[fr_freak]

You don’t need a driver’s license to operate a vehicle on your own property.

Can't say what it's like in Georgia, but California has funny definitions of "private property". For example, if you had a really long driveway that was not gated off, but could be used by others (such as UPS deliveries, etc.) then it is considered public access even though it is private property, and thus a driver's license would be required (that is my understanding - my disclaimer is that I'm not a lawyer). For purposes of our discussion here, that would be a valid enough example to demonstrate that public funding of roadways is not the motivation for licensing of drivers. Not only that, but your vehicle has to be registered even if it is never driven, or even drivable, and never leaves your private property.

[ought-six]

“Not only that, but your vehicle has to be registered even if it is never driven, or even drivable, and never leaves your private property.”

Depends on the state, and the circumstances. For instance, if you live in an urban or suburban environment your cars will probably have to be registered, whether they are running or not (and if they are not running they will be considered a derelict and you’ll have to move them, usually to a junk dealer); however, in a rural environment you usually will not have to have them registered, unless they will be operated at any time on public roads, or on private roads that have public access. I know people who own old pickup trucks that are used EXCLUSIVELY on private land (i.e., private ranches), and they don’t have to be registered.