Nicely detailed rant, but you're missing one important detail.
Interstate commerce
Roads like route 40 go through small towns and lack bypasses for large city centers. There are several reasons for interstates to exist.
- Safety: The more big rigs you have running through population centers, the more likely you are going to have accidents. As a truck driver, I try to stay away from state routes during the day because I don't like driving through school & hospital zones.
- Congestion: Those roads aren't meant to handle the kinds of traffic interstates are. You don't want 50 trucks in Nowheresville, USA when you're trying to drive 2 miles to get home from working at the local grocery.
- Fuel Economy: With commercial carriers being pressured to reduce emissions & fossil fuel usage, fuel economy is a major concern. Constant speed limit variations reduce fuel economy.
- Limited access highway is right: Limited access to truck stops, truck shops, and truck parking. 4-wheelers don't have to worry about these things, but they are daily necessities to truck drivers.
FYI, I drove 18-wheeler back in 2009. I drove all the way from Maine, to Washington state.
First, the reason unused 4-lane, divided highways, don't have truck stops.... is because they are UNUSED 4-lane divided highways.
Again, you are looking at the results of the interstate killing off business along existing roads, and then claiming "without the interstate we wouldn't have truck stops!". The reason Route 40 doesn't have truck stops, is because there are no trucks, because the Federal government blew billions on redundant roads we didn't need.
Second, Route 40 is not a constant speed variation.
Third, Congestion has simply moved. It's not gone... it just went from Route 40 to I-70. Have you driven I-70 during rush hour? It's a parking lot.
Fourth, the most dangerous road I've ever been on was I-5 around Portland Oregon. Further, most of the State Routes do not go through any of the towns. R23 bypasses Marion and Delaware, and Chillicothe. R33 bypasses Mariesville, Bellefontian, and bypasses Lancastor and Athens going the other way.
Most routes bypass the significant 'safety' hazards. I don't, and did not when I was driving, find that a significant problem. I personally loved the routes, because they were practically empty. I used them every chance I could get, granted I wasn't on the road long though. Only half a year.
(First post cropped out because... damn)
If you were a truck driver,then you should be well aware of the differences between traveling US40 vs I-70. Yes, there are speed variances. Every time you come across a town, you have to slow down as you pass through it. Often multiple times. Then you can speed back up once you are through it. Just to slow down again at the next town. Ad nauseum, through ~a dozen states. As opposed to an interstate where you can generally keep at one speed throughout the entire state (with the
occasional exception of a slightly lower limit through heavily populated cities).
Also, you missed my point entirely about congestion. I am not referring to congestion as it affects truck drivers. I am talking about the local yokels just trying to travel to/from their job a couple miles from home along those state and county roads. Big rigs in small towns are a massive nuisance.
If you think I-5 is dangerous, I totally believe your 6 month claim. Also, you're comparing apples to oranges. The more time you spend around local traffic, the more likely an inattentive driver who takes their responsibilities on the road for granted will do something stupid and cause an accident.
Any time there is an accident that involves a big rig, there are consequences for that driver regardless of whether or not he is determined to be at fault. If the wheels are turning, according to safety departments across the industry, there is SOMETHING the (truck) driver could have done differently to avoid the accident.
The less a driver puts himself at risk, the less likely he/she is to suffer the effects of "4-wheeler Derp Syndrome"
Yes I have driven Route 40. I am aware of the differences. It's not that much.
I-5 was a nightmare. If you had a great experience, more power to you. When I went there in an 18-wheeler, it was a freakin nightmare.
Again, I listed a number of towns, that the state roads bypass. You generally don't go through them. Are there a few? Yes. There are a few. But if you are telling me that one mile of 45 mph, instead of 65, is going to cause a massive loss of gas milage, you are nutz. Sorry, but you are wrong. My Volvo Tractor only got 6.1MPG loaded, at best. I highly doubt that minor speed variation over 1 mile through a town, made any significant difference.
I wager the slow downs and speed up, from a packed I-70, over 100 miles, made a much larger difference.
But you want to argue otherwise, fine. We agree to disagree. Until you can prove it, I'm sticking with my experience.
Again, I've been down Route 40. It was empty.... as in EMPTY. There were no 'local yokels' on Route 40. That's why I stayed on Route 40 more than I-70.
Route 23 south, goes through South Bloomfield, and Waverly. Thousands of trucks go up and down this road every single day (Because there is no redundant Interstate). Those two towns, 23 goes down to a undivided road, with stop lights. Specifically, one light in SB, and 2 in Waverly.
Thus far, I haven't seen any lines of dead people along 23, killed by trucks, or local yokels smash under trucks. In fact, in the 25 years I've driven 23, (family down south), I have never once even seen an accident. Trucks seem to navigate the "stop and go light" on the straight 23 road through the tiny towns perfectly fine without incident.
And I never referred to county roads. I'm well aware that those itty bitty 2-lane county roads suck. I avoided them like they were diseased.
But state routes, especially here in Ohio, are wonderful. There was, and is, no need for a multi-billion dollar redundant federal waste program.
And here's the last thing...
I'm not even debating the fact that Federal Interstates are 'better' than the state routes. I would hope that at some level, they were better, given the much higher cost.
What I am debating with those on the left is... is it better enough to justify the cost, and does it actually increase economic growth?
I say the answer is no. Before the interstate, millions of trucks rolled down Route 40. There are abandoned towns, fuel stations, rest areas that no longer exist, hotels / motels, restaurants, and other abandoned buildings, that show a growing economy, and commerce transported by Route 40.
Now, it's almost empty. The amount of commerce did not 'grow'. It moved. There is no rational, logical, let alone provable claim, to be made that the amount of commerce over I-70s 4-lane divided highway, is any greater than that over Route 40s 4-land divided highway.
So this idiotic claim that building infrastructure for infrastructures sake, is ignorant.
You can't make the case that building the interstate drastically increased the economy, when we already had roads, that were perfectly suitable for the task.
So the question is, are the Interstates so much better of a road, that they were worth hundreds of billions? Again, I say no. The difference in quality between the two are minor. Even the differences that DO exist, exist mainly because states stopped building their own roads, in favor of the subsidized Federal roads.
State funds that would have gone to state roads, were instead diverted to Federal roads. Then you want to claim state roads are not quite as good?
On top of that, the cost is much higher for Federal roads, than state roads. If you look at the major construction companies, they list different costs per mile of state roads than Federal roads, and it's over a 50% increase.
Now of course this is subsidized by the Federal government. Last I checked, it was 50/50. That's great for the state, but terrible for the tax payer.
That's one of the problems people have when they look at taxes, and consider policy. Policy X might only cost a few billion at the Federal Level, but you fail to see it's also driving up taxes at the State and Local level.
So then I ask the question... do you really think Federal roads are worth how much it cost? Because honestly..... We are *STILL* paying for the *BUILDING* of those Federal roads. And you will be paying for them until you die.... and your kids are paying for them, and will be until they die.... and THEIR KIDS will be paying for them, and pay for them until they die.
Do not grasp that? And I'm not talking about the maintenance cost either. I'm talk about the half a trillion dollars the government spent in the 1950s..... WE ARE *
STILL* PAYING FOR IT. To this very day.
No, it's not worth it. The cost was too high, and still is. And it did *NOT* boost the economy.
