Because fuel tax basically never covers the externalities (pollution from burning it, plus the cost of the road infrastructure), car travel is heavily subsidized by everyone who isn't driving a car, and this fact is very rarely talked about in the mainstream.

Follow

@uint8_t while roads are subsidised by everyone without cars, they are actually a public benefit. Lorries take goods to shops, this would be impossible without roads etc

· · Tootle for Mastodon · 2 · 0 · 0

@TinBee @uint8_t said lorries are probably the leading cause of damage to said roads, they ought to be charged tolls

@a_breakin_glass @uint8_t but, if the lorries are charged extra then they will have to charge more for delivering and that will drive (no pun intended) prices up.

@TinBee Except roads costs gets higher with more cars. More cars → faster deterioration → more costs.

And too many lazy people use cars for ridiculously short "travels" for which public transportation or bicycles¹, or even sometimes a walk, is sufficient…

1. Provided decent cycling facilities. But most public authorities, in most rich countries, would rather build even more fucking parkings, and give even more public space to cars, than build cycling facilities…

@uint8_t

@devnull @uint8_t yes, I agree about unnecessary car trips and worrying about cars in cities, when bikes and walking or busses would be a much better thing to encourage. We have an “interesting” shared bike, electric bike and electric scooter scheme, which could help. Cars are terrible and need to be taxed more to minimise their damage. But roads for deliveries etc are a necessity.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.