The lesson here is that in situations where you have a clear public good that (almost) everyone needs and consumes, like roads and infrastructure, it's better for (almost) everyone if the government simply pays for it out of the general fund and doesn't try to nickle-and-dime the populace to tax "usage".

Sadly if you flip that around and talk about other public goods like "health care," (almost) everyone walks across the aisle of the same principles and starts arguing in the opposite direction.

▲

loeg an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> The lesson here is that in situations where you have a clear public good that (almost) everyone needs and consumes, like roads and infrastructure, it's better for (almost) everyone if the government simply pays for it out of the general fund and doesn't try to nickle-and-dime the populace to tax "usage".

I don't know how you took that from the article, especially the impression that almost everyone uses any particular piece of infrastructure. Most infrastructure will be used by a minority of the populace. Use fees are a fair way to fund infrastructure needed by its users.

	▲	kakacik 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Fair use ends when private for profit enters the discussion, then the only goal is maximizing private income from necessary infrastructure meant to serve whole population. France has most expensive highway travel in whole Europe only due to incompetent bureaucrats. Nothing fair there, other countries (apart from half-defunct Italy) have figured out things better with better resulting quality too.

▲

amanaplanacanal 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'd say the opposite. Roads have competition in trains, and subsidizing them at the expense of trains seems like a bad idea if trains are actually more efficient. Let them both compete on their merits un-subsidized.

For health care, your only competition is disease and death.

▲

ketzu an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why is that the lesson? That's not obvious to me at all.

Taxing roads can still have a worthwhile steering effect, can be used to even cost as local tax payers are not necessarily the main beneficiaries of the roads, or can make large infrastructure projects like tunnels or giant bridges worthwhile.

Obviously, there's also arguments for free access.

▲

layer8 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Tolls can be a useful way to steer traffic, it isn’t just a way to generate income.

▲

adrianN an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

IMO the lesson here is that driving is still cheap compared to taking trains and we should subsidize the latter and tax the former more.