The Transport Politic: A Note on the Future of American Transportation

A Note on the Future of American Transportation

Yonah Freemark
April 29th, 2011


The glee expressed by the commentariat — most conservative, though some to the left — over the decaying support for investing in the nation’s intercity rail system has been a telling indication of the degree to which too many Americans are willing to gloss over the demands of this growing country.

Convinced both that it would be too expensive to construct anything we do not already have and that the United States is so hewn to its automobile-oriented, mid-century landscape that it cannot change, this perspective appears to be gaining currency. To ill effect.

Though the conversation being had on the future of American transportation has been framed in terms of high-speed rail, a mode that has captured the minds of some and raised fury in others, the truth is that the ideological war being waged against increased investment in infrastructure applies to all modes of transportation. The crusade against government spending extends universally — and that means bike paths, light rail, and highways.

Yesterday’s Economist story on the nation’s transportation problems notes some of the most serious problems facing the world’s biggest economy: Infrastructure spending that is less than half of that in Europe and a third of that in China in terms of GDP; far too few funds dedicated to the maintenance of existing infrastructure; very low gas prices compared to just about everywhere else. Considering the lack of investment, the results are unsurprising: Very high traffic fatality rates and some of the longest commute times in the developed world. Not to mention our continued dependence on the congestion-causing, sprawl-inducing, pollution-generating private automobile. ...................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/04/29/a-note-on-the-future-of-american-transportation/

not we are a 'growing country'.

The cost of repairing it, let alone expanding it, makes caring for a retired baby-boom look small.

Indeed, there are some of such arenas that have been completely demolished and replaced but are still not yet paid for.

And yet these types of venues are one of the least important parts of our infrastructure.

It's only certain kinds of infrastructure that Americans oppose building/maintaining.

That's an interesting twist. I've thought of them sort of like the necessity of color photos in the news paper or having a cell phone. Nice, but not really necessary. I've thought about libraries that way, too. Once they were essential to have an informed public when that public couldn't afford books. Nowadays books themselves are seen as unncessary.


Want builds needs, so I suppose a sports arena could be considered essential infrastructure. It's a novel point of view for me.

Either that or you're a total dumbass