Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
No, I think he just means something like the interstates. Route 66(which I was surprised to learn I once lived near) is nothing like say I290(which is the modern way a person leaving Chicago' downtown heading west would go). It has no lights, no cross streets, faster speed limits and just isn't much comparable to what went before.
OK, read this fast b/c it will probably get deleted. The PP has said stuff like this many times in the past. He has even posited that there were NO roads at some point in the recent past.
Even limited access roads were not unheard of before 1950. The Pennsylvania Turnpike was opened in 1940. The Pennsylvania Turnpike
(Hopefully you can figure out how to turn off that gawd-awful song!)
From the link: "President George Washington publicly favored the establishment of roads to promote the westward expansion of our nation. In 1791, the legislature of the Pennsylvanian Commonwealth approved a state-wide transportation plan and a year later created the Philadelphia and Lancaster Turnpike Company. The turnpike charter called for the construction of a 62-mile log-surfaced road, which provided successful transport for settlers and their goods over the muddy territories."
The Ohio Turnpike: History | Ohio Turnpike and Infrastructure Commission
"Following the Revolutionary War (1783), and most particularly the victory of General “Mad” Anthony Wayne over the Indians at Fallen Timber in 1794, western migration increased dramatically as citizens of the new republic began settlement of the Ohio or Northwest Territory. In 1802 congress inserted into the Ohio statehood bill a provision for the construction of a National Road from the eastern seaboard across the new state. . . . On October 1, 1955, the massive project was completed. "
If I read one more word implying that there were no government funded highways before 1950, I'm going to go on a rampage!
But there is no implication. Note:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
OK, I'm treading on thin ice here, but I have to speak up. If a person makes a statement, e.g. "my husband has worked in the suburbs for 33 years at 3 jobs", it doesn't mean s/he is saying something else, e.g. "there are no people working downtown". A lot of the bickering on this forum would be avoided if people would keep that in mind.
It could be less before 1950, it could be none. The 1800s roads you listed weren't useful for car traffic. Did the poster say there were no government funded roads before? No. It doesn't even specifically discuss roads it discusses highways, specifically ones that allow faster automobile speeds. Maybe that's wrong, but statements about government road building in the 1800s don't contradict the statement, nor does "government-funded highways criss-crossing the country" say "there was no government-built roads whatsoever" before. It is really hard to have a conversation if a quote is turned into something else. :
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
With government-funded highways criss-crossing the country, leading from old downtown cores into greenfield areas, it was much easier to relocate a factory to more remote areas.
Before arguing against an implication that's not clearly stated, it would be best to ask the poster if he meant that. This way, we can avoid arguements over something the poster didn't mean.
It could be less before 1950, it could be none. The 1800s roads you listed weren't useful for car traffic. Did the poster say there were no government funded roads before? No. It doesn't even specifically discuss roads it discusses highways, specifically ones that allow faster automobile speeds. It is really hard to have a conversation if a quote is turned into something else. :
Before arguing against an implication that's not clearly stated, it would be best to ask the poster if he meant that. This way, we can avoid arguements over something the poster didn't mean.
Well, you have to look at his whole post, and not take stuff out of context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
Generally, they aren't built in the "suburbs"--they are built in undeveloped land outside of the city, often initially because regulations about zoning and pollution discouraged putting smelly, smoky facilities in city centers. Suburbs ended up following the jobs out into the country.
However, before either factory relocation or suburbanization is possible, there has to be transportation. Until the 1950s (meaning the era before 1950, just to clarify) most long distance transportation of goods was by rail, which means factories had to be located near railroads. Even small facilities had a railroad spur, or were located close enough to a railroad line to carry goods to a nearby "team track" by truck or wagon. Factories were also generally labor-intensive, so they had to be near a large source of workers, who generally didn't own cars. That made cities the logical place for industry. And because land was expensive in cities, the industries tended to be vertical, rather than horizontal, to make the most use out of the least land. Streetcar suburbs spread this pattern out a bit, but still retained a basically rail/pedestrian oriented structure--it just meant you could set up little "downtowns" away from the urban core. If the suburb was bankrolled by a combine that also owned an electric railroad and an electric utility, they could make a lot of money selling land to the factory owners and workers, selling electricity to both to power homes and factories, and selling rides for both workers and products in and out. That's how the interurbans of Los Angeles were built, along with many Midwestern interurban networks in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois.
Public highways changed this industrial dynamic. With government-funded highways criss-crossing the country, leading from old downtown cores into greenfield areas, it was much easier to relocate a factory to more remote areas. Larger facilities still needed railroad access, so they would often concentrate where railroad lines and highways crossed, but many could be served by trucks, and with increasing worker affluence following World War II (thanks to unionization) more workers could afford cars to drive to work. And where the industries led, suburbs followed--although not too closely, leaving lots of buffer space between the job areas, shopping areas and residential areas. Typically, though, all three were closer than downtown--which is part of why downtowns started to die during this era. Having been replaced in all three roles, there was no longer a reason to visit downtown for a suburban resident.
To me, it is clear that this poster meant in the first paragraph that prior to the 1950s factories shipped by rail. In the second paragraph, starting in 1950 public highways came into existence, according to the poster. In this case, the poster is saying something changed after World War II, ca 1950 and that something is publicly funded roads. Not to mention, this poster has stated his position many times; he doesn't think there were roads prior to about 1900.
Better channel George Washington (cited in the PA pike history) or the Congress of 1802 (cited in Ohio) to see what they meant by "roads". Of course, I could "dredge up" many of his old posts to bolster my argument as well, but I have better ways to spend my time.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 03-04-2014 at 03:40 PM..
If I read one more word implying that there were no government funded highways before 1950, I'm going to go on a rampage! To put it bluntly, that's bulls***!
ETA: Don't forget the subsidized railroads, either.
There were government-funded highways before 1950, and the processes I'm talking about were not like flipping on a lightswitch halfway through the century, they were gradual and evolved over decades. The earliest modern highways in the United States were products of the 1930s, like the New Jersey Turnpike and the Arroyo Seco Parkway, or earlier and more primitive routes like the Lincoln Highway. The difference in the post World War II era is one of degree--the rate of highway expansion grew dramatically, and its effects on other forms of transportation also grew. The modern superhighway as we know it today is primarily the product of the postwar era, but of course they existed in earlier decades. No need to cuss or go on a rampage.
Some railroads were subsidized--but they were privately owned and operated, and many railroads were not subsidized at all. Streetcars and interurban networks, for example, were almost never subsidized in the manner of, say, the Central Pacific/Union Pacific federal land grants. Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there are any wholly privately funded, built, owned and operated highways.
Sure, there were "roads" prior to 1900...but they were primarily dirt or gravel, not concrete or asphalt roads intended for high-speed automobile travel.
No, I think he just means something like the interstates. Route 66(which I was surprised to learn I once lived near) is nothing like say I290(which is the modern way a person leaving Chicago' downtown heading west would go). It has no lights, no cross streets, faster speed limits and just isn't much comparable to what went before.
There could be a whole thread about Rt 66. There probably is! Used to be the Mother Road, sung about, featured in movies, etc. But in the 70's it was de-designated in many States. A lot of people are surprised to find out that Joliet Rd and part of IL 53 used to be US 66. And some old timers still refer to it, like "that restaurant out on 66."
There were government-funded highways before 1950, and the processes I'm talking about were not like flipping on a lightswitch halfway through the century, they were gradual and evolved over decades. The earliest modern highways in the United States were products of the 1930s, like the New Jersey Turnpike and the Arroyo Seco Parkway, or earlier and more primitive routes like the Lincoln Highway. The difference in the post World War II era is one of degree--the rate of highway expansion grew dramatically, and its effects on other forms of transportation also grew. The modern superhighway as we know it today is primarily the product of the postwar era, but of course they existed in earlier decades. No need to cuss or go on a rampage.
Some railroads were subsidized--but they were privately owned and operated, and many railroads were not subsidized at all. Streetcars and interurban networks, for example, were almost never subsidized in the manner of, say, the Central Pacific/Union Pacific federal land grants. Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there are any wholly privately funded, built, owned and operated highways.
Sure, there were "roads" prior to 1900...but they were primarily dirt or gravel, not concrete or asphalt roads intended for high-speed automobile travel.
Horse Hockey!
Lincoln Highway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
**Conceived in 1912 by Indiana entrepreneur Carl G. Fisher, and formally dedicated October 31, 1913, the Lincoln Highway spanned coast-to-coast from Times Square in New York City to Lincoln Park in San Francisco, originally through 13 states: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California. In 1915, the "Colorado Loop" was removed, and in 1928, a realignment relocated the Lincoln Highway through the northern tip of West Virginia. Thus, there are a total of 14 states, 128 counties, and over 700 cities, towns and villages through which the highway passed at some time in its history.**
In Nebraska, the Lincoln Highway parallels an even older road, part way, anyway: The Oregon Trail.
Plus, do read the links about the PA and Ohio turnpikes.
There have been many posts in just the past week or so about municipal takeovers of streetcar systems, 100 years ago or so.
History of Roads - Inventions for Traffic Management
**The first road use of asphalt occurred in 1824, when asphalt blocks were placed on the Champs-Élysées in Paris. Modern road asphalt was the work of Belgian immigrant Edward de Smedt at Columbia University in New York City. By 1872, De Smedt had engineered a modern, "well-graded," maximum-density asphalt. The first uses of this road asphalt were in Battery Park and on Fifth Avenue in New York City in 1872 and on Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington D.C., in 1877.**
beyondRoads.com :: History
**625 B.C.
The first recorded use of asphalt as a road-building material in Babylon. The ancient Greeks were also familiar with asphalt.**
Wow, I didn't know the ancient Greeks drove automobiles. And, again, "primarily" not "entirely." You're making yourself upset here. Seriously, I don't feel obligated to post the entire history of a subject every time I leave a post here.
Wow, I didn't know the ancient Greeks drove automobiles. And, again, "primarily" not "entirely." You're making yourself upset here. Seriously, I don't feel obligated to post the entire history of a subject every time I leave a post here.
I don't know why you're making this personal.
You're missing the whole point, anyway. The national highway system started long before you claim it did. Road materials were far more advanced in years past than you seem to be aware of. And I'm not upset except at your inaccuracies that you expect us to believe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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 2 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.
