Why do we call cars "markets" and "freedom" if we don't pay the actual price of driving?
One of the most paradox of cars defensiveness as a "right" is the true cost of driving (and parking).
Studies suggest that societal costs of driving in the U.S. can be 30–40% higher than the private costs paid by drivers. While car owners pay taxes, these taxes often do not cover the full cost of road infrastructure maintenance, let alone external costs. In EU the percentage is lower but it's not remotely on pair.
Since a car is often (and fairly, given the urban shape/how we live) associated with freedom to drive "because I pay the car and taxes to drive while cyclists don't" and "supply meeting demand" then we would assume we get what we pay for, like a market feeding itself.
But if we consider that when we drive we don't day the full price then someone else has to pay for it and that someone else is the public, so driving it's not true freedom or market in a sense because it's heavily subsided by those who don't drive or drive a little.
Now let's forget the "true freedom" of having other modes of transportation.
If we actually apply the true cost of driving as true freedom and true right to drive don't you think that driving and parking would prohibitively expensive for most people that won't be able to afford it (at all or most importantly like now)? Then the market would really balance itself?
I think this it's one the biggest lies of modern transportation.
We disguised a sort of heavy socialism into a fake market-based world that allows to see investments for a better world (that would actually makes us richer, like investments in transit and active mobility) as unfair socialism. But it's the oppposite.
Car infra investments almost always end up being a net cost we can't maintain, then what the hell are we doing, world?
Obviously things are much more complicated than this. Two things come to mind
- costs assume a person suffering from a disease and the loss of a loved one has a monetary value, to the state maybe but it has not value to a community or families, it's infinite value no study can estimate
- while rural settings are much much more subsided than urban dwellers we need to calculate the social cohesion having these tows alive and not dead, how do we measure that I don't know and who gets to decide which value is better or worse?