If that strikes a chord with you, please take a moment to consider the following message:

https://morethanjustparks.com/roadless-rule/

Abbey was spot on when it comes to roads through parks, but this isn't really that - it begins in farmland and Ute reservation land, then climbs into the managed woodlands of the San Juan National Forest, mostly lined by towns and ski resorts. It also is the only connection between a number of towns. The wilderness area is off to the east.

US invests lavishly in road infrastructure by any measure. The idea that the US underinvests is contrarian to say the least. If it doesn't seem like the infra is any good that's in large part because of the huge Anglosphere infra cost multiplier and the fact that there is so much existing to maintain.

Problem is that the Federal Highway Association only spends for new projects, not routine maintenance (please check me on that though).

Therefore cities who need maintenance done will bundle routine maintenance they can't afford with expansion (lane expansion, streamlining). This lets them access federal dollars they wouldn't otherwise get.

Over decades, this has created a lot of infrastructure that isn't financially responsible as stuff has just gotten built and built and built. The ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) always grades the overall US as a "C" or worse for maintenance.

Part of the problem is that building things is sexy, maintaining them is harder and not sexy. Lotta money and focus on new stuff, maintenance is a secondary concern.

I would not say that is not completely true. Your state Department of transportation is probably the biggest spender anmong other state agencies. The healthcare Leviathan is only thing that could be bigger. I think it’s important to keep in mind that the surface transportation network in the United States is massive. We also have roads serving mere handfuls of predominantly agricultural users (still critical to food supply).

Building roads is expensive, and they don’t last forever. A good asphalt surface may be service worthy for 20 years. A ton of asphalt outside of California may cost in the ballpark of $150 to install. A 2 inch lift of asphalt will cover not quite 10 sqyd. So you can see how expensive this gets when we’re talking about thousands of miles.

I think it’s worth considering how policies may destroy much of the demand for roadways. Personally, I could imagine a future wear personal private transportation is basically unlawful or artificially expensive.

not all infrastructure should be maintained. I'd personally prefer rail infrastructure prioritized over car roads.

But maintaining current infrastructure in the meantime while we build better things is good too. Let's just not lose the plot on what needs to happen next.

If they fix the potholes, imagine the damage to the mechanic economy for no longer needing to replace tires/wheels, fix suspensions, etc. The mechanic lobby is never going to let this happen!!

The highways are never a problem. However "scary" the highways are in any given place the local roads are worse and people's driveways are worse still.

So of course nobody cares about two cars a year going off a cliff on the federal highway when ten cars a year go off a cliff on the road that's the local shortcut between the center of town and Walmart in the next valley or whatever.

tAkE a DiFfErReNt RoUtE https://maps.app.goo.gl/uCsiUoZHs28pwb4Z8

Everyone is already driving 15mph on it because for so many people it's a tourist attraction.

Sorry, you're saying that people should just let the free market decide the issue of a gov't provided road? How does that make sense?