Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The economics blog, Knowledge Problem on how prices effect individuals incentive to conserve: Conservation of resources: Prices change everything Steven Stoft, at the EU Energy Policy Blog, observes that market driven conservation is a slow process: Conservation is the main way consumers respond to high market prices. When price goes up, consumption comes down–but it takes a while for the full price effect to play out. The market eventually shifts demand in the long run, as individuals adjust their behaviors in reaction to higher prices. To what extent will sustained high gas prices cause people to shift their location preferences towards a less gas-dependent urban lifestyle? (assuming high prices are here to stay) How long will it take for us to see a difference in where people prefer to live? Graph from the NY Times
Developer, Al Friedman plans to build a “green” parking garage in Chicago’s Streeterville neighborhood, where development has replaced many surface lots. (Crain’s) Environmentally speaking, it’s probably better than a surface lot and frees up more space for productive development. But, can the structure itself being green offset the environmental effects of the cars using it? Is this a lesser of evils? Or is making a parking structure “green” a wasted effort? What do you think?
From Toll Road News: With a bid of $12.8 billion an Abertis/Citi team has been selected as the concessionaire in a 75 year lease of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. The bids were received in a second round of best-&-final offer bids last Friday (May 16). #2 bidder was Transurban/Goldman Sachs at $12.1b. With this kind of cash, it’s going to be very tempting for more states to privatize to keep budgets afloat. I worry about how much wasteful spending today’s politicians plan to do after they get this windfall. It’s also a shame it’s a 75 year lease not a sale. This gives the state some authority to maintain some patronage, cap toll increases, and keep unions happy.
One of my favorite new blogs, Rationalitate brought up a topic that I have spent much time thinking about, The Great Depression and Public Roads: In a time before the widespread adoption of income and sales taxes, property taxes made up the lion’s share of local government revenues: two-thirds of all revenue according to Dick Netzer, and over 90% of all taxes levied in cities of more than 30,000 according to David Beito. …property owners and renters were subsidizing roads for the benefit of the wealthy. Real estate developers who ran private forms of mass transit (mostly streetcars) and who were in direct competition with government-financed roads were some of the biggest payers of taxes, which makes the transfer especially ironic. It is a tragic coincidence that big government policies became popular during the same era as the automobile. History books champion Roosevelt and his New Deal, but few are willing to attribute our dependence on oil to the progressive policies that exploded during the Depression and continued through Eisenhower’s Interstate Highway System and on to this day. The big government solutions to “create jobs” drew resources from productive sources to fund projects that burdened future generations with the costs of maintenance, debt repayment, and auto dependency, as well as the abandonment of urban areas and rail infrastructure for an extended time. This is a topic that deserves more attention. One could write a book on it.
John McCain and Hillary Clinton have both supported the idea of a “Gas Tax Holiday“. The whole idea of a Holy Day to celebrate the worship of socialized transportation catered by Santa Clinton/McCain seems pretty absurd to me. Nonetheless, they expect pandering to gas-addicted voters to pay off in their election hopes. Unfortunately, such a gas holiday would burden the deficit, incentivize the burning of fossil fuels, and further socialize our transportation system. Highway advocates currently cling to arguments that roads are more “free-market” than transit because the costs of maintaining the highways are paid by the user through gas taxes and user fees. That is a myth to be debunked in future posts, but the argument would be void during McCain’s new “holiday”. And, with future tax money footing the bill instead of gas users, we would have a full blown transfer of wealth from the responsible taxpayers who don’t depend on petroleum to the gas guzzlers and petroleum industry. I propose a more free-market solution at the federal level – get out of the transportation business altogether! The federal government would end the gas tax permanently, but at the same time deed the entire federal highway system over to the individual states where the highways are located, and abolish the Department of Transportation over a span of a few years. The individual states would be free to handle their transportation as they see fit, as long as the they do not diminish the military’s ability to mobilize forces for defense. States could pay for maintenance of the assets in ways that best suit them, whether it be a gas tax, tolls, property taxes or states could actually raise money through complete privatization of the new assets. Besides easing the burden on the deficit, getting the federal government out […]
This isn’t some crazy proposal, they have been private since the 20’s and 30’s. It seems there are advantages and disadvantages. You don’t have to worry about street parking when you own the street, but you have to hire your own contractor to make repairs. My main concern is that those homeowners are still paying taxes, but not benefiting from public services. From the Brooklyn Daily Eagle – Community Board 10 Meeting Sparks New Effort to Solve Cul-de-sac Problems: The 19 private unmapped streets in Bay Ridge are now a public matter as nearly a hundred residents of these cul-de-sac havens came together at a Community Board 10 meeting to learn how they can get city services that they pay for in taxes but don’t get. It would be interesting to see what would happen with more private streets.
If Chicago’s Midway Airport is privatized, I’ll be looking forward to flying in there. (And it won’t just be to satisfy cravings of Italian beef sandwiches and hot dogs at the food court.) It’s success may depend on the how much (or hopefully how little) the city regulates the airport’s contracts and operations as well as how much wasteful patronage will be eliminated by the private operator. From Reason.org‘s Out of Control Blog: Leasing Chicago’s Midway Airport If there was any question whether investors would be interested in a long-term lease of Chicago’s Midway Airport, it was answered in the affirmative at the beginning of April. If Midway does generate significant value for the city, the lease could be as precedent-setting as the city’s January 2005 lease of the Chicago Skyway. That transaction focused global attention on the United States as a new market for privatization of toll roads. But for the same thing to be possible in the airport sector would require Congress to amend the Airport Privatization Pilot Program legislation it enacted in 1996 . If it is as successful as the Skyway lease, it could usher in a wave of privatization of airports and highways across the US as governments try to shore up their budgets.
Watch it right here: And also, Kunstler on oil & suburbia:
I tend to agree that there is some hypocrisy in the conservative/libertarian world when it comes to transportation, which is part of the reason I started this blog. A more free-market transporation system would certainly lead to a more urban land use pattern; something between pre-auto, transit-reliant density and current auto-reliant sprawling suburbs. Regardless, market-based solutions will lead to a denser land use pattern in the long-run. This article discusses governement’s role in infrastructure and some libertarian free-market advocates’ strange love affair with government planned highways: Maybe the Government Should Build the Cars Is transportation like education, a communal service that works best through heavy general funding that pays off down the road in a community’s overall prosperity, or is it best delivered by targeting users, especially road users through congestion pricing to reduce demand and increase revenues? Also: King of the Road They seem to see a highway as an expression of the free market and of American individualism, and a rail line as an example of government meddling and creeping socialism. However, the above article portrays the government as the hero for overspending on highways, but what do you expect from a magazine named Governing? Rationalitate: Libertarians for Statism on the Governing article: “[o]ur national road system would never have been built if every street were required to pay for itself.” Yeah, that’s exactly the point! Our “national road system” is the problem, and the author’s implication is that not only would there be no “national road system,” but that roads are indeed synonymous with transportation. But just because we wouldn’t have trillion-dollar pavement stretching across the continent doesn’t mean we wouldn’t be able to get across the continent – or, more importantly, wherever it is that we want to go. Latest: How McCain or Obama Can Permanently […]
I favor Bob Poole’s solution: “The longer-term solution is to scrap the 20th-century tax-and-grant system in favor of universal tolling, managed by each state’s Department of Transportation and private toll companies.” Furthermore, get the federal government out of the business of subsidizing highways altogether and allow the states to privatize them. It would shift the cost closer to home and drastically reduce pork. More: Greg Mankiw’s Blog: Bad News for the Pigou Club