cbn42

This document only deals with the federal budget. Most of the expenditure of highway construction and maintenance is borne by state and local governments and comes out of general taxation.

KurtVH

The states tax road fuels at almost twice the rate of the federal government on average. In addition, states collect sales tax on vehicle sales, registration fees, taxes on tires and vehicle lubricants, tolls, etc. Whether those funds goe into a state's general fund or are set aside for roads is moot; the fact remains that auto transportation is more than self sufficient in most if not all states

cbn42

Since you made a rather bold statement without any sources or support, I looked up some numbers for California:

sales tax for a year: $27.140 billion
9.6% of this is from gas stations, giving $2.6 billion
vehicle license fees: $1.36 billion
Total Revenue per year: $3.9 billion

spending on highways: $56 billion over 10 years, or $5.6 billion per year
spending for local streets over 10 years: $19 billion, or $1.9 billion per year
Total spending per year: $7.5 billion

So based on this rough calculation, the state spends almost twice as much on roads as it collects in taxes from motorists.

(This is attributing ALL gas station sales to motorists. If you only count sales of gasoline, the revenue from motorists will be even less, but I couldn't find any such numbers.)

InkUnderNails

cbn42 and KurtVH, I tried finding backup because I felt KurtVH was right.

Here is mine.

Seems cbn42 was right based on one article.

KurtVH

Regarding lack of sources: Fair enough. This is seat-of-the-pants stuff recalled mostly from years of semi-interest in the topic; my assertions are, I believe, generally accurate but far from dispositive. My excuse is that I'd had a couple of cocktails before posting yesterday.

On your post, I don't see fuel taxes in your calculation. Did you include this in the sales tax numbers? I also don't see sales tax on vehicles or truck weight fees (though those may be included in your license fee line).

California uses part of its fuel tax revenues to fund public transportation. Those should be counted in the percentage of highway funding that comes from user fees for a true picture.




Good article. Couple of things, though. The article notes that about a quarter of federal gas tax revenues go to things other than highways. Those funds should be counted when determining if highway/road expenditures are paid for from user fees as those offset other general revenue spending. The same logic would apply to state and local funding.

The article also puts funding from bond issues in the non user fee category. That may be accurate, but if the monies raised by issuing bonds are repaid from user fees, those should also obviously be counted as funds from user fees.

ysolde

I'm a huge fan of the Acela to either Boston or DC. Door-to-door from Manhattan, it is much faster and easier than taking a flight. The lounges are decent. The redcaps are always charming. And the on-board experience is lovely, with wi-fi, decent food served at your seat, and some beautiful views (depending on which side you are sitting on).

halls120

^^ on the DC-NYC Acela. Yes, it might take a tad longer door to door compared to flying at certain times of the day, but I can get quality work done sitting in a comfortable seat, with full connectivity. And without the ridiculous security theater experience.

barbell

It's not just the Acela.

I have a conference to attend next month. It is 800 flight miles away and I have access to a 2.5 hour nonstop flight, which I could take for free as NRSA.

I am instead taking a 29-hour Amtrak, which does not include a 5-hour connection in Chicago. While I won't have WiFi on these particular routes, the trips are overnight, so I can sleep on the trip, get work done during the day that I can't complete while I'm at the office without the distraction of hopping on the internet, and because of the timing I save a night in the hotel on the other end.

As for timing, the conference is almost cross country, which means I have to close my business for a full travel day regardless of the mode of transit on both ends. The only thing I'm out is closing the office an additional day on the return, which isn't necessary due to my arrival time home, but I don't want to run the risk of arriving late and having my staff reschedule a day's worth of appointments.

All-in-all Amtrak is as easy, or easier than the flight option. As a bonus I avoid a longish flight in a Barbie jet, I don't have to attend the Security Circus, I won't be threatened with irradiation, and I won't "enjoy" an opt out choke, shove, testicular slap, or any of the other indignities I've actually received at my home airport.

Schmurrr

The federal government is researching alternatives to the fuel tax. As cars grow more fuel-efficient, fuel tax revenues achieve less and less, and this is problematic for transportation agencies whose projected expenditures have been based on historical trends in fuel tax revenue. FWIW, the Obama administration is proposing a 2025 fuel efficiency standard of 54.5 mpg.

BearX220

The Northeast Regional rolling stock hasn't changed in 40 years. And you sometimes see consists with baggage cars that are clearly far older than that. With the malfunctions and derailments Amtrak suffers so often, I don't know where they get enough cars to piece the trains together.

I like the Acela but don't think the 40-odd minute speed advantage over the NER trains is usually worth the enormous price differential.

cbn42

No worries, I do that sometimes as well

On the state budget website, the fuel tax is not broken out separately, but it does say that 9.6% of the sales tax comes from gas stations, so I assume this includes the tax on fuel. I highly doubt that sales of cigarettes and beer at gas stations accounts for 9.6% of the state's sales tax revenue.

I think that is just an accounting gimmick. They use part of the fuel tax revenues to fund public transportation, and they use money from the general fund to pay for roads. What matters is the amount they spend on roads vs. the amount they collect on fuel tax and other automobile-related taxes.

I_Can_Fly_US_Airways

How bout telling us something we DON'T know!!!

Dianne47

I travel several times a year from my home in rural New Mexico to Oceanside, CA. If I fly (which I never do anymore) I have to drive 2 hours to ABQ and either pay for parking or be dropped off by family. Then I have to go through the nightmare of TSA screening, which ALWAYS involves the grope and shoes being taken away, x-rayed and swabbed. I have to allow 2 hours for the nonsense. I can fly to SAN or SNA, my daughter has to drive one hour each way to pick me up, so 2 hours plus waiting time to pick me up.

Or, I can drive less than one hour to the quaint Lamy train station, park for free or be dropped off. I spend the afternoon and night on the train, sleep in a bed, shower, and have nice meals. At Fullerton I jump off the Southwest Chief, walk across the footbridge over the tracks, and catch the southbound Surfliner about 5-10 minutes later. My daughter drives 6 miles (10 minutes) to the Oceanside train station to pick me up. No TSA, no parking fees, restful ride, and much much easier for my daughter.

My last trip and upcoming trip next month include(d) double Amtrak points. I now take Amtrak for all domestic trips unless I can't get there by train.

tkey75

As opposed to what? DL T2/3 at JFK? I'll take Penn Sta. any day.

danl08

I made this move YEARS ago and have had status on Amtrak and not on any airline for 3 years now. I have earned enough points the past few years to take my family to FL on the Autotrain for vacation. Going to NYC and actually landing in the middle of the city is so much more civilized than fighting the traffic in a cab from LaGuardia or even worse, JFK. I do plenty of work in Philly, NJ and NYC and will never fly up there from DC again. Unfortunately, my little secret has been getting out and the trains are getting more and more crowded.