Atlanta’s relationship with the automobile is reaching a crossroads. (movies, excise tax)

[ddm2k]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I guess that is the bigger point I am trying to get across. Figuring out the subsidies on the back end are one thing and who is really subsidizing who. But let's look at the front end and see how these subsidizes are really distorting what people choose. For example if a real estate development helps "subsidize" a public transit connection to their project we all win (unless you think more transit destinations and riders is bad).

Now, if your private employer or a government office decides to subsidize the parking of all its employees & visitors regardless of how they decide to get to work that is not such a clear win. People that might take transit or an Uber only think about the 8-cents-a-mile cost of gas then and will drive ten miles to work thinking $0.80 is less than $2.50 for transit fare or a $5 UberPool. In reality that results in more people driving to work and the employer needing to build more parking that costs thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars a space (lets not even go into the rabbit whole of how you really should be paying in gas tax for that billion dollar interchange over a maintained dirt road).

As a society, do we really think 8-cents-a-mile is really reflective of not only the true price of driving but how much we want to encourage it?

And if driving really is costing 8-cents-a-mile why are the poorest often taking transit instead?

What about comparing to an Uber? If Uber is losing huge amounts of money as a company, their drivers are under paid, yet Sam is having to pay $40 to go five miles where is that difference in money going?

The ONE thing about an HOA that I like is that it can use its revenue to undertake projects that can't get held up by a single homeowner digging in his/her heels.

I believe part of Uber's answer lies with their choice of HQ location, and cost of talent. Senior software developers are sometimes paid in excess of $200k base salary annually, plus a signing bonus, plus an annual bonus, plus RSU - part of which vest each year and can be used as income.

I'd consider it a waste if it was determined Uber was hemorrhaging money primarily due to these employee salaries. And by the looks of things, it's a good place to start investigating.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

You don't think people ever just drive somewhere because they think it is cheaper then getting an Uber, bus, train, or plane? ddm2k just above said (s)he considers cars to cost $0.08 a mile. You don't think that is a factor that has lead him/her to drive somewhere over other alternatives?

No. Ask ddm2k if the supposed 8 cents a mile was factor in them driving vs getting a $100 Marta pass. I could be but I doubt it. Most people aren't thinking about that when they decide buy cars outside of the cost of gas in general.

Originally Posted by jsvh

And if you think price is not a concern for drivers why do we need subsidies? Why not toll roads?

The premise of this question is based on a something you made up. Who said price wasn't a factor to drivers?

I am stating what I know from experience that people don't decide to drive because of some financial cost analysis of driving being cheaper. Feasibility and convenience has always been the driving reasons from the beginning.

Why do you even think cars exist? People are already paying more to drive vs transit if you aren't counting subsidies and the reason we don't toll them is the same reason we don't toll sidewalks and public parks; those are paid by taxes and in the case of driving drivers already pay usage fees in gas tax and yearly tag fees so there is no reason to toll most existing roads.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

People are already paying more to drive vs transit if you aren't counting subsidies

Really? How much are you paying each day you drive to work? I pay $4.25 round trip for MARTA.

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

and the reason we don't toll them is the same reason we don't toll sidewalks and public parks; those are paid by taxes and in the case of driving drivers already pay usage fees in gas tax and yearly tag fees so there is no reason to toll most existing roads.

As a society we like to encourage more people to walk, play, and enjoy nature. That is why we subsidize and encourage more sidewalks and parks.

But we do not need public policy and subsidy to encourage / support more driving.

Also realize that even sidewalks are usually the responsibility of individual property owners. Not paid, owned and maintained by the government / tax payers like most roads.

Many parks are privately operated as well including the park near my old home in Ormewood Park.

Does having each property owner being responsible for maintaining sidewalks while we spend billions of subsidies on roads reflect the best interests of society? No.

If cars are really the best way for you to get around, great. Start paying your tolls and for your parking and enjoy it. But they do not warrant subsidies like sidewalks, parks, transit, and police do.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Really? How much are you paying each day you drive to work? I pay $4.25 round trip for MARTA.

~9 dollars a day not including maintenance, car purchase, yearly tax or vehicle tax.

Originally Posted by jsvh

If cars are really the best way for you to get around, great. Start paying your tolls and for your parking and enjoy it. But they do not warrant subsidies like sidewalks, parks, transit, and police do.

That’s sounds like a fringe opinion and you can have it.

Go protest in the streets that we should stop subsidizing roads.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

~9 dollars a day not including maintenance, car purchase, yearly tax or vehicle tax.

Oh really? And what does that number include?

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

That’s sounds like a fringe opinion and you can have it.

Go protest in the streets that we should stop subsidizing roads.

Not as fridge as you might think. If you notice, most new lane miles being built are tolled. And the infrastructure plan the president has been pushing would legalize tolls on existing lanes.

But the bigger question is why do you think we need public policies and subsidies to encourage more people driving? I think more people would consider that a fridge opinion.

[demonta4]

I'm not interested in getting into a car vs transit argument but I do want to say this. Transit access is the number one factor in whether a person will be poor or middle class. Atlanta has some of the worst income equality figures in the nation. People need equal access to jobs and we simply haven't provided a second option for those who can't take on the large costs of a car. We need to subsidize transit because it benefits society as a whole by providing access to jobs to everyone, even those that can't afford a personal vehicle.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Oh really? And what does that number include?

This is getting weirdly personal. What are you trying to figure out?

Originally Posted by jsvh

Not as fridge as you might think. If you notice, most new lane miles being built are tolled. And the infrastructure plan the president has been pushing would legalize tolls on existing lanes.

I have no problem with new roads being tolled but toll lanes aren’t going to be the majority of lanes used. If we toll all roads we need to remove all gas and vehicle tax

Originally Posted by jsvh

But the bigger question is why do you think we need public policies and subsidies to encourage more people driving? I think more people would consider that a fridge opinion.

Can you ever argue without strawmen though?


I’m not even sure where I said we should encourage more driving, but that is not synonymous with thinking that ending all road subsidies is a ridiculous idea.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

This is getting weirdly personal. What are you trying to figure out?

I am mostly calling BS. I don't think you really know how much your car commute costs you because I think hardly anyone knows how much their car commute really costs them because the costs are so well hidden and subsidized.

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

I have no problem with new roads being tolled but toll lanes aren’t going to be the majority of lanes used. If we toll all roads we need to remove all gas and vehicle tax.

Sounds fine to me. It is not like gas tax is covering the costs as is and it is not reliable funding source as people switch to alternative fuels anyways.

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

I’m not even sure where I said we should encourage more driving, but that is not synonymous with thinking that ending all road subsidies is a ridiculous idea.

Do you think subsidies result in lower prices?

Do you think lower prices result in more of something being used?

Do you think we should spend tax dollars to encourage more driving?

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Is it now. I am mostly calling BS. I don't think you really know how much your car commute costs you because I think hardly anyone knows how much their car commute really costs them because the costs are so well hidden and subsidized.

What are you arguing here? I swear you are bouncing off the wall.

If you are arguing that folks don’t know exact dollar to cent amount of their commute you could be right depending on what you “count” (you won’t even state what cost you are counting and I’m getting tired of asking), it would not be hard to calculate. If you are trying to say driving is cheaper than taking the train then that is absolutely wrong because people who can’t afford to drive still take transit.

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you think subsidies result in lower prices?

That’s a loaded question. Lower where? For who? If you mean what the end user pays sure.

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you think lower prices result in more of something being used?

Depends on what it is. That’s a broad question. Transit is already cheaper than my monthly gas alone but I’m not riding more. I’m sure that’s many people.

Originally Posted by jsvh

Do you think we should spend tax dollars to encourage more driving?

Does “more driving” mean maintain the rate a which people drive now or to increase the % of drivers? There is difference.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

What are you arguing here? I swear you are bouncing off the wall.

If you are arguing that folks don’t know exact dollar to cent amount of their commute you could be right depending on what you “count” (you won’t even state what cost you are counting and I’m getting tired of asking), it would not be hard to calculate. If you are trying to say driving is cheaper than taking the train then that is absolutely wrong because people who can’t afford to drive still take transit.


That’s a loaded question. Lower where? For who? If you mean what the end user pays sure.


Depends on what it is. That’s a broad question. Transit is already cheaper than my monthly gas alone but I’m not riding more. I’m sure that’s many people.

So if your "~9 dollars a day not including maintenance, car purchase, yearly tax or vehicle tax. " is somehow too personal to go into detail, lets walk through my commute costs. I have said before here that I often commute downtown to the airport area. If I decide I want the convenience of driving, how should I figure out how much more money to allow for each daily commute over my $4.25 MARTA fare? I go 10 miles, Five Points to Airport Station to keep your math easy. You have already said you are "not including maintenance, car purchase, yearly tax or vehicle tax" so we can skip that. What should we include?

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

Does “more driving” mean maintain the rate a which people drive now or to increase the % of drivers? There is difference.

Since Atlanta is growing, both would mean more driving.

And still, you are avoiding the bigger question: Why should we spend money subsidizing drivers? By your own account even with that subsidy it is still too expensive for the poor. Shouldn't that subsidy money be better spent on things like police, sidewalks, parks, and transit?