[Publius]

There is a missing piece of the of the puzzle, which is the degree to which highways (as other transportation forms) are subsidized. We tend to think that all highway building and maintenance expenses are covered by gasoline taxes, which is not true.

A certain FReeper (who shall remain nameless) gave a lunchtime entertainment speech to some Washington state politicos in Olympia two years ago and condensed the speech into an essay. After being cleaned up and edited for print form, TANSTAAFL: A (Semi-)Satiric Look at a World Without Transportation Subsidies maintains its belly laughs but doesn't quite convey the image of state legislators falling on the floor and laughing themselves into insensibility. (The speech should have been videotaped.)

There is a lot more to transportation funding than meets the eye.

[Atlas Sneezed]

There is a missing piece of the of the puzzle, which is the degree to which highways (as other transportation forms) are subsidized. We tend to think that all highway building and maintenance expenses are covered by gasoline taxes, which is not true.

---

What, by income taxes?

All income tax payers benefit from the highway.

Most income tax payers use the highways.

At worst, there are some people who pay more in taxes than highways benefit them, but the vast population receives little or no subsidy.

Most of those who pay into public transit don't use it. A small group in select locations (tending to be controlled by those of a certain political persuasion) receive a great subsidy from others.

See the difference?