Quote:
Originally Posted by Daox
I'd be interested in seeing some info to back up that statement. I did a quick google search and found that most of the tax money does in fact go toward road maintenance, but yes some does get used for other things. This differs from state to state though. The state tax is the majority of the tax. The federal tax is smaller in compairison.
|
Or if your state raids random funds with IOUs and borrows money to claim its not running a deficit.
In any event the real problem is the skyrocketing cost of roads and WHO causes road damage.
Our current system does absolutely nothing to encourage the companies/agencies that build roads to have them last any period of time. There were roads that historically lasted 30-40 years with minimal maintanence, today most interstates get plowed over every 2-6 years around here. That is an indiciation of incompetance, and flawed materials being used in the road. There are materials that cost little if anything more that would last much longer, even europe uses more advanced methods of building roads and most euro zone countries require a guarantee of 20 years on any given road.
My belief is that many roads...
1. need maintanence not repair (secondary roads should be left to rot besides fill and hazard control) Car traffic does little to wear them out literally and yes I have driven on 100 year old "original state" roads in Oshkosh.
2. Semis cause over 90% of the damage on most roads (sometimes more), many roads will deteriorate of old age before car traffic causes damage, perhaps we should encorage train usage by putting the majority of the cost on those who cause the damage and less on those who use the resource occasionally? A shift to rail would reduce road damage.
Ah well.