Oh, the externalities! Why won't anyone think of the externalities!" game I see over and over from public transit advocates.

[cycomanic]

> > So how do you thing roads are build? Is that not a subsidy? > > No? In my area, new local roads are normally built by developers and maintained by HOAs, with fuel taxes covering most state and federal road work (I think it should all be covered by fuel taxes personally). > > > Especially out in rural areas where people always complain the loudest that public transport doesn't work because it requires subsidies. >

My point is, even if roads are build and maintained by fuel taxes only (as you point out they usually are not, and in most countries much of the road network was build using other income sources), those fuel taxes are a not local (happy to be corrected though), i.e. rural roads get massive subsidies from metropolitan areas.

[const_cast]

It absolutely can compete with cost, we just have to not cheat.

Often when we compare transit to automobiles we don't take into account the cost of roads (???). Interstates have cost us over 25 trillion by now. That's just the interstates.

[bpt3]

First of all, I don't know who is comparing the two and ignoring cost, so you can put away that strawman.

Secondly, road costs are mostly paid for by fuel (i.e. use) taxes, and I think the fuel tax should be increased to pay for all of it personally. What percentage of public transit costs are covered by use taxes? In my area (which is a major city that is not NYC), it's around 10%, and it still makes little financial sense to take public transportation if you value your time at all or are traveling as a group (which families do regularly) and look at out of pocket costs.

Third, you (as with other transit advocates, which I will assume you are based on this comment, feel free to correct me) completely miss the point even though I explicitly stated it. Even if roads are significantly more expensive, Americans can afford it and are willing to pay for the massive increase in convenience. If that changes, then spending patterns should change as well.

And I say all this as someone who prefers living in a walkable area and lives close to a public transit and uses it when it makes sense (which is not often, despite my work also being very close to a stop on the same line I live on).

[jandrese]

Use taxes cover about 36%[1] of road construction and maintenance, the rest comes out of the general budget. If they were raised to cover all of the costs driving would be unaffordable to many people. Or at the very least Americans would suddenly be interested in small cars again. Some other countries do push more of the burden of road maintenance onto drivers and those countries tend to have far more robust public transit systems.

[1] https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiative...

[bpt3]

That's only for state and local government from what I can tell, and they could offset increases in fuel taxes by reducing things like property taxes if desired. Federal highway spending has almost entirely been covered by federal fuel tax revenue, but a recent ramp up in spending without increasing revenue now has the put the trust fund at risk of depletion.

Americans would suddenly be interested in small cars again, which seems like a win to me, because there's almost nothing that will make them desire public transit despite what some hope for.

[jandrese]

There is another monkeywrench in road funding. Use taxes are mostly from fuel taxes, which electric vehicles don't pay. As the vehicle fleet electrifies that gap will need to be covered somehow.

[bpt3]

I believe most states (mine definitely does) are applying a use tax at registration.

I would be fine with the mileage being tracked at the annual inspection and getting a bill based on that, but it seems like I'm in the minority there.