PennDOT & the Turnpike

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by BPP1999

I guess that just goes to show you that people see this as a worthwhile endeavor (i.e. to properly fund and improve infrastructure).

The point wasn't whether they were for or against raising the fuel tax, the argument comparing X amount for cable and X amount for fuel tax is wrong becsue the cost of fuel effects the cost of everything else. Even if you don't own car you're going to pay if the fuel tax is increased.

[pman]

Originally Posted by BPP1999

I've always found it silly that I-95 through PA is free. It's not free in NJ, DE, MD, or NY, that I know of. Why is it free here?

possibly because its more of a commuter road in philly (like the schuylkill) since ny thru drivers take the bypass in delaware. usually the idea is to hit thru drivers and not locals...though clearly im proposing to hit locals with tolla to pay for maintenance and upgrades.

coalman -artificially transportation costs have their impacts as well. the more expensive it is to ship something the higher the price a local producer for whom shipping isnt a big factor can charge. you may end up shifting some thi gs back to local production over time. arrifically low transportation costs from the interstate era probably causes an unsustainably large shift away from local.

[Craziaskowboi]

I am vehemently against the idea of leasing any infrastructure to multinational corporations. They already have too much influence over our governments and our lives anyway, and there's no proof that privatizing infrastructure and other civil services even works. The city of Pittsburgh is building a new asphalt plant to replace the old one that closed after they privatized their road maintenance. After privatization, the city got its roads repaved at less than half the rate it used to, and for a higher cost per mile. Doing it themselves will actually save them money, and also see to it that every street in the city gets repaved once every 10 years. In other cities, there have been stories of expensive, unreliable, and even dangerous bus service after privatization. As far as I'm concerned, infrastructure is the overhead cost of a developed economy.

[pman]

Originally Posted by Gnutella

I am vehemently against the idea of leasing any infrastructure to multinational corporations. They already have too much influence over our governments and our lives anyway, and there's no proof that privatizing infrastructure and other civil services even works. The city of Pittsburgh is building a new asphalt plant to replace the old one that closed after they privatized their road maintenance. After privatization, the city got its roads repaved at less than half the rate it used to, and for a higher cost per mile. Doing it themselves will actually save them money, and also see to it that every street in the city gets repaved once every 10 years. In other cities, there have been stories of expensive, unreliable, and even dangerous bus service after privatization. As far as I'm concerned, infrastructure is the overhead cost of a developed economy.

lots of people are vehemently against it but theres litttle evidence it doesnt work since it works fine in other countries. what you are talking isnt privatization but outsourcing. the city outsourced asphalt and then insourced it. companies make those decisions all the time. its not the same thing. if the turnpike were private the company would be making those decisions since theyd be responsible for the expenses of the turnpike. ive driven on private highways and the chicken littles are wrong. the main thing is getting a square deal for taxpayers upfront. politicians are often interested in upfront payouts and waste them rather than offloading capital expenditures and maintenance which theyre often bad at. anyway if youre vehemently against it it may be due to ideological reasons. people are often for or against privatization without considering the facts. look at the plcb, privatizing is only one factor. if we were to privatize the monopoly that wouldnt do much good. what we really want is privatization and liberalization but only the word privatization is used. anyway, since the turnpike is sort of privatized already perhaps its. 80 that should be sold off and converted to a toll road. the buyer would have to oay bacl the feds. roads should have to pay their fair share. as it is now they get too large a share of transportation subsidies.
where do you stand on the original post? schoch makes a pretty convincing case. against consolidation and thornburgh looks like an uninformed politician