Eisenhower's Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956

[South Park Fan]

I'll post what I posted in a similar thread earlier:

The Interstate Highway System ought to be considered an anathema to libertarians and environmentalists alike. The former should realize how the nationalization of transportation has been the death knell of federalism in this country as the Feds can just threaten to cut any state's highway funds that threatens to defy the Feds. The latter should realize that the IHS was essentially a massive subsidy to the automotive industry to the detriment of more efficient modes of transportation.

 

[ronpaulfollower999]

The interstate highway system destroyed private intercity passenger rail. It also encouraged people to live many miles away from work. The US had a good trolley system that was privately run in basically every city but many were ran out when GM conspired with cities to replace these efficient trolleys with busses.

So now if we want mass transit it has to be funded by the government just like airports, highways, and seaports. Oh what a terrible path we have gone down.

 

[mainstream economist]

I am under the impression that this act was not perfect, but it changed our country as a whole...for the good.

NFB, I do not fault you for thinking so. This is the official line found in almost all history books. However, an honest economist always asks the following question:

Compared to what?

What would have arisen in the absence of federal highway construction? Would it have been a network of cheap high speed rail? Would it have been State-level highway construction that would have come with less infringements on freedom? We cannot say. It has never been the case that we could predict the market's creative and novel solutions to existing problems.

I am not trying to single you out, but the logical mistake you made is a very common one. I teach at a business school and this kind of mistake is common even among executives taking part-time MBA courses.

I highly encourage you to ask the question "Compared to what?" when considering the benefits of government programs. Furthermore, do not be discouraged if you cannot come up with a better free-market alternative. The free market is not just one person. Even if you cannot think of it, there probably is an enterprising mind out there who can. Each person can contribute a market solution to a different problem. There is a probably a problem that only you can solve as well. The power of the free market combines the creative forces of the entire nation as opposed to a few armchair elite in some distant capital.

 

[yoshimaroka]

Compared to what?

Exactly.

What innovation has there been since the Interstate Highway System? None. There is no profit motive to improve it either.
Compared to the IT industry, the transportation industry has barely changed because of the government stranglehold on that sector.
We probably would be using flying cars by now, without a need for any massive highway system.

 

[Voluntary Man]

Exactly.

What innovation has there been since the Interstate Highway System? None. There is no profit motive to improve it either.
Compared to the IT industry, the transportation industry has barely changed because of the government stranglehold on that sector.
We probably would be using flying cars by now, without a need for any massive highway system.

i want my jetpack!

 

[No Free Beer]

Thanks guys! The responses for this thread has been amazing!

 

[dannno]

Obviously nobody told him about the CIC (Construction Industrial Complex)

i always thought of the interstate highway system as a function of national defense. either the states would have to each make their links seperate or a central agency could plan it. to the benefit/cost of each route is debatable.
but having a fast national transit system could help with troop mobilization.

Are Governors not allowed to communicate with each other? Why couldn't they come to a mutually beneficial common ground?

 

[Krugerrand]

I've raised this one many a time. I believe one of my first posts here was a critcism of this turkey.

The U.S. highway system--the ones with all white shields--was built without a federal fuel tax, and it managed to connect all of the states and provide a structure of through routes. It was just a case of the states working together for the common strength of the nation. And here's what didn't happen back then:

Federal highway fuel taxes create federal highway funds. Everyone who drives pays them, and whether or not a state gets them back depends. Depends on what? Well, back in the 'seventies, it depended on whether or not a state passed the 55 mph speed limit. You know, the speed limit that was appropriate enough for Connecticut and Maryland, but had people in places like West Texas, Nevada and Eastern Utah falling asleep at the wheel. It depends on things like states lowering their BAC standard for drunk driving to .08, throwing a certain percentage of their populaton in jail for it, and setting up police roadblocks whether they actually had a problem with widespread death and destruction from drunk driving or not. And yes, the federal government has actually tied whether or not a state gets federal highway funds to things that have nothing to do with cars, trucks and driving.

Just another Pandora's Box that needs to be slammed back shut and padlocked.

excellent point.

 

[raystone]

I am under the impression that this act was not perfect, but it changed our country as a whole...for the good.

After all the examples here of how federal highways have created handcuffs for states, have resulted in many negative unintended consequences, maybe you should tell us exactly how our country's been changed for the good. Besides you being able to more easily road trip to spring break at South Padre Island.

 

[dannno]

This is the head of the CIC nobody warned Eisenhower about:

 

[eduardo89]

The interstate highway system did destroy the private, profitable rail system in the US. It also is what led to the urban decay of most American cities when everyone moved into urban sprawl suburbia.

 

[klamath]

Though I love the interstate system, I think like all huge government programs it came with a lot of unintended consequences. The main one being that our method of transporting goods around the country moved from rail to trucks as the highway system subsidised the trucking industry. Rail for the movement of large amounts of goods is more efficient. Just like rail a century before was subsidised by the federal government had its unintended consquences such as the mass slaughter of the buffalo and created the timber and steel monopolies. The problem is the very people that are trying to fix all these unintended consequences want to use massive federal programs to fix the problem with no regards or thought to the unintended future consiquences.

 

[TonySutton]

The interstate highway system destroyed private intercity passenger rail. It also encouraged people to live many miles away from work. The US had a good trolley system that was privately run in basically every city but many were ran out when GM conspired with cities to replace these efficient trolleys with busses.

So now if we want mass transit it has to be funded by the government just like airports, highways, and seaports. Oh what a terrible path we have gone down.

Add to that all of the businesses it killed. The old highway system, think Route 66, was littered with motels, restaurants and sites of interest. Many of these were bypassed by the Interstate Highway System and subsequently closed due to lost business. The government effectively shutdown many well run businesses that did nothing wrong.

 

[reardenstone]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal-Aid_Highway_Act_of_1956

This is what separates me from libertarianism. I think this Act helped the United States tremendously. This act changed the way America did business. What would be the libertarian viewpoint of this act? How would you have embarked on this mission, from a libertarian's view point?

Comment below.

- NFB

I think it and the Big Dams act ruined towns and displaced a lot of people economically and it was expensive. It was all a big crocked up scheme to support the automobile industry and Fordism.

Robber Barron corporatism.

Towns and cities should have found their own means. Maybe Rail? Maybe steam cars? But why the hell not after we shot and ran off the Injuns, then the poor townships that replaced them. Let's just use MORE vulgar eminent domain!

 

[Erentheca]

The interstate highway system did destroy the private, profitable rail system in the US. It also is what led to the urban decay of most American cities when everyone moved into urban sprawl suburbia.

This.

A few others mentioned this point as well.