I-70 possibly being closed to semi-trucks???WTH!! (Denver, Colorado Springs: foreclose, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We are so far in the hole on our highway infrastructure that we will never catch up. We can't catch up because the road system itself is so inefficient in every way--energy, construction cost, maintenance cost, operation cost--that there is going to be no way to continue to prop it up as it exists for any longer. Roads and highways don't need expansion--they need contraction--and much of the traffic traversing them diverted to other more capital-efficient and energy-efficient transportation modes--namely rail. This is going to happen whether people want it or not--necessity is going to dictate it. The only question is whether we will flush another few trillion dollars into trying expand a highway system that most Americans will not be able to afford to use, or we start investing in an efficient passenger rail system that is convenient, comfortable, and sustainable. I don't advocate total abandonment of our road system--that won't happen--but a huge amount of traffic could be diverted from it--enough that the highway infrastructure could be shrunk to what this country can actually afford to maintain. If we don't do that, the whole US transportation system will shudder into total gridlock from both collapsing infrastructure and lack of affordable fuel.
I like driving across the Rocky Mountain's "wide open spaces" today as much as I'm sure some people preferred riding horseback across it over a century ago--but, just as the coming of the railroad made long-distance horseback travel impractical, exploding energy, road construction and road maintenance costs are going to render highway travel as we know it today an impractical and--for many--an unaffordable luxury. There is already huge evidence that we can no longer afford it as country, or a state--people just don't want to see current inane transportation policy for what it is. As the old saying goes, "It's easier to believe a pleasant lie than it is an unpleasant truth."
Now, what government services do you use? I'd like you to pay "toll". At least that's the principle you're espousing.
Not a bad idea! How would you implement a toll on government services?
With regard to the toll on I-70, whenever I chose to use that highway, I would pay my toll like everyone else. I drive a fairly small, lighweight vehichle so my toll rate would be near the bottom rung of my proposed progressive rate scale, because my vehichle is not putting as much wear and tear on the highway compared to a heavier vehichl.
Anyway I like your idea. I hope you'll write some more about it and share some of the details as to how you would implement it. Interesting concept.
The only thing is the time and money to complete such a task. Immense.
We've got the time, but not the money. I would like to see a BIG FAT TOLL based on vehichle weight slapped on to the portion of I-70 between Denver and Grand Junction. And this would be a progressive toll...the heavier the vehichle the higher the cost per pound. Samll, light weight vehichles would pay a very low rate, while heavier SUVs and trucks would pay a rapidly progressing higher rate. Let those who use it and tear it up PAY for it. Sock it to em!
I love this idea. I drive a Mitsubishi Eclipse so I wouldn't mind at all. Bring it on!
Now, what government services do you use? I'd like you to pay "toll". At least that's the principle you're espousing.
Not a bad idea! How would you implement a toll on government services?
With regard to the toll on I-70, whenever I chose to use that highway, I would pay my toll like everyone else. I drive a fairly small, lighweight vehichle so my toll rate would be near the bottom rung of my proposed progressive rate scale, because my vehichle is not putting as much wear and tear on the highway compared to a heavier vehichl.
Anyway I like your idea. I hope you'll write some more about it and share some of the details as to how you would implement it. Interesting concept.
Interesting, but it was sarcasm!
Why not pay toll on your local street? Same principle. I don't use your street, why should I pay for its upkeep. Toll on your sidewalk?
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
The only thing is the time and money to complete such a task. Immense.
We've got the time, but not the money. I would like to see a BIG FAT TOLL based on vehichle weight slapped on to the portion of I-70 between Denver and Grand Junction. And this would be a progressive toll...the heavier the vehichle the higher the cost per pound. Samll, light weight vehichles would pay a very low rate, while heavier SUVs and trucks would pay a rapidly progressing higher rate. Let those who use it and tear it up PAY for it. Sock it to em!
Sounds great, but with what I have seen of toll roads, they end up being the worst interstate highways around. The Pennsylvania Turnpike costs a fortune to drive and it's the most backwards, out of date, falling apart piece of junk highway around. And all it spawned was a huge bureaucracy of people sitting on their butt collecting a check.
So yeah great we will tax and charge people even more, but where does the money go? We keep giving more and more money to the government, nickel and dimed on everything and where is the money going?
We are so far in the hole on our highway infrastructure that we will never catch up. We can't catch up because the road system itself is so inefficient in every way--energy, construction cost, maintenance cost, operation cost--that there is going to be no way to continue to prop it up as it exists for any longer. Roads and highways don't need expansion--they need contraction--and much of the traffic traversing them diverted to other more capital-efficient and energy-efficient transportation modes--namely rail. This is going to happen whether people want it or not--necessity is going to dictate it. The only question is whether we will flush another few trillion dollars into trying expand a highway system that most Americans will not be able to afford to use, or we start investing in an efficient passenger rail system that is convenient, comfortable, and sustainable. I don't advocate total abandonment of our road system--that won't happen--but a huge amount of traffic could be diverted from it--enough that the highway infrastructure could be shrunk to what this country can actually afford to maintain. If we don't do that, the whole US transportation system will shudder into total gridlock from both collapsing infrastructure and lack of affordable fuel.
I like driving across the Rocky Mountain's "wide open spaces" today as much as I'm sure some people preferred riding horseback across it over a century ago--but, just as the coming of the railroad made long-distance horseback travel impractical, exploding energy, road construction and road maintenance costs are going to render highway travel as we know it today an impractical and--for many--an unaffordable luxury. There is already huge evidence that we can no longer afford it as country, or a state--people just don't want to see current inane transportation policy for what it is. As the old saying goes, "It's easier to believe a pleasant lie than it is an unpleasant truth."
There is no point in going backwards to slow, costly rail which doesn't deliver goods to their final destination and just requires more expenditure of energy to remove them from rail cars, store and distribute. Rail didn't last because it was out of date and doesn't work for many goods that are not bulk. No one in their right mind is going to build more railroad track as it is way too inefficient.
We just need to accept we live in a country of 310 million and we need to bring the roads out of 1960 to the modern day with modern road technology. We rode the initial build out of the interstate system for decades and it's time for a rebuild, which is happening.
I-80 carries by far the lions share of cross country semi traffic (to serve N-S central USA). Most of us CDL drivers prefer to stay off I-70, especially during ski season, and certainly Friday / Sun. I will confess I prefer I-70 to stay awake and enjoy the view, BUT Traversing Denver vs. Cheyenne is very costly if you get stuck in traffic.
Tolling will not help as mentioned, 'privatization' ends up with a profit motive, and transportation ease and costs suffer. I am afraid that our national debt is going to be paid by giving /trading' the chinese and other nations our highways and national parks, and we will be sending the profits (which we fuel) overseas. (Just as we have done with commercial wind and solar power (which SHOULD have been owned by the hosting communities, rather than a foreign entity)). USA is not too 'forward / strategic' thinking. Chinese culture is very 'strategic' in business.
Quote:
And this would be a progressive toll...the heavier the vehichle the higher the cost per pound. Samll, light weight vehichles would pay a very low rate, while heavier SUVs and trucks would pay a rapidly progressing higher rate. Let those who use it and tear it up PAY for it. Sock it to em!
Driving a fleet of 50 mpg VWs (since 1976) I don't share your viewpoint; as I also have Semis, and currently pay significantly for highway taxes (~$20k per commercial unit).
Personally, I'd hate to see I-70 expanded with more of our mountainous landscape devastated by asphalt and concrete.
I know it is coming though. I'm sure within the near future, it will be six lanes all the way through the twin tunnels to Denver. We will tear down buildings in Idaho Springs to add two more lanes. We will bore more holes in mountains to straighten out curves and to widen the highway.
All to keep skiers and campers spending money in the mountains.
We are so far in the hole on our highway infrastructure that we will never catch up. We can't catch up because the road system itself is so inefficient in every way--energy, construction cost, maintenance cost, operation cost--that there is going to be no way to continue to prop it up as it exists for any longer. Roads and highways don't need expansion--they need contraction--and much of the traffic traversing them diverted to other more capital-efficient and energy-efficient transportation modes--namely rail. This is going to happen whether people want it or not--necessity is going to dictate it. The only question is whether we will flush another few trillion dollars into trying expand a highway system that most Americans will not be able to afford to use, or we start investing in an efficient passenger rail system that is convenient, comfortable, and sustainable. I don't advocate total abandonment of our road system--that won't happen--but a huge amount of traffic could be diverted from it--enough that the highway infrastructure could be shrunk to what this country can actually afford to maintain. If we don't do that, the whole US transportation system will shudder into total gridlock from both collapsing infrastructure and lack of affordable fuel.
I like driving across the Rocky Mountain's "wide open spaces" today as much as I'm sure some people preferred riding horseback across it over a century ago--but, just as the coming of the railroad made long-distance horseback travel impractical, exploding energy, road construction and road maintenance costs are going to render highway travel as we know it today an impractical and--for many--an unaffordable luxury. There is already huge evidence that we can no longer afford it as country, or a state--people just don't want to see current inane transportation policy for what it is. As the old saying goes, "It's easier to believe a pleasant lie than it is an unpleasant truth."
This is probably one of the most sensible posts in this thread. Sadly, I am sure there are plenty who will fight tooth and nail against railways.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is probably one of the most sensible posts in this thread. Sadly, I am sure there are plenty who will fight tooth and nail against railways.
