This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
Everyone else seems to be responding in terms of road safety. But surely the question is more about the rights and duties of the citizen and state. After all the roads are provided at public expense, finansed by universal taxation.
Should such a facility be restricted to those who can afford to pay for certification? If so then why should those who do not want to pay for certification be required to pay for the road?
Discuss.
Should such a facility be restricted to those who can afford to pay for certification? If so then why should those who do not want to pay for certification be required to pay for the road?
Discuss.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@Teslin The roads that are necessary for goods are quite different from those required for millions of private vehicles. A non-driver's use of the roads is quite a different category of activity than someone who drives their own private vehicle.
I'm not saying that the point I made is right merely that it is a valid one and that discussions of road safety seem to be missing the point, as I understood it, of the original question.
To push the argument to the extreme one could consider whether or not a specific road would be needed at all if the only traffic were public transport and goods. It could then be argued that rail might in many cases be cheaper in the long term; less maintenance per kilogram-kilometre.
People should probably start marshalling arguments regarding this sort of thing because some, or perhaps many, in the road safety lobby would dearly love to ban people from driving private vehicles altogether as soon as anything resembling autonomous vehicles is available. If one argues that driving is a privilege and not a right then it can easily be taken away or the qualifications made arbitrarily onerous and expensive.
I'm not saying that the point I made is right merely that it is a valid one and that discussions of road safety seem to be missing the point, as I understood it, of the original question.
To push the argument to the extreme one could consider whether or not a specific road would be needed at all if the only traffic were public transport and goods. It could then be argued that rail might in many cases be cheaper in the long term; less maintenance per kilogram-kilometre.
People should probably start marshalling arguments regarding this sort of thing because some, or perhaps many, in the road safety lobby would dearly love to ban people from driving private vehicles altogether as soon as anything resembling autonomous vehicles is available. If one argues that driving is a privilege and not a right then it can easily be taken away or the qualifications made arbitrarily onerous and expensive.
Teslin · M
@ninalanyon Thank you for your comments/explanation.
My opinion, without roads, people would be stuck in their houses. Although public transportation is a great thing for metropolitan areas, it is impossible for rural areas.
If I only had access to public transportation, it would take me a day to get to a location that is say, 3 hours by my personal car. With multiple transfers.
And, I would have to take an Uber or Taxi to the train/bus station.
Again, just my opinion, not feasible.
My opinion, without roads, people would be stuck in their houses. Although public transportation is a great thing for metropolitan areas, it is impossible for rural areas.
If I only had access to public transportation, it would take me a day to get to a location that is say, 3 hours by my personal car. With multiple transfers.
And, I would have to take an Uber or Taxi to the train/bus station.
Again, just my opinion, not feasible.
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@Teslin [quote]
If I only had access to public transportation, it would take me a day to get to a location that is say, 3 hours by my personal car. With multiple transfers.[/quote]
That's how life was in most of Europe for most people before about 1960, it is how it is for the vast majority of the world even now and for the foreseeable future.
My point was that people should not take it for granted and should marshal arguments for or against. And pointing out that it takes longer by public transport will not necessarily be a telling argument, after all it could be argued that even the US functioned quite well before people drove their own cars.
If I only had access to public transportation, it would take me a day to get to a location that is say, 3 hours by my personal car. With multiple transfers.[/quote]
That's how life was in most of Europe for most people before about 1960, it is how it is for the vast majority of the world even now and for the foreseeable future.
My point was that people should not take it for granted and should marshal arguments for or against. And pointing out that it takes longer by public transport will not necessarily be a telling argument, after all it could be argued that even the US functioned quite well before people drove their own cars.
SW-User
@ninalanyon those who are qualified for the privilege deliver your groceries to the supermarkets over those roads, so you can eat, regardless of whether you are qualified for the privilege or not, so yes, you should participate in funding public [i]infrastructure[/i] (not just roads), as you almost certainly still benefit, even indirectly ... you also benefit by your national defense force being able to move its assets from one part of the country to another over these roads in a time of crisis (natural disaster, invasion)
There's a special place in hell for naive "libertarians"
There's a special place in hell for naive "libertarians"
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@SW-User I think you haven't read my responses very carefully. I was not advocating for any kind of libertarian point of view I was setting out some of the arguments that will need to be countered if people wish to maintain there supposed right to drive their own vehicles.
I don't understand where you get the idea that I am any kind of libertarian, naïve or not.
I don't understand where you get the idea that I am any kind of libertarian, naïve or not.