Posted on 07/07/2018 7:15:06 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
How did Americans develop their love affair with driving?
Visit the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History in Washington and the transportation exhibit “America on the Move” will sell you on the commonly held theory that when Henry Ford made cars affordable, Americans loved them and demanded more and more highways.
Of course, that exhibit is sponsored by General Motors, which donated millions to put its name on the collection.
But University of Virginia history professor Peter Norton, author of “Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in American cities” contends that’s a myth. Just as outgoing President Dwight Eisenhower warned us of the military industrial complex, Norton says an automotive-construction complex took over our country, paving from coast to coast.
Sure, Americans like their cars. But it was a conspiracy of economic interests that turned us into a car culture. Where cities once enjoyed a network of cheap, fast streetcars, GM, Firestone and oil companies bought and wiped them out, replacing them with buses and cars.
“This country destroyed and rebuilt its cities in the 20th century to serve automobiles,” Norton says.
And those same interest groups are alive and well in Connecticut.
Groups like “Move CT Forward” aren’t pro-transportation as much as they are pro jobs — in construction. The groups have spent a lot of money lobbying in Hartford to keep their members, the unions and contractors busy. While I’m happy they’re promoting transportation, their motives are hardly altruistic.
This is nothing new, Norton says. The original interstate highways built in the 1950s used Portland Cement because that company lobbied so hard for its product over cheaper asphalt. Now that rusting rebar and crumbling cement is costing us a fortune.
Another myth from that era was that Eisenhower built the interstates to move troops quickly for national defense. That may have been the pitch to Congress, but the real reason for the highways was to evacuate civilians from the big cities in the event of nuclear war. Luckily, we never had to test that idea.
When Hurricane Harvey hit Houston — the most urbanized highway city in the country —authorities last summer didn’t even try to evacuate people because they knew more would die on congested roads than in the storm.
Who pays for all this road building? You do, in the form of income taxes and, yes, gasoline taxes. But Norton says gas taxes are hardly a fair way to pay for everything.
Why does the motorist driving on a dirt road pay the same gas tax as one driving Interstate 95? The costs they place on road maintenance, the environment and our stress levels are grossly different, so why isn’t the cost?
“It would be like having Best Buy selling everything by the pound. People would flock to the electronics (our crowded interstates) instead of the towels,” he notes. I’m not sure Best Buy even sells towels, but I take his point.
He reminds us that before the interstates, the nation’s first “super highways” like the Pennsylvania and New Jersey turnpikes were built as toll roads — not freeways — and remain that way today.
Driving may seem to be free, but it isn’t. Until we ask drivers to pay for its real cost, there is no incentive to do anything but drive (and pave) more.
Jim Cameron is a longtime commuter advocate based in Fairfield County
I dismiss offhand 90% of what comes out of the mouths of someone from Connecticut. Each year it seems like a larger and larger percentage. I remember a time it was only about 50%.
1.) Require all government employees who are able to perform their duties from home to telecommute.
***********************************************************
From some of the things I’ve seen, a good many government employees don’t have the ability, the motivation nor the energy to do effective work or even to stay at their desks. And that’s when they’re at the office being “managed” and even there they manage to take LONG lunch breaks, frequent long breaks and spend time on the Internet. Imagine the “productivity” of these “workers” when they’re st home. Jerry Springer’s ratings would soar.
My background is in accounting and public transit. This business of the oil and auto interests’ conspiring to convert streetcar companies to buses is complete and total BS.
Not only is streetcar infrastructure not cheap (involving not only cars, but track, roadbed, surrounding pavement, copper wires (more like rods) above, steel support wires, support poles, substations, etc.), in many cases the private transit utilities were being outright screwed by the cities granting franchises...they were required to maintain not only their tracks, but the streets they used, along with contributing to related municipal utility repairs such as sewers, and often were required to provide amenities like street lighting as well.
What really served to kill streetcars in the US was the combined effects of the Great Depression and WW2. From about 1930 to 1945 they had been unable to do proper physical plant maintenance (often counting themselves lucky to make payroll every month...note that many such properties across North America did not survive the Depression), and from 1939-40 to 1945 they had been forced to put out 110% service for the war. By 1945, most streetcar companies’ physical plant was a virtual wreck...much of it had been built gradually decades before, and now all of it had to be rebuilt ALL AT ONCE. And banks weren’t willing to lend for the capital projects, because they (rightly) saw streetcars as a losing proposition.
As early as the 1920s, and in both electric and internal-combustion forms, along came the bus. As streets were paved, the advantages of the bus grew...no tracks in the streets (and no induced obligation to maintain streets), maybe no wires overhead, no wires and support poles or substations to maintain....
For any private (and quite a few municipal) transit providers, putting a “new” face on the streets (and shedding loads of financial obligations) by converting to bus was the most logical option.
Granted, rail does still have its place in urban/regional transit (and, really, major cities do need it to survive)...but the passenger loads need to be really high to merit that level of physical plant investment.
I used streetcars for years-—and then came the busses,which I loved.
When a streetcar broke down we were ALL held up behind it——not so with the busses.
.
Automobiles enabled the birth and development of the suburb, where ordinary working class families could own a single family home on a lot with a front and a back yard and a garage. Today, those people are called Republicans and the Democrats are working every day to get rid of them.
As a generalist, it is gratifying to see what I deduced through common sense verified by an expert in the field.
Thank you.
That sounds like Occupy Wall Street propaganda to me.
What about Pete?
As one who was formerly in that local urban forum, I can tell you that leftists hate cars with a burning passion. It’s basically because they represent independence. Leftists REALLY hate independence with a burning passion. They want everything dictated by the state including breeding dependence.
Leftists hate the idea of cars (at least for other people). Cars allow people freedom to go where they want, anytime they want. Can’t have that.
“..leftists hate cars with a burning passion. ..”
They hate SUVs even more.
That’s why I have TWO of them.
F*** ‘em.
The writer conveniently forgot to mention that trucks carry a helluva lot of American-made products/farm produce directly into cities and towns who otherwise would not have enough food to eat. (Trains can only carry so much and then still have to be “trucked” to supermarkets.
Streetcars were great in their day (I rode them in the 50’s and 60’s. A snowstorm stopped the last one I road on in 1962. A similar storm also stopped our transit bus on the way home. Had to walk a mile to a major bus stop which was functioning).
Asphalt roads, WHEN BUILT CORRECTLY, are great. The stupids who now pave-over the old underlying asphalt/cement are only putting on an 1-1/2 to 2” surface which lasts about a month. It has to be a minimum of 3 inches thick or more to survive the weather and pounding of the cars (which create vibration cracks in the thin overlay repaving. I’ve seen this for years in the DC area).
I remember when Rhode Island once had signs on their major highway that said “Use at own risk”. They finally fixed it years later (1995 to 2004).
Something has happened to the people of New England. A form of Marxist stupidity has set in. Must be due to the water and their colleges. Can’t be do to “common sense”.
A dirt road might carry 4 cars a day, while I-95 carries hundreds of thousands. If the dirt road requires maintenance every few years, I would would wager that the cost per mile driven for the dirt road is a good deal more than for I-95.
This whole article is stupid from a mathematical and engineering point of view. It is just emotion-based nonsense. That is not to say that the conclusions are necessarily wrong. There just seems to be no rational basis for them.
There are many good points being made here by FReepers - especially those referring to the economic and other freedoms, opportunities, and benefits our roads, including our Interstate Highway system give us.
Aside from “freedom”, for economic reasons (mostly) China has been building a modern road system at an incredible pace, and they are no fools.
Has the author considered that publicly funded roads are a boon to modest income folks who must “transport” a lot outside of public mass transit? Does he really think most people would be better off on dirt roads? (Lord knows, we have plenty of dirt and / or gravel roads around here, and any significant amount of driving on them is both a PITA and sometimes downright dangerous to both car and driver / passengers, no matter how cautious one is, unless walking speed is the “limit” one accepts.)
Then the author claims the Interstate Highways were built to evacuate people from cities in the event of a nuclear war, which is just an absurd idea, as he goes to show in the next paragraph. I might not like Ike on all points, but, he was not THAT crazy.
I’d also point out that the Interstate Highway System has been a great aid in tying the people of this very large and diverse nation together.
If you just robbed a bank, do you want to run outside to your waiting car, or go outside to wait at the streetcar stop?
I am not advocating robbing banks, of course, but it is a dramatic example of somebody wanting to exercise his freedom without government control. This is the case, to a lesser extent, for each of us, every day.
I want to do what I want, and go where I want, when I want, without the interference or control of the state. For that, I want my car.
Well, quite a few of the dirt / gravel roads around here carry dozens to perhaps a couple hundred cars a day, but, your point is still valid. Also... Many of the dirt / gravel roads around here need maintenance 2 or more times a year just to be passable by even a Subaru Outback...
We just got back from “Land Between the Lakes” — try dropping your undercarriage onto FS road 351 — Holy crap....!!! About 15 ft. after you turn off “The Trace” there’s a semi-hidden sharp drop & a huge(!) “crater”: It’s just the first obstacle, I might add. (You gotta have a TRUE off road vehicle — and well rooted teeth — for that one. And... Maybe a sign as you turn in that says “Repent. Now!!”)
:-)
Many of the better dirt / gravel roads around here are limited to maybe 20 mph at most if you don’t want to tear up your vehicle, and again even that is assuming one’s vehicle is something like an Outback or an older Ford Explorer (not the current “mall finder” iteration.)
P.S. We got back on The Trace ok, but, gotta inspect the underside of the Outback more thoroughly tomorrow...
Author is lame. Claiming it unfair for farmers etc who drive on dirt roads having to pay, via taxes for interstate rds means folks without kids in school should not have to pay any taxes slotted for public education.
Now that rusting rebar and crumbling cement is costing us a fortune.
Yeah...but you would have repaved with asphalt some 20 times over the life of the concrete. I imagine the cost would exceed that of the concrete.
Did this guy have something to do with the History Channel shows on the automobile or did he just watch it and decide to "crib" some of the data for his personal use?
The automobile gave us some extra personal FReedom....
Good one!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.