congestion, roads discussion

[pete75]

No, we don't. The UK builds things called "bypasses" but most are really "relief roads" because we fail to close the routes through the heart to through traffic. I discuss this in viewtopic.php?f=6&t=129801

Yeah but both roads are often still congested which shows the capacity of both old and new roads is needed.

Or maybe it shows that motoring expands to fill the space available, also known as induced traffic - but let's discuss that in the other topic, please.

Well obviously if people weren't driving before because of congestion it shows both roads were actually needed.

[gaz]

Well obviously if people weren't driving before because of congestion it shows both roads were actually needed.

If people weren't driving before because of congestion, how were they making their journeys?

"Relief roads" induce demand. Car journeys that were never made because of the congestion become attractive, whether they are switched from other modes or simply additional journeys that did not happen before.

[mjr]

It shows there was probably suppressed demand, which does not necessarily mean that the roads were needed. Several on here think that motoring demand could do with suppressing a bit more, the stick to accompany carrots for more active travel.

[pete75]

Well obviously if people weren't driving before because of congestion it shows both roads were actually needed.

If people weren't driving before because of congestion, how were they making their journeys?

"Relief roads" induce demand. Car journeys that were never made because of the congestion become attractive, whether they are switched from other modes or simply additional journeys that did not happen before.

In a different way obviously. Driving isn't the only way to make it a journey you know. For many people it's the easiest and most convenient way though.

[Wanlock Dod]

... Driving isn't the only way to make it a journey you know. For many people it's the easiest and most convenient way though.

I wonder if that might have anything to do with our obsession with spending billions of pounds on building more and more roads?

[gaz]

In a different way obviously. Driving isn't the only way to make it a journey you know.

Yes, there are alternatives to driving for many journeys. I'm glad that you recognise that, I only wish more people would.

For many people it's the easiest and most convenient way though.

.

Because, as a society, we repeatedly choose to make sure that driving is the easiest and most convenient choice.

If we were to invest more in the alternatives fewer journeys would be driven, reducing congestion pollution and road danger.

[Ron]

For many people it's the easiest and most convenient way though.

Only for the private car owner, it's more expensive and more disruptive for the majority of tax payers.

[pete75]

For many people it's the easiest and most convenient way though.

Only for the private car owner, it's more expensive and more disruptive for the majority of tax payers.

Do you mean the majority of people who pay tax or the people who pay the majority of tax? Almost all the latter will own a car.

[Pete Owens]

It shows there was probably suppressed demand.

Not even that.

In economic terms demand is measured in terms of how much people are prepared to pay for a good or service. (and note pete75 that means a direct charge for that particular service). So unless that road is tolled the demand measured by the fact that people use a recourse provided for free by the state is zero.

If the state were to hand out free chocolate bars I am sure there would be takers. That wouldn't prove there is suppressed demand for chocolate - and nor could it be justified by the fact that most tax is paid by people who like chocolate.

Now I am a leftie. I am happy to see us contribute taxes to provide facilities for the general good of society. It is good that people who cannot afford the necessities of life are provided for - ie free health and education from the general purse, I would like to see greater funding for social housing, social care, social infrastructure - parks, libraries. So I am far from a market fundamentalist, but even I draw the line at socialism for motorists. Privatise the roads - if there is genuine demand then leave the supply to the market. Let the state concentrate on modes of transport accessible to all rather than just those with the means and ability to own and drive a car.

[Ron]

Do you mean the majority of people who pay tax or the people who pay the majority of tax? [/quote]
What I said was clear.

[pete75]

It shows there was probably suppressed demand.

Not even that.

In economic terms demand is measured in terms of how much people are prepared to pay for a good or service. (and note pete75 that means a direct charge for that particular service). So unless that road is tolled the demand measured by the fact that people use a recourse provided for free by the state is zero.

Using your definition there's absolutely no demand for NHS services. I think you'll find the reality is somewhat different.

It's a common misconception that stuff provided by the state is free. It is not, it is paid for from our taxes.

[mattheus]

Now I am a leftie. I am happy to see us contribute taxes to provide facilities for the general good of society. It is good that people who cannot afford the necessities of life are provided for - ie free health and education from the general purse, I would like to see greater funding for social housing, social care, social infrastructure - parks, libraries. So I am far from a market fundamentalist, but even I draw the line at socialism for motorists. Privatise the roads - if there is genuine demand then leave the supply to the market. Let the state concentrate on modes of transport accessible to all rather than just those with the means and ability to own and drive a car.

Pete,
I have to disagree with your logic here - because I don't think it makes sense to treat motoring in a "free market" manner. Cars-n-roads have too many effects on those trying to avoid them - the space they take up, the pollution, the deaths they inflict. Plus all the subtle stuff.

(reminds me of a Radio sketch from the 80s about deregulating air-flight; no need to test pilots, Crashes? Well, yes - the bad pilots will crash ... )

[Tom_B]

THis thread is a helpful discussion of economic principles but... what is the relevance of the word ‘German’?

[Pete Owens]

Now I am a leftie. I am happy to see us contribute taxes to provide facilities for the general good of society. It is good that people who cannot afford the necessities of life are provided for - ie free health and education from the general purse, I would like to see greater funding for social housing, social care, social infrastructure - parks, libraries. So I am far from a market fundamentalist, but even I draw the line at socialism for motorists. Privatise the roads - if there is genuine demand then leave the supply to the market. Let the state concentrate on modes of transport accessible to all rather than just those with the means and ability to own and drive a car.

Pete,
I have to disagree with your logic here - because I don't think it makes sense to treat motoring in a "free market" manner. Cars-n-roads have too many effects on those trying to avoid them - the space they take up, the pollution, the deaths they inflict. Plus all the subtle stuff.

Hardly an argument for state subsidy.

Certainly the state should be actively discouraging car use by taxing it to compensate for the external costs (eg pollution) imposed on society. We should regulate the safe design and operation - just as we do with private operators of other transport modes (indeed the conflict of interest in the state being both the provider and regulator of roads probably contributes to the reluctance to regulate properly due to the cost implications).

However, when it comes to the efficient allocation of resources - eg your example of the space vehicles take up- then even a lefty such as myself recognises the effectiveness of market mechanisms. Congestion is simply an imbalance of supply and demand - and this should be dealt with through the price mechanism. If more people turn up wanting to use your road then you can handle then put the price up - those that don't value the use of that road space at that time of day will not pay thus removing the congestion for those that do. If a lot of people do still choose to pay higher prices then this is a measure of genuine demand - and thus possibly making it worthwhile to expand the capacity.

[Pete Owens]

It shows there was probably suppressed demand.

Not even that.

In economic terms demand is measured in terms of how much people are prepared to pay for a good or service. (and note pete75 that means a direct charge for that particular service). So unless that road is tolled the demand measured by the fact that people use a recourse provided for free by the state is zero.

Using your definition there's absolutely no demand for NHS services. I think you'll find the reality is somewhat different.

Try reading what I wrote.
Absence of evidence is not the same thing as evidence of absence.

While fact that people will use something that is provided free of charge cannot be taken as evidence of demand (ie your original claim) That doesn't mean that it is evidence of zero demand - just that without charging we there is no measure of how much that demand is.

I did go on to point out (in the bit of my post that you have not quoted) that I am a lefty and explicitly included health as an example of the sort of thing that should be provided on socialist lines.

It's a common misconception that stuff provided by the state is free.

exactly the point I was making above (the bit starting "note pete75 ...")
It is free to the user (ie free in the general useage of the word)

It is not, it is paid for from our taxes.

but paid for by the rest of us.

This argument is usually brought up by opponents of socialised services such as the health service so it is most odd that you should deploy it in support of free (to-the-user-but -paid-for-by-someone-else) roads.