The End of Detroit... [Plan to widen I-94, I-75]

[ghettopalmetto]

Widening a highway to relieve congestion is like loosening your belt to lose weight.

I throw out all my pants and buy new ones every time my waistband gets congested. I call it "mobility improvement".

[GP For Life]

Free goods have infinite demand, by definition. That's Econ 101.

Not really. By definition, a free good is a good whereby the entire quantity demanded is available at a price of zero.

Essentially, it implies an implicit, but not explicit, opportunity cost where society allocates the resources along some consolidated indifference curve.

Any more questions?

[ghettopalmetto]

Not really. By definition, a free good is a good whereby the entire quantity demanded is available at a price of zero.

Essentially, it implies an implicit, but not explicit, opportunity cost where society allocates the resources along some consolidated indifference curve.

Any more questions?

Putting jargon into terms that average people can understand:

There is no direct cost to the user of a roadway. Since I've never seen a supply-demand curve where there is zero demand at zero cost, it follows that in a metropolis of millions of vehicles, it will not be possible to ever construct a freeway that is wide enough to meet the demand.

Did I get that right?

[Sharnelle]

So I guess the concept that public transit reduces the amount of traffic for those who choose to drive does not apply here? People from the suburbs will never take light rail into Detroit as they do in cities around the world? Detroit will continue to be the last holdout by investing in wider highways?

[Bham1982]

Detroit will continue to be the last holdout by investing in wider highways?

Could you name these cities that have stopped investing in road improvements? Because I see road widening all over the place, wherever I travel.

[ghettopalmetto]

So I guess the concept that public transit reduces the amount of traffic for those who choose to drive does not apply here? People from the suburbs will never take light rail into Detroit as they do in cities around the world? Detroit will continue to be the last holdout by investing in wider highways?

Contrary to what some have claimed, public transit doesn't actually reduce automobile traffic. This is precisely because of driving being a "free" good [[induced traffic). As soon as roadway capacity becomes available, it will fill just as quickly, because the demand for that roadway space will always outstrip our ability to construct more.

Transit will get used when automobile commuters get tired of the congestion. This is why, even in cities like Chicago, New York, DC and London, you still have interminable traffic jams despite the presence of extensive and heavily utilized transit.

[Bham1982]

There is no direct cost to the user of a roadway. Since I've never seen a supply-demand curve where there is zero demand at zero cost, it follows that in a metropolis of millions of vehicles, it will not be possible to ever construct a freeway that is wide enough to meet the demand.

There is a significant direct cost to a user of a highway. It's alot more expensive than taking public transit, that's for sure. Not sure why you think cars and gas and maintenance and time are all "free".

Your "zero cost" premise is wrong, but underlying supply-demand curve is wrong too.

Demand is a product of three things- desire, ability to pay, and willingness to pay.

Is there limitless desire to drive I-75? No
Is there limitless ability to pay to drive I-75? No
Is there limitless willingness to pay to drive I-75? No

[ghettopalmetto]

I'm pretty sure there is a direct cost to a user of a highway. It's alot more expensive than taking the bus, that's for sure.

Your "zero cost" premise is wrong, but underlying supply-demand curve is wrong too.

Demand is a product of three things- desire, ability to pay, and willingness to pay.

Is there limitless desire to drive I-75? No
Is there limitless ability to pay to drive I-75? No
Is there limitless willingness to pay to drive I-75? No

Unless MDOT is installing a toll both, use of the roadway has essentially no cost to the user.

[Bham1982]

Unless MDOT is installing a toll both, use of the roadway has essentially no cost to the user.

How did you come up with this idea? If I drive down I-75 right now, it's "free"? LOL

[GP For Life]

Putting jargon into terms that average people can understand:

There is no direct cost to the user of a roadway. Since I've never seen a supply-demand curve where there is zero demand at zero cost, it follows that in a metropolis of millions of vehicles, it will not be possible to ever construct a freeway that is wide enough to meet the demand.

Did I get that right?

No. Remove the concept of induced demand from your head when you're thinking about free goods, because that induction is included in the "equilibrium". I use quotes around the equilibrium, because the supply curve and the demand curve, never actually cross in this case. Which if you think about the "free" part of free good, makes sense! There is a demand, it's just that the demand never touches the supply curve.

A free good, again by definition, is an irregular good. An irregular good has an atypical supply/demand profile. Yes?

[rb336]

How did you come up with this idea? If I drive down I-75 right now, it's "free"? LOL

Did you pay extra to drive on it? If not, then it is, by definition, free

[Bham1982]

Did you pay extra to drive on it?

Obviously yes. Can you explain how you drive for free?

If I travel 20 miles in my car, obviously I'm spending a lot more than if I travel 20 miles on public transit.

[GP For Life]

By the way, if the trends of reurbanisation hold, we'll have more time before we have to add a real light rail system.

I agree, long term we need a light rail system, however, right now we don't. We're not growing and we'd need a decade of growth just to get back to where we were ten years ago. The last thing you want to do, is build a huge underused light rail system in hopes that you a) induce public transportation demand and b) grow into it, everywhere it goes.

[nain rouge]

Could you name these cities that have stopped investing in road improvements? Because I see road widening all over the place, wherever I travel.

There are more ways to improve a road than just widening it. Did you know Seattle is actually reducing lanes all over the city? Yes, that's right - reducing. And by any mark Seattle is doing much better than Detroit, isn't it?

Besides, others are right when they point to the exchanges and on-ramps as the big traffic problem, anyway. You'd have to be blind to not see that as the problem.

I will admit that widening the freeways could be useful around the exchanges. The Square Lake and I-75 exchange works flawlessly thanks to the added lanes. But otherwise it's a waste. They don't even bother to keep the streetlights on for large stretches of I-94 in Detroit, but you're telling me we need to the widen the lanes?

[rb336]

Obviously yes. Can you explain how you drive for free?

If I travel 20 miles in my car, obviously I'm spending a lot more than if I travel 20 miles on public transit.

by your logic, if I get free tickets, parking and food for an event, I'm still paying for it.

How, exactly, are you paying MORE for using the freeway instead of, say, surface streets? answer? you are not. Actually, by using the freeway you are saving time and gas money because you are getting there faster and using less gas to do so. your car is receiving less wear-and-tear by avoiding the starts/stops of surface street driving. Actually, you are thus getting PAID to take the freeway.

[Bham1982]

There are more ways to improve a road than just widening it. Did you know Seattle is actually reducing lanes all over the city? Yes, that's right - reducing. And by any mark Seattle is doing much better than Detroit, isn't it?

Besides your correlation/causation fail, how do you conclude Seattle isn't widening roads?

I see lots of road widenings happening all over Seattle. Just look around-

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/i405/ne6thtoi5/

[GP For Life]

They don't even bother to keep the streetlights on for large stretches of I-94 in Detroit, but you're telling me we need to the widen the lanes? [/COLOR]

This is why people hate hippsters.

The streetlights have been looted, like the rest of this city.

[Bham1982]

by your logic, if I get free tickets, parking and food for an event, I'm still paying for it.

No, that event would be free. What does this have to do with the argument?

Driving isn't free.

How, exactly, are you paying MORE for using the freeway instead of, say, surface streets? answer? you are not.

What is the relevance of this? Obviously driving anywhere costs money. The initial claim was that driving was somehow free, and taking the bus costs money.

[rb336]

No, that event would be free. What does this have to do with the argument?

Driving isn't free.



What is the relevance of this? Obviously driving anywhere costs money. The initial claim was that driving was somehow free, and taking the bus costs money.

No, the argument was that driving on the freeway is free. yeah, yeah, you will make some lame comment simply because you know you are wrong. Please explain how driving on the freeway costs you extra money. no, your car expenses do not count. you would have those regardless.

[nain rouge]

The streetlights have been looted, like the rest of this city.

The streetlights in the tiny middle median of the freeway were looted? O RLLY? And you have proof?

I see lots of road widenings happening all over Seattle. Just look around-

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/i405/ne6thtoi5/

Notice that the widening is all occurring outside of the Seattle city limits? Believe it or not, Seattle doesn't control the decisions of the state government, although they do have more say within their own borders.

[Gistok]

Hehehe... Tkshreve is right... this thread does need to die....

It's bordering on incoherence....

[GP For Life]

The streetlights in the tiny middle median of the freeway were looted? O RLLY? And you have proof?

http://www.deadlinedetroit.com/artic...s#.UqeQWvRDu8M

Would you like a cookie with your nice warm glass of STFU?

[MotorCityTrikes]

If everybody rode a Trike traffic would ............... sorry just kiddin'! I've driven the Dallas/Fort Worth area hundreds of times the past 8 - 9 years. If you think Detroit is bad try that place a few rush hours. How come so many work on one side of the city and live on the other anyway?

[Wesley Mouch]

The streetlights in the tiny middle median of the freeway were looted? O RLLY? And you have proof?


Notice that the widening is all occurring outside of the Seattle city limits? Believe it or not, Seattle doesn't control the decisions of the state government, although they do have more say within their own borders.

Seattle is a highway mess from hell. What they are doing is hardly a guide for anyone. Detroit should have Seattle's traffic problems. And we shall.

But all this said, a lot of cities are discovering that reducing lanes can is a valid strategy.

The fact that a fully built-up city like Seattle isn't widening roads much, and is reducing lanes here and there is just a sign that they are looking at their transportation and addressing their issues.

Meanwhile, we attack MDOT because they ARE addressing an obvious issue.

Atlanta is car hell. I75 through Atlanta has grown from 2 or 3 lanes to more like 7 or more lanes each direction. Atlanta grew. Their roads grew. Like their car culture or not, they have been a growing successful city.

[Gannon]

Free goods have infinite demand, by definition. That's Econ 101.

Not if the product sucks. Econ 102.