The Real Reason U.S.Highways Are Always Under Construction - Cheddar Explains

[@lordofduct]

This video makes a heavy implication the omission that: 1) The US doesn't generally use concrete for highways (despite showing pics of Houston, who uses concrete for their roads) 2) That concrete is significantly better than asphalt due to some pros (while leaving out its cons). The further south you go the more concrete highways you'll find. Houston for example, as well as Florida where I spent 25+ years of my life. These are the quote "young highways", most of the construction that is going on there is because of the ever growing population and expansion that is being done. There's actually not that much "maintenance", because they use concrete for those benefits! But here's the thing... they CAN use concrete easily. Aside from cost, some problems concrete have is: 1) They crack more easily than asphalt. Note how you talk about if there is cracking they replace a much larger section? The reason is... it's concrete. You have to replace that large region if it cracks. When the concrete cracks the damage is likely to have reduced the integrity of much of the concrete around it. Odds are high that nearby concrete is cracked or will crack soon. So you must replace all of it. 2) Concrete does not play well with salt. You must seal the concrete if lots of salt will be touching it, and the sealer needs to be replaced frequently. Furthermore things like plowing and the sort can wear out this sealing layer requiring more frequent resealing. ... I think you might be seeing where I'm going here... the northeast... is cold. There is a lot of snow, necessity to plow, and a lot of salting of the road to keep it from icing in the winter. Concrete does not do well in this setting. ... But but Germany! Germany is warmer than New York and New England. The whole western and northern (basically near the water) the climate is more like say the UK. Sure it gets a winter... but's a very mild winter. And you can see if you say go on google maps and look at their highways (autobahn) areound say Dusseldorf (a region of Germany where there is much more highways primarily because the region, North Rhine-Westphalia, is the most populated region of Germany). Dusseldorf has an average temperature in its coldest month of about 0.5->6 Celsius, so just above freezing, while sometimes dipping below it. Cold, but compared to say New York where the average temp is below freezing (NYC average a low of -2.7C, places like Albany average low is -10C), it's warmer. But now lets travel to the southeast, up into more hilly inland regions of Germany, where it's much colder climate wise versus the lowlands. Let's go to Nuremberg. Where the average low in January is -2.3C, a bit more like NYC. What's that I see when I drop into street view on say highway 9, or highway 6... is that.... ASPHALT!??? I fucking wonder whyyyyy!!?????

[@LeeeroyJenkins]

Nice paragraph 👍 Lots of info. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️5 stars

[@robosuit]

So Cheddar is lying to push an agenda. Not surprising.

[@CaptianDerp69]

asphalt is one of the most recycled materials in the US 94% of asphalt reclaimed from old roads and parking lots goes back into new pavements which means a road can be torn up and repaved with out wasting much this video is incredibly one sided

[@the0ne809]

I like everything you said. We also need high speed trains so people use less cars on the highway.

[@CellaDragon]

The correct information ℹ️ Glad to see it

[@UniquelyCritical]

We overbuilt the number of roads due to the "suburban dream" of seas of single family homes. Now it's too expensive to maintain. It's the result of lobbying and poor planning. This is what happens when profits take precedent over people.

[@dbclass4075]

Or rather, short-term profits. Long-term costs often ignored.

[@IpSyCo]

No, it’s a result of consumer demand and the persistent desire for people to have their own yards in a quiet neighborhood. It’s the reason why the suburbs continue to expand.

[@dbclass4075]

@@IpSyCo It's more than that. Majority of the land is zoned for single-family homes, and nothing else. Not even other low-density types such as duplexes. In other words, it is illegal to build something else other than single-family houses. HOA neighborhood can take this to the extreme and outright dictate your house, defeating the point of wanting a personal house.

[@grambo4436]

Thank the morons who were for the Defense Highway Act of 1956 including other state planners in general etc. Etc

[@johnathin0061892]

People move out of cities because the cities have sky high taxes, sky high cost of living and third world levels of crime.

[@luxuryhub1323]

The thing is that it’s not just removing highways, that’s relatively easy. You’ll need densification (the kind that was rejected by Rochester), new mixed use developments, and the provision of adequate mass public transit to replace that demand for transportation. It’s so much more than taking down concrete

[@M3ganwillslay]

Why cant USA build even a single high speed rail lane????

[@lemonngripz]

@@M3ganwillslay They are. Look at california. Its still being built, has had delays but is doing well rn.

[@highway2heaven91]

@@M3ganwillslay Because most people don’t want it, want it but don’t want to spend the money or just don’t care.

[@M3ganwillslay]

@@highway2heaven91 true

[@CDN0128]

What's with all ya'll cucks wanting public transit? I absolutely don't.

[@rolandgonzales3343]

Here in Houston they spent years rebuilding freeways and large portions go underwater during floods so now they're going to rebuild them again. Anyone living in the city could have told them that these parts next to flood prone areas weren't going to be above water during floods. At the time they were building them I assumed they had a plan to keep that from happening but apparently they didn't. I went to a meeting on a development plan for a large residential area they are building next to downtown and when I asked if it would be above Hurricane Harvey level flood waters, none of the planners had an answer to that question. In fact I don't think they even considered it before I asked. A large residential building next to downtown had it's foundation damaged from Hurricane Harvey and is being evacuated with no date for return of tenants. Hurricane Harvey has to be the standard to which everything in Houston has to be built going forward.

[@Racko.]

the solution will always be walkable places and stuff like trams and transit

[@Fabdanc]

@@Racko. I'll just improve your response by adding *above grade.* I ride the Red Line in Houston to get to/from work, the gym, concerts, and some light shopping... When it floods in certain parts of the city... The trains are not running because they are street level. Loads of fun!

[@travcollier]

They considered flood risks, problem is that they used the standard way of calculating that risk which is based on how often floods happened in the past... A past before massive expanses of concrete were everywhere and before man made climate change really started kicking in.

[@Fabdanc]

I moved to Houston from Philly... It has always baffled me that there is no commuter rail that connects into the MetroRail. Could you imagine if there was a commuter rail link flowing the 610/BW 8 with radials going out to the suburbs and airports? And then within the 610 you switched over to an expanded MetroRail network?

[@__jonbud______________________]

@@travcollier the ice at the poles are akin to "scarring" that occured due to extreme circumstances. Expect the Earth to tend towards returning to a state similar to what naturally occured in the Miocene or Pliocene epochs, even without human intervention.

[@BariumBlue]

Most roads don't produce enough taxable value/wealth to pay for themselves. Detroit was one of the first cities to build large and long roadways - the cost of maintaining those and the associated services was one piece that lead to it's bankruptcy.

[@shinnam]

How is "paying for itself" measured? There are a lot of things of value, not measured in profit. The wear and tear on vehicles, the stress and lost work time spent on getting repairs aren't included. There are some things that will never produce enough measured value to "pay for themselves."

[@HF7-AD]

@@shinnam roads are very expensive to maintain, levying enough taxes to fund their repairs would be very unpopular

[@shinnam]

@@HF7-AD Yes, roads are expensive. However my MAGA brother would be one of the first one's to cry fowl and blame it on the current administration if tax money went to rail or infrastructure other than roads. Then he couldn't drive his 15 mpg RV wherever he wanted. Don't get me started on education....

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

And many others will follow. It is just a matter of time.

[@pablonh]

@@shinnam > Don't get me started on education... Protip: When being an arrogant jerk, try to get your spelling right...

[@AaronSmith-kr5yf]

The real failure of the interstate system IMO was routing thru traffic into cities. Nashville is a perfect example of this, I-65, I-40, and I-24 all connect in downtown. There is no damn good way to avoid the downtown lane crunch/stop/go traffic clusterfuck if you just want to go straight thru on one of those interstates. Yes we have I-840, but its 20 miles longer to get around Nashville vs going straight thru downtown if you are driving I-40 straight thru. Unless you time things wrong to rush hour, its 30 minutes quicker or so just to go thru downtown if you are a truck driver. Not to mention that almost 3 gallons of fuel you save when you do the shorter route thru downtown. Cincinnati has a similar problem with their outer belt, no traffic its like 30 minutes quicker to go thru downtown, so that's what most of the lemmings do, then traffic backs up thru downtown and southern Kentucky because of that god forsaken stupid double decker 3 lane bridge over the Ohio River. Really back in the 1950's the interstate system should have built alternate routes around downtown thru the cornfields that were 10-15 miles out, bypass that thru traffic from downtown. .

[@Prodigious1One]

Yes, bypass to preserve downtowns!

[@callmeswivelhips8229]

But then how would they have displaced all the people living in those black and latino neighborhoods???? Consider it from the perspective of the racist capitalists running this country!!!

[@alphamaccao5224]

The problem is in bypassing you actually cause considerable harm to the cities. When things like route 66 were made redundant the cities that relied on that thru traffic withered.

[@alex2143]

@@alphamaccao5224 Please go and tell all of the people whose houses got bulldozed and whose communities got displaced that they should be thankful. Please tell all of the people who have a twelve lane highway right outside of their bedroom window how glad they should be. You can just build highways around cities. You don't need to bulldoze downtown for that. Literally no-one benefits from that. It's just stupid.

[@callmeswivelhips8229]

@@alphamaccao5224 I believe the real problem here are cars themselves. At the end of the day, cars are likely the worst solution to transportation needs in terms of urbanized regions.

[@walterh2113]

Infrastructure is at the heart of a country, investing in a good network is crucial. As is providing alternatives to cars, such as trains/trams/metros/busses.

[@julianshepherd2038]

Communist

[@shinnam]

Spot on. Last time, 2019, I was in my home state of Missouri, it was awful. Thailand, Poland and Latvia have better infrastructure.

[@m4x927]

yea it would be nice if we had high speed railways

[@Racko.]

@@m4x927 Oil companies are the reason why it doesnt happen

[@Sparticulous]

@@Racko. car companies like ford also gutted public transportation

[@BucketlistBeatty]

the real failure is that we don't invest in other modes of transportation. if people had options they wouldn't drive as much and then you wouldn't have to repair the roads as much.

[@__jonbud______________________]

Bikes are cheap and buses exist. A chunk of productive people just don't always have the *time* to spend on alternatives or they just don't think about time management.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

@@__jonbud______________________ riding a bike is a death sentence and busses are wildly inefficient after thoughts. It all starts with zoning properly. Suburban sprawl is the dumbest thing ever.

[@BucketlistBeatty]

@@__jonbud______________________ time wouldn't be an issue if we invested in these other modes of transportation

[@betula2137]

Yep, and then the drivers don't have traffic and the infrastructure is cheaper and better-tailored

[@danb.709]

Or it's a cost/benefit thing and the cost is worth it for a lot of people to not have to get up an hour earlier, not have to ride public transport, not have to ride a bike in the snow. And different people have different values regarding the environmental thing, not even gonna touch on that one. A lot of people need their vehicle for work as well. It's also a status quo thing, although maybe that's beginning to change, maybe.

[@LakesideGazer]

The farther north of the Mason-Dixon Line you go, the more roads suffer. In my state, temps range from -30°F (-34°C) in the winter to over 100°F (38°C) in the summer. The actual physical laws of thermal expansion come into play here. Concrete roads can literally explode in the summer under the expansion stresses. Add in water infiltration and repeated melt/thaw cycles of winter and our roads are brutalized. Much of Europe doesn't experience these kinds of extremes.

[@charlescourtwright2229]

Imma guess you live in Minnesota, since you get a bit colder reliably than Illinois, and yes, the constant freeze and thaw cycle combined with the heavy hauling of grain does a huge number on the roads

[@Dqtube]

You probably don't only know the weather in Europe, for example the temperature records for some locations ( in degrees Celsius): Frankfurt Gemany : a minimum of -27 and a maximum of +40 Helsinki Finland : a minimum of -34 and a maximum of +33 Stockholm Sweden : a minimum of -28 and a maximum of +35 Vienna Austria : a minimum of -26 and a maximum of +38 Rome Italia : a minimum of -11 and a maximum of +43 As you can see, in many regions of Europe, the temperature can vary by up to 50 C throughout the year. In some locations the variance is even higher than 60 C and the infrastructure has to survive this.

[@Boulder734]

@@Dqtube Nope. The weather in western Europe is milder than America for sure. You can look at the statistics. I agree you guys can experience those temperatures listed above, but it is rare, whereas in America, It is normal in every winter.

[@Dqtube]

@@Boulder734 You missed the point, the original I was replying to and my post was not about normal/average temperatures, it was about extremes. Infrastructure is not designed to survive average temperatures, it is designed to survive once recorded peaks even with some tolerance for future extremes. It also depends on how you define Western Europe. I chose places with high differences between minimum and maximum, not the coldest. The winters in Norway, Sweden and Finland are colder than in other parts of the continent and the infrastucture still exists there.

[@commoncentstx]

The issue with switching to concrete entirely is concrete, and the materials used to make concrete, are very finite, and certain things like sand are scarce. Sand for concrete is currently in very short supply across the US, and we're using more and more of it every day. Meanwhile, asphalt can be milled up, and then laid back down on the same road, or elsewhere, repeatedly. That process very commonly done all over the US, People hate the potholes that come with asphalt roads, but (Americans at least) hate tax increases more. If all our roads were redone in concrete, costs would skyrocket. In addition, concrete doesn't last forever either, and when it's time to resurface a concrete road, it has to be demolished piece by piece, and an insane number of dump trucks are needed to haul it away. Old concrete is either thrown in a landfill, or crushed down to make crushed concrete and other materials used underneath roads. I believe the best solution lies somewhere in the middle. Providing better drainage infrastructure, combined with embedment for roads and highways, will allow asphalt roads to last much longer. New asphalt highways always have a thick layer of concrete under the asphalt, so the concrete provides support, while the asphalt can still be resurfaced as needed.

[@shenshen4460]

You are correct. Since I work in this field as well, this holds true.

[@tcsnowdream9975]

The best solution is more public transit. No, we won’t be able to replace the interstate. But most people on the interstate are going from suburbs to local city or towns. Or city to next city. Not cross country. A robust train networks connecting, say, austin, to San Antonio, to Dallas to Houston would do more because it would greatly reduce wear and tear. America is WAY to addicted to car travel.

[@soul-heart]

@@tcsnowdream9975 I don't think we are addicted, more like forced. The car and oil industry make way too much money to allow the reduction of traffic on highways. Sure when the car came along it was great, but what happened is that almost all transit rail that was built up over, at the least, a 100 year period was demolished and replaced with asphalt. Big oil and car have a stronghold over the US and any infrastructure bills, especially from the Federal Government, will only go towards new roads and highways. Let alone due to terrible zoning laws it's caused ridiculous urban sprawl, that really can't be solved by just adding more trains, has caused an even stronger dependency on cars. It's honestly surprising California is getting anywhere with their high speed rail project.

[@nuassul]

La mejor solución para todo el país es que retome los trenes de pasajeros y habilitar todas los miles de kilómetros de vías en mal estado. El tren es el sistema de transporte más eficiente que ha tenido la humanidad desde que se inventó.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Plus setting concrete emits a lot of CO2.

[@edwardmiessner6502]

We need more intercity railways, light rail and streetcars for smaller cities, light metro for midsized cities, and proper metrorail and regional rail for the big cities

[@nobodyspecial4702]

Why? I live in NY and I get the daily updates on how bad crime is in their subway system. That's the best incentive not to build one anywhere else if there ever was any.

[@fennecfoxfanatic]

@@nobodyspecial4702 the subway systems doesnt cause crime. the lack of affordable housing and social safety nets does

[@dbclass4075]

@@nobodyspecial4702 Remove that Subway, congestion will be way worse!

[@nobodyspecial4702]

@@dbclass4075 Have you seen NYC roads lately? It's always bumper to bumper. If you need an ambulance, you're pretty screwed because it can take them 20 minutes to move one block.

[@dbclass4075]

@@nobodyspecial4702 In which removal of Subway will stretch the 20-minute delay even further as the already gridlocked roads has to deal with even more cars.

[@nomaderic]

I'm a delivery driver and I travel city to city doing so. I come across construction and poor roads every single day. One of the number one problems I realize is alot of places have grown so much in a short amount of time but the roads are meant to handle half of that population. It shows alot in the suburbs, especially in texas and other southern cities. Traffic in the suburbs of cities I can predict every day. With the way subdivions and suburbs are made every single person that lives there is pretty much going to use the same route to go to and from work. As a delivery driver I've mastered which roads to avoid and at what times. It doesnt matter what city in America I go to, it's all the same. The main point I'm getting at is its much much more than just an infrastructure problem. We have to change the way our cities are built and laid out, Americans also have to come to terms that if they want to live in the city or close to it that they will need to give up land and space to do so.

[@rabbit251]

I worked at an airport for years as the ground crew and saw them replace a runway, 2-3 yards thick and took them only a few weeks to do. Priorities.

[@lostwizard]

Asphalt also holds up better when you have massive freeze/thaw cycles. But you still need a proper road bed under it, and you have to make the asphalt thick enough. Speaking from experiences, you *really* don't want to drive on a concrete road surface that's been beat to hell by heavy traffic combined with multiple freeze/thaw cycles *per year*.

[@iemjay]

The goal should be to reduce traffic and the need for people drive at all or less often, not adding room for more traffic and increasing the necessity leading people to need to drive.

[@jezzarisky]

When all you have is a hammer, everything becomes a nail. The idea that the only way to cure congestion is removing cars and not by adding more lanes, and that cars make anemic and empty cities because of their excessive size for these short trips just doesn’t make sense when all you know is using a car.

[@toomanymarys7355]

If you let people have enough housing, they might have kids and want MORE houses! If you let people travel freely, they might travel freely and want to travel MORE! If you let people own their own belongings, they might want to just own MORE!

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

THATS NOT THE AMERICAN WAY!!!!! More more more, bigger bigger bigger. And nobody wants to pay for it! THAT is the american dream.

[@grahvis]

@@toomanymarys7355 . You don't have to stop people doing anything, you design things so they don't have a need to drive everywhere. You make it better for people who would walk or cycle, you allow small shops in among the housing.

[@betula2137]

@@grahvis Yep, choice. Everyone benefits.

[@Conantas]

Its crazy how we let politics and old, outdated companies (ie. Oil companies) keep us from having actual useful infastructure.

[@gqh007]

If people are not spontaneously combusting and visibly turning into pile of charcoal, it's not on a politician's high priority list. And even then, maybe, just maybe, there will be some bandaid solution.

[@Racko.]

It's the exact reason why there's still no true high speed rail, those same oil companies and Auto Industries have too much power over congress and influencing them to avoid making those nicer transit projects, I wonder if they're a solution to all this, to bring back walkability, more transit, better passenger trains and more outside of just large cities, this is ridiculous

[@RealSergiob466]

@@Racko. Yes I agree and environmental solutions

[@christianmoore7109]

companies aren't stopping America from doing something, Americans are stopping America from doing something.

[@Racko.]

@@RealSergiob466 Yup!

[@Yin_Strider]

There has been a self repairing material for roads in existence for about a decade now. Also, the government LOVES repairing roads because the contracts for the work goes to their buddies and they get a cut. So they definitely want the roads to decay so they can repair to make $ out of those contracts.

[@chrisgeorge74]

Its also much cheaper to repair roads than to use other materials.

[@Conantas]

@@chrisgeorge74 Cheaper *initially, not in the long run

[@Thomas-pq4ys]

I grew up in East Stroudsburg. I'm 72 now. Rt 80 was built when I was a kid, intersecting Rt 33, as I was becoming an adult. As a young man, these roads were literal race tracks. Guys with fast cars would see how fast they could go on these concrete strips, devoid of traffic. These road have gotten paved over so many times, I cannot count. Traffic is insanely busy, even at night. As Bob Dylan wrote, "Time's, they are a-changing."

[@RYMAN1321]

I used to live around 10 minutes from Stroudsburg until 2009. But yeah Route 80, especially around that mountain in Columbia is treacherous. People fly on it, and 80 in general always seems to have accidents every week. But IMO, the tractor trailer business ruined roads and highways. All it did was add more traffic to the road, increased the possibility for accidents, and increased overall maintenance

[@KG_BM]

oh i thought it was because construction companies intentionally delay completion of the projects so they can keep getting paid by the city without finishing the work. good way to launder money legally

[@benkoskinen3871]

If you speak to any civil engineer they all usually admit and joke about how fun it is to launder money

[@KG_BM]

@@benkoskinen3871 makes sense since it can just be exacerbated by using permit filing and paperwork to slow it all down artificially.

[@MrCaseHarts]

I’m really sad that you guys didn’t bring up the idea of trains. Highways are unsustainable. I’m a houstonian who lived in Europe for years. Better roads is good but it’s a bandaid. Trains are the only way we get out of this alive.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

Exactly. The usa is doubling down on failing strategies all over the place. Digging one hole to fill another. The whole world sees it but the usa itself seems completely oblivious to it.

[@MrCaseHarts]

@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 I make videos about transit. I get Americans constantly saying "But I love this, we want this" so many people who have no idea how good trains make life. Even if you do love cars, public transit doesn't ban cars

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

@@MrCaseHarts i have noticed that a lot of people, but it seems much more widespread in the usa, tend to value or judge things based on single things or atributes. You hear it often in the defence of the car, it offers them freedom to go somewhere remote once a year. Or it enables them to move a big object once in a blue moon. And i get it, that is nice to have available when you need it. But that is not the entire reality of car ownership and a society based on the need to own a car. In order to have those bennefits you need to own a big car all the time, that is expensive and thus depreciates a lot all the time, and uses loads of gas all the time, and requires a lot of floorspace in your home all the time, and requires loads of roads all the time, that are congested by other unesesarilly big cars pumping unnesesarilly much toxins into the air all the time, making these people sick and deteriorating the environment they live in all the time. You catch the drift, i can go on for a while obviously. And that doesn't even account for the wasted time every year sitting behind the wheel being misserable. Which is why the amount of road rage per driven mile is the highest and most violent in the usa of all developed nations. The extreme dependence on often multiple depreciating assets that are a major source of debt is also a major driver of poverty. To a point that one person often pretty much works to pay to be able to afford the cars they need to get to work. With public transport one person in the family could basicly stop working completely or at least cut half their hours or more. Or spend an entire salary on anything else. Nobody can tell me that all that is worth it to be able to move a fridge once a year without renting a van. But nobody actually is aware of the true complete costs of car ownership. They only are aware of the percieved bennefits and over inflate them to a point that any compromise in their head is unacceptable. A situation carefully crafted and maintained by the industries that rely on this illusion for their profits.

[@baronvonlimbourgh1716]

@@Bobspineable i'd rather go for the porsche. Tesla really needs to step it up now that competition is entering the market in a big way. They no longer can rely on being the only game in town anymore.

[@DavidJohnson-dp4vv]

Pretty much imagine $9 billion spent on commuter rail in Houston. Or $9 billion on a driverless metro.

[@Londronable]

The Bulgarian and Polish roads you showed were most likely build with EU money. It's one of the big things the EU invests in. More transport means more business means more growth.

[@hackman669]

Environment?

[@larrybuchannan186]

Except US has higher economic growth than any european country.

[@mlc4495]

Gotta say transport is one thing the European Union does really well at. They just throw billions at countries with substandard roads to get them up to the level of France and Germany. It's actually quite impressive really. Say what you like about the EU but when it comes to roads they are world leaders.

[@BelaJuTe]

Just a little correction, from my experience most of the Autobahn uses asphalt as well

[@LadyAnuB]

You want the problem with freeways? Suburbs. By placing your home miles away from your place of work without good public transit, you've just invited a bill for road repair that is coming due now. Build in the city centers and you make public transit very viable and some commutes end up being walkable. To make public highways in the US even more viable, how about designing around transit before you deal with highways? When you're driving is for weekend leisure, do you need to make the mistakes we have in the US regarding highways? Designing for transit can be quite easy, take a look at San Carlos, CA. Since I moved from there it has put up a big apartment complex right next to the Caltrain tracks. Geez, a commuter train steps from my door? Absolutely spot on. For the opposite end of transit there's the SMART train in Sonoma and Marin counties. Only parking lots near most stations, no apartments next to the stations with only a few homes by some stations. And then businesses have not been near the stations since the very earliest days of the Northwestern Pacific. (The originator of the rail line.) Of course, this is a rail service that's only been in service since 2017 with the COVID interruption as well so it can do better but this does depend on each city and their plans for development. (Rohnert Park has a great development opportunity to support SMART if they zone out the old State Farm insurance site into a big apartment complex which makes the Rohnert Park SMART station only a few minutes walk from the farthest location.)

[@onetwothreeabc]

How do you plan to kick out homeless people begging on public transits?

[@LadyAnuB]

@@onetwothreeabc Your bias is quite visible here so I ask you the question of what is your solution to homeless people? I have ridden buses that were packed with riders which makes this issue somewhat moot.

[@onetwothreeabc]

@@LadyAnuB My solution to homeless people is to give them free homes. After all homeless people had their homes, and they are no longer, well, homeless, I will have no problem riding on transits anymore. But wait, I don't want to ride transits that are "packed". I'd prefer to have a seat and table on my train ride to work so that I can use my laptop. That's really the benefit of riding a train compared to driving myself.

[@i-Sparki]

One of the other unspoken reason roads need constant repair is weather. Roads in most European countries don't experience the extreme flux of temperatures US roads overall do. In the Northeast, winters can be cold and harsh with lots of snow (and salt that comes with it, which does not help the situation) then it transitions to hot, humid summers. This creates conditions that form large cracks and potholes you might see everywhere as water seeps in during the winter, expands as it freezes creating small cracks that during spring and summer, get worse as the road expands from sheer heat. Layers of concrete do help deal with this problem as bridges generally don't exhibit the same issue as asphalt roads over the same amount of time. That said, let's not pretend using concrete is a grand solution since it's absolutely brutal on the environment as it creates a lot of CO2 when first being manufactured. Ideally, we shouldn't be expanding new roads at all and instead investing in alternative methods to highway travel ala public transit and densifying cities. Sadly, this sort of thinking is relegated to a few regions and not overall.

[@DjangoBit]

My understanding was that vehicles cause the cracks and the freeze thaw/water intrusion makes it worse. That's why there are still potholes and terrible roads in places like Texas and Arizona.

[@annekekramer3835]

Ah, one of the bullshit reasons again. If you are right (but you aren't) then you must be able to find one state in the US where there are equal or less temperature differences than in Europe, right? And thus one state with better roads. Please name that state :-)

[@i-Sparki]

​@@annekekramer3835 Let's use two examples then- two large influential cities: New York City and Paris. Paris' average high in the summer is between 20 to 25 Centigrade and average low in the winter is between 4 to 9 Centigrade. Now what about NYC, what is the average high? 30 to 35 Centigrade. The average low? 2 to -2 Centigrade. Now why am I proving there are higher temperature ranges in northern US than in continental Europe? Because I'm not falling for the trap in proving a negative. You must prove your point, I have proven mine just now- and these numbers come from NOAA and Meteo France I did not just make them up. The onus of proof in an argument is to be raised by the one making the argument not by the other party.

[@annekekramer3835]

@@i-Sparki Strange, my website averages NY between 2 °C low and 25 °C high, so a difference of 23 degrees. Paris at 5 °C and 20 °C, so 15 difference. That's quite the difference indeed. However, Madrid is between 6 and 25, so that's getting closer already. Stockholm is at -3°C and 18 °C, so a difference of 21 degrees. Let's say NY and Stockholm have similar temperature differences, right? Thus the state of the roads should be similar, right? But somehow Stockholm has better roads... Okay, let's compare one more time: NY with Miami. Miami is between 20 °C and 28 °C, so with only 8 degrees difference, those roads must be near perfect, right? I think I'll let you be the judge of that... Source: www.holiday-weather.com/

[@i-Sparki]

@@annekekramer3835 Listen, it's strange you continue to ignore the point I've been making- that damage is accelerated due to temperature range and require more maintenance to make normal. I never said the roads are better or worse in maintenance, naturally Stockholm might have better roads than NYC- aside from a massive number of factors for the conditions of their roads such as daily use, local population density, and cargo traffic; yes weather plays a part too. Additionally, this is why I used Paris not Stockholm, because NYC and Paris share more similarities in statistics than NYC and other major urban centers in Europe aside London. That being said, as far as I know, Stockholm is constantly repairing their roads too because of the exact same problem. Additionally, I would like to point out I said "most" when speaking of European countries in my original statement. Maybe I should have clarified that Scandinavia and Russia are are not part of the "most" because they absolutely fall into the same problem as Northern US (and Canada). Also, Florida roads (as much as I dislike Florida) are generally much better than roads in the NYC metro and NY as a whole. I live in the region, I know our roads are abysmal and I've been to FL. Hell, I've been throughout a lot of the South. The only state's I can complain about are Alabama and Mississippi but they're both quite poor states in general. The state of their roads more stems from monetary reasons than anything else.

[@murdelabop]

"Fast and cheap" is kind of the definition of the American way.

[@philsmith2444]

Except it’s not fast or cheap.

[@murdelabop]

@@philsmith2444 Yup. There's an old joke about such things: "Fast, cheap, good. Pick any two."

[@philsmith2444]

@@murdelabop In backpacking we say you can get a sleeping bag that’s 2 of these 3 - inexpensive, light, warm.

[@RYMAN1321]

It’s what led our corporations to shift jobs overseas in the 70’s and 80’s, for cheap labor

[@TheRagingPlatypus]

Have you been to Germany? I live here. The roads are terrible and under constant construction. Not only that, but when they do construction, they'll just shut down a road indefinitely and you just have to figure it out. One highway near me is closed for two years, turning a half hour drive into an hour drive if you're lucky. Another road is also closed. This one bisected the town and is the main artery. It is also closed for two years. It's great for us because now, there's no traffic but sucks for the thousands of cars and trucks that used to use it and now have a huge detour for the next two years.

[@discman15]

Come to New Mexico, they don't even need to do construction, they just block off 90% of the road with cones, go home and unblock it a year later after not having done any work

[@jarynn8156]

I've only ever traveled down I-25, but New Mexico has been doing some utterly massive construction projects around the Raton area. The rest of I-25 from Las Vegas to Las Cruces... Didn't really need any attention. It was fine.

[@MountainFisher]

@@jarynn8156 80,000 pound trucks will fix that soon enough.

[@janjochem20]

@@MountainFisher dutch trucks are 110231 pounds and are roads are very good roads

[@MountainFisher]

@@janjochem20 That's the issue, most Interstates ARE NOT built to take 130 kph with 40 tons on 5 axles too closely spaced. Base is 12 inches or 1/3rd meter instead of half a meter thick. They just closed a bridge across the Mississippi River because of a design flaw on a major highway. I'm an engineer, but in aerospace, but I could build better roads although I'm not a civil engineer. Problem is politics goes into road building and gas taxes for highways are stolen for other BS.

[@bjarkih1977]

You should check out the videos on 'Not just bikes' and 'City beautiful' on the issue of expansion.

[@mrhmm3198]

🥱🥱

[@__jonbud______________________]

... Let me guess, based on the design of the casing in your profile picture your idea of a more effective and beautiful city involves gentler/no slopes, static-conducting metal flooring, less stairs, and more elevator shafts

[@bjarkih1977]

@@__jonbud______________________ Don't forget exterminate!

[@LeeeroyJenkins]

So instead of highways running through low income neighborhoods, you run interstate train tracks. Every method of transit that involves infrastructure always goes through the cheapest land. Airports? Cheap land. Roads? Cheap land. Train tracks? Cheap land. Look at where all the current train tracks run through and you’ll already see it.

[@bjarkih1977]

@@LeeeroyJenkins Have you actually watched the channels I recomended?

[@killernat1234]

In the UK we don’t concrete for roads at all, we compact the ground then add ballast then add a base level of asphalt then a final layer of asphalt, it’s not perfect but asphalt can be recycled into new asphalt

[@larrybuchannan186]

UK roads are relatively wose than us roads, some far wose

[@daveotuwa5596]

These could be grounds why toll booths are existent in the United States. In Europe, a few of those.

[@jhmcd2]

First, some states do use concrete versus asphalt in some areas, but there is a reason why asphalt is used over concrete and its not a simple cost thing. Its more flexible. In more places in the US, the temperatures swings are vary greater than in Europe. In DC for instance, you can have winters as cold as ten degrees Fahrenheit and in the summer 100 degrees. In some days, you can see a change in temps of over 70 degrees alone. That would cause concrete to warp and crack, even fail. This is often the case in places like Southern CA, where they do use concrete, and the roads are pitiful. Sure, you can make it thicker, like airport runways which are typically concrete, but it can take over 48 hours to fix about a hundred feet of runway. So before jumping to a conclusion, see if there is a reason behind it. This is a major problem Cheddar.

[@mae2759]

God forbid Cheddar does more in depth research past "Europe does it, so it must be better than what the US does."

[@petermages9482]

No. Europe uses the same amount of Asphalt on roads. The temperature changes are the same in Europe. What he meant is the underlay. The underlay and also the Quality of Concrete/Stone Gravel/ Asphalt is in Europe double/triple. This saves a ton long term

[@jhmcd2]

@@petermages9482 While that may make since, that isn't what he's saying in the least bit. And even if that is what he means, then he isn't presenting it that way which is also a failure. Also, the temperature changes have only gotten as wild as the US has recently, and even then not over the course of a day like in the North East USA. There are very few places in Europe where the temperatures are near ninety in the morning, but its snowing the 3PM.

[@samd3497]

The main problem is just the fact that we've overbuilt the highway system. And then all the land taken up by underused highways is no longer paying any taxes, so local and state governments don't have as much money for other priorities either.

[@stevenvallarsa1765]

I live in Michigan but am from neighbouring Ontario, and the highways between the state and the province are night and day. Ontario puts a lot of effort (and presumably money) into its 400-series highways, and it shows! Michigan Interstates and US Highways are in incredible disrepair in comparison. One big difference is Ontario highways being entirely asphalt instead of concrete, which is what most Michigan highways are built out of. While concrete doesn't need to be entirely replaced as often as pavement, the edges between slabs get destroyed in the freeze/thaw cycles of living in the north, and need constant filling and repair, making it incredibly hard on vehicles to drive over. To be fair, local Michigan roads are in much better shape than their Ontario counterparts, so it may be how roads and road repair are funded.

[@JeffDeWitt]

I seem to recall Michigan has county road departments, I wonder of Ontario has the equivalent. Here in North Carolina pretty much all the roads are state maintained, and by and large are well maintained.

[@franzzrilich9041]

I was a technical writer for three decades, and an amateur historian of transportation economics. There are serious problems with soil conditions in the northern United States, due to twenty-plus glaciations in the past 2.6 million years since the start of the Ice Age. These conditions demand frightfully high investments in soil engineering studies for all roads. Failure to carry out these costly studies is a big reason for short road life. The soils shifting and wreck the pavement. Yet, more, the size of the United States is so great that it is not economically possible to build the highways to some of the better European standards. So, states keep scrapping top pavement, recycle it, and add to the old stuff fresh asphalt binder. Repaving with recycled old asphalt is very cheap and fast. The current Interstate system was designed when the population was half its current size, so obviously more Interstates are needed. Also, when the Interstates were first created, the railroads were requied by the federal government--through the old Interstate Comerce Commission--to carry uneconomical short-range and poorly-paying freight and passengers. After the collapse of Penn Central, it became obvious that the old ICC had to be gotten rid of, and then the railroads stopped most passenger trains and short runs of single boxcar deliveries. These loads were picked up by larger trucks. I should point out the Federal Government briefly nationalized the railroads in WWI, sunk vast sums of money into them, quickly returned the wornout railroads at the end of the War, and in many well-documented post-WWI reports concluded that it should never, ever nationalize te roads, again. After Penn Central collapsed, the Congress then nationalized the remains of Penn Central and other railroads, creating Conrail, since largely privatized, and Amtrak, which spends insane amounts on passenger service. Wendover Channel has a KZbin video that explains why Amtrak and all US passenger rail systems inherently tend to cost more than do luxury airliner trips. There were serious and detailed proposals from the railroad and shipping industries(1963-1967) to build an Interstate-type super-train system with very wide tracks, no highway crossings, and two story-tall boxcars. Speed was to be 120mph, propulsion electric. It was to be called GATX Rrollway. Note the two "Rs." The system would still require lots of heavy trucks to be used on highways. As regards the use of cars, employment practices are rapidly removing the types of nine to five jobs that last thirty years. Commuter bus systems, trolleys, and other fixed location systems don't make sense. By the time the planning and construction is done, the original driving forces behind the construction of the system are gone. Then, you are stuck with an albino elephant. The emerging pattern is to locate ones self in a small town near the middle of high tech industries scattered over several counties, and to drive a car to one job in the morning, then go off to a second job three miles away, and to constantly search for remunerative work. One could grab a huge hunk of currently unused land, such as the interior of Maine, build an international airport there, run an Interstate and freight highway to a new seaport, then cross-conect seven to elen counties with Interstates around the airport. Places, where such unintended layouts have been executed, experience rapid economic growth. The key seems to be to ban congestion, by requiring low-rise buildings, lots of setbacks for land use, and lots of traffic lanes.

[@dhawthorne1634]

Asphult is a type of concrete. It is also 100% recyclable. While it can't handle the abuse our interstate and US systems get, for all other roads it is still the superior option since it can be pulled up, remelted and laid back down. With the right equipment, you can completely resurface a road with minimal new materials at the same pace as laying a new road on dirt.

[@kjorlaug1]

You left out three major issues in US infrastructure planning: 1. Local govt's have much more ability to push back in US than in most other countries. 2. NIMBY blocks many projects, so they just redo existing ones 3. Most govt contracts are required to go to the lowest bidder

[@hjalmar4565]

4. Heavier cars than European ones, which causes more damage to roads. 5. Low density, car centric suburbs, which forces people to use cars for everything.

[@lancer1993]

Its not just a US problem here in Australia we have long distances and lower population which means less taxes to keep the roads going. A few months ago I took an interstate trip some 9000km round trip and I can tell you a lot of roads were bad and the number of road works we passed became a daily joke.

[@iRogerRomero]

This country needs high-speed trains. We’ve been wasting so much money and time on hyper loops instead of just high speed trains

[@chengliu872]

Funding itself isn't necessarily the issue, a lot of it is how the funds are used. The SF Bay area has some of the highest taxes in America, yet a lot of the roads are in awful condition.

[@proZach380]

the REAL reason is that back when the interstate system was first built, they expected we would all have flying cars by now

[@RYMAN1321]

Not only that, but they didn’t factor in having those heavy tractor trailers 20-30 years from then. But all those did was add more traffic and congestion. Should’ve just kept the trains but the corporations cheaped out (not to mention shipped everything overseas).

[@ACasualCustomer]

The US is doomed. Reversing the effect of building car-centric cities is going to be a nightmare. Car dependence just might be the US's eventual downfall and collapse.

[@damnation358]

It really might. Especially with climate change making repairs harder to complete and more necessary more often. It’s gonna take more money for less quality repair.

[@wildbill7267]

Need the political will to invest in passenger rail. Amtrak sucks as it is when compared to Europe and Asia passenger rail. If I would gladly get rid of my car and just rent one on an as-needed basis and take trains for the most part.

[@Racko.]

Most states and taking down their highway and road and replacing it with places to actually walk and bike paths, so no I'd disagree with you

[@Racko.]

@@wildbill7267 Amtrak sucks because of Congress, I hope they invest heavily into passenger rail and actual high speed tracks for improvement, freight companies that own the lines also give more priority to their trains leading to massive delays for Amtrak, high speed rail way should happen in cities no more than 600 miles apart, West and East Coast are a great start, ik CA is investing in HSR but the progress is moving at a pace of a snail

[@highway2heaven91]

@@wildbill7267 Also need the general desire of the public, which isn’t high enough.

[@floridajake58]

This entire channel is perfect for people who want to watch videos made by folks who don't know what the hell they're talking about. Cheddar is a classic example of the Dunning-Kruger effect in play.

[@semipenguin]

I love how people, who have greater access to public transportation, say that highway expansion is bad. Try being a truck driver and driving from Chicago to Indianapolis on Interstate 65. Most of it is just two lands in each direction, with people going anywhere between 55 and 85 miles an hour. Yes. People go that fast on a 70mph speed limit highway. Adding a lane would bring it up to the level as Germany’s Autobahn. Fastest vehicles in the far left. Slowest in the far right. The middle for passing and moving over to let traffic on. States like Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Ohio, have added lanes make most of Interstate 75 a six lane highway. Where as states like Tennessee only expanded highways in urban areas, leaving most interstate highways four lane. I used to live right off if I-75 in Tennessee, equidistant from Knoxville and Chattanooga. You take your life in your hands just trying to get on the highway.

[@Coolman573]

Highway expansion within an urban area generally is bad. Rural highway expansion generally isn’t necessary and two lanes is usually enough to support the traffic. What we really need is tighter licensing requirements for the problem of spreading people betweeen lanes. Even with three lanes, with the current competence of the average driver, highways will always be a mashup of different speeds in different lanes. Many stretches of autobahns are two lanes in each direction, and yet still flow better than us interstates with much more speed variation

[@WillmobilePlus]

"You can just deliver the stuff on a bike, bro!"

[@semipenguin]

@@Coolman573 Good idea, but … The whole automotive industry keeps the economy moving. Tighter licensing requirements would mean less cars on the highway, eliminating jobs that support the industry.

[@semipenguin]

@@WillmobilePlus 😂

[@yahoolix]

Instead of widening the road, the real solution is to build a good train. Induced demand works the other way around as well. Check videos from, for example, “not just bikes” for more information :)

[@billcame6991]

I remember reading in the Boston Globe in 1978 (I was 12) that Massachusetts was looking into building European style roads. It was killed by pressure from the folks who represented the contractors who repave every summer.

[@philsmith2444]

It took about 4 years to rebuild a few miles of Route 3 in the Nashua NH/Tyngsboro MA area back in the late 90s/early 2000s.

[@LarryDickman1]

@@philsmith2444 I worked in Billerica then. What a nightmare.

[@Bendigo1]

I really do not understand how people can try to compare the United States to other countries. The size difference alone shatters any comparison that is made.

[@phox1515]

Ugh I can't say anything about residential roads, but the United States Interstate system was actually purpose built for military and freight transportation. Because as many of us truckers have explained over and over no matter how good your rail system is, you can't put tracks everywhere and will always need trucks. Trucks cannot carry as much as trains but we can take it more places and faster. The same principle applies to military (before flying became a big thing)... You could transport military much faster via roadway than train. So the Interstate system was built. So while modern and residential roads may not be designed for semi trucks.... It was the original purpose of the Interstate system.

[@Fabdanc]

If I recall correctly, there are a few engineering channels that explain why concrete is not always a viable solution here in the US. Something to do with rapid freeze thaw cycles, being more geologically active, and repairs can be done on a much smaller area if need be. There were other reasons, so search those out before lambasting me for not remembering them all! Thanks!

[@z609gaming]

US-1 through Morrisville PA and Fairless Hills is concrete. It hasn’t been maintained at all and the striping is faded, no reflectors and no street lights. At night it is like driving blind if you aren’t careful. Get over the bridge into Trenton NJ and while certainly the road quality isn’t much better it becomes much easier to see the striping on the asphalt. Why is it that road quality changes between states? I know it’s gotta do with taxes but can’t we make and enforce federal standards, especially on our US routes and interstates ?

[@Fabdanc]

@@z609gaming the quality of route 202 between Delaware and PA! The Delaware side was nearly pristine while the PA side was like driving in Mario Kart.

[@philsmith2444]

@@z609gaming Because the Constitution doesn’t allow for unfunded federal mandates. If the feds mandate the states do something, federal funding has to be provided for it. So now you have a federal and a state bureaucracy involved, so even less of the money actually makes it to the job. Something to remember if you vote “no” on those bond issues at election time.

[@sgrant9814]

The usa spends too much on the military and so, unlike other nations, hasn't sufficient funds to maintain domestic issues like this one

[@nobodyspecial4702]

You could pay more in taxes and solve that problem. You know, like Europeans pay anywhere from 50 to 70% of their income in taxes. Then you get well maintained roads and a military that suddenly they realized are woefully unprepared for modern Europe and now they're all scrambling to correct with massive increases in spending that make the US military budget look trivial.

[@sgrant9814]

@@nobodyspecial4702 yes we could. However, we can also cut the dod budget by a third and still out spend any other nation by multiple times over. Then we would not need to raise taxes. Our govt prioritizes bombing other folks over providing for its own citizens

[@nobodyspecial4702]

@@sgrant9814 What other country has to project over two oceans? You don't think that might have something to do with how much the DoD gets? Besides, bombing other people is good for the economy.

[@ehtuanK]

Remember: One fully loaded semi truck damages the road as much as 160000 cars would.

[@brianbassett4379]

Trying to go cheap and rising temperatures is why American highway infrastructure is often similar to 3rd world countries.

[@MrBibi86]

*Concrete is the only way. here in Australia, our roads are so bad with potholes. it makes it so dangerous and can damage your car. some of the highways have been redone with concrete and are excellent and smooth*

[@ericfranco5336]

Concrete in cold winter environments does not work at all.

[@MrBibi86]

@@ericfranco5336 her in Australia it does get cold but not very very cold

[@MrBibi86]

@@ericfranco5336 her in Australia it does get cold but not very very cold

[@ericfranco5336]

@@MrBibi86 I'm talking about cold cold. Where you need to salt the roads heavily every winter. That is the norm for much of the northern United States.

[@AdamSmith-gs2dv]

@@MrBibi86 It doesn't get cold in Australia by NY standards. Concrete in NY just gets completely and utterly destroyed by the end of the winter due to ground shift and road salt. That's why they don't use it there

[@amanor409]

I was in Canada over Labor Day weekend. On the 401 from Windsor to Toronto I didn’t hit a rough patch. The drive was almost 370 kilometers, and the road was smooth the entire way. I heard an excuse that the reason why the roads in Michigan were so bad was all the snow and freeze/thaw cycles. Canada gets just as much, or more snow as the stretch from London to Toronto has heavy squalls in the winter.

[@chrisgraham2904]

The majority of roads in Canada are asphalt and the quality of the road depends mainly on two factors. The first is the base below the asphalt that the asphalt is laid upon. A 16 inch thick base of reinforced concrete will stabilize the asphalt layer and greatly prolong it's longevity. Second is the quality/grade of the asphalt. There are numerous grades, identified by ASTM specification standards and various codes. Each has it's own quality standards and application use. Different grades for weather conditions during application, grades for hills and inclines, grades for residential driveways, highways, on/off ramps, raised roadways...etc. and the list goes on and on. Issues arise when the improper grade is used for the application. Issues arise when cities and counties are forced by their policies to select the lowest bid contractor, resulting in lower grade materials. Issues arise when contractors criminally substitute lower grade materials than the specifications called for. Two engineering professors from McGill University (Montreal) and the University of Calgary developed a superior asphalt surface material for roads about 40 years ago. The cost of material and installation per kilometer/mile of road was about 20 percent higher, but they guaranteed no maintenance requirement for at least 30 years and an expected surface life of 5 times longer than traditional asphalt being used for highways. They expected to become multi-millionaires very quickly from their revolutionary formulation , but found it impossible to sell the product to cities and provinces at the 20 percent premium. The City of Toronto did accept their proposal for a test installation. Two ramps (one on ramp and one off ramp) plus one kilometer of collector lanes, to and from each of those ramps, was installed, free of charge to the City, on one of the major 400 Series highways to prove the product. It is now 35 years later and the sample road installation has never developed a crack or pothole and never been serviced or repaired. Driving or inspecting those road sections would lead you to believe that they no more than a year old. Better road technologies do exist, but you have to be smart enough to choose them.

[@dw-bn5ex]

@@chrisgraham2904 Crapola

[@MooCow2X2]

@M P Vermont roads? Better? Maybe better than a pig trail. But they still suck. It’s a slalom course to avoid the bloody potholes on anything lower than an interstate. And the I is full of ruts.

[@linuxman7777]

The interstate highway system was made for the military, civilian uses weren't really considered at the time of its construction. I am thankful everyday for the interstate system, because the state routes in my state are so much more dangerous and poor than elsewhere. There are many good solutions to improve the interstates, but they are still the best roads America has.

[@WillmobilePlus]

>The interstate highway system was made for the military, civilian uses weren't really considered at the time of its construction The stupid in this comment burns.

[@travcollier]

Civilian uses were very much considered. The military use for the highway system was always more of an excuse than a reason... Not that it isn't also important, but it never really was the main reason.

[@nuke___8876]

@@travcollier

[@dbclass4075]

@@nuke___8876 Railways to move troops domestically and cheaply. Save the trucks and planes for more urgent redeployments.

[@Mgameing123]

One good solution is to just bulldoze them all & replace them with high speed rail!

[@the_garniiics]

Too many cars. That's why we need multimodal infrastructure

[@FinancialShinanigan]

Build more lanes, more people will drive and traffic will get worse. Plus more electric vehicles means heavier cars and will lead to more cracks and pot holes.

[@Lando-kx6so]

People should stop buying these unnecessaryily large trucks & suvs

[@Racko.]

Get rid of large roads, replace it with trains, metros, trams, bike paths and walking paths, they're severely cheaper and better

[@seandepagnier]

@@Racko. stop maintaining all roads. Do not allow motor vehicles on the roads. bikes can use existing decaying roads for decades without repair.

[@Racko.]

@@seandepagnier That's also a good idea, less ppl will be desired to use automobiles but will take transit instead, im all for that idea

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

In the North, most of our highways have concrete beds with asphalt surfaces. Asphalt can't hold up to freight trucks, but nothing can hold up to what winter and snow removal does to our roads. It is simply cheaper to resurface Asphalt every 3-5 years than it is to repave concrete every 10.

[@Seattlesilver]

It’s interesting that both the federal gas tax and minimum wage have both remained stagnant while inflation continues to rise

[@Ronprower]

Sadly it would be the end of any politician's career to say they are going to raise the gas tax. Everyone wants to have good roads, but they are not willing to pay. Additionally with more electric vehicles there's less gas tax coming in. Some have brought up possible use taxes, but you come back to the same problem of no one wants to pay for upkeep themselves.

[@Seattlesilver]

@@Ronprower I totally understand that no one wants to pay extra taxes but at some point we have to do things we don’t want to for the better of everyone

[@UltimaOmega]

So, road repair is funded by fuel taxes, but now we're trying to push EVs. I sense a problem.

[@joebloggs2473]

In traffic engineering there is a simple rule of thumb; every added lane adds 1,5 lanes of traffic.

[@christianp5486]

It's true. With no roads we would have no traffic. We should tear down all the roads.

[@MagicToenail]

@@christianp5486Your logic also destroys like 90% of public transport leaving only stuff like trains and metros left.

[@ursulasmith6402]

The only problem with European roads is, they're too small and narrow.

[@mattbosley3531]

Everything needs repair over time. As for adding lanes to relieve congestion, it's been proven that that doework yet cities and states don't seem to have gotten the message. Plus, EVs are eating into the gasoline tax and now California is no longer going to be selling any gasoline powered anything in a little over ten years. And some other states will follow suit. So has the government mad any plans to fund the highways using another method?

[@Epic_C]

Nope. They don’t think that far ahead.

[@magnemoe1]

Well that is an bumper EV and probably more plug in hybrids with large batteries will ruin it ,neighbor of my boss had an hybrid, older guy mostly driving in the city, he went on an road trip for a vacation and the car stopped because the gasoline was too old.

[@soul-heart]

Yes, but California has a massive problem, and that is their power grid. They just passed that bill and then they told people to not plug in EV's as they will put too much strain on their power grid over labor day weekend.

[@mattbosley3531]

@@soul-heart This is true. They need to increase public transportation, build up the power grid, increase the amount of power available on the grid, and repair or rebuild the roads. All of these require money and the will to get it done. They're working on high-speed rail but they don't have the money to get it done. And that's another drain on the power grid.

[@dbclass4075]

Not to mention EVs themselves are heavier. Might accelerate road wear and tear.

[@nerfherder4284]

In Washington state, many roads are made by spraying the tar part of asphalt over gravel repeatedly They are cheap and effective in the rain. If you've ever driven through the Midwest it is full of concrete highways and they are the worst. Driving for hours hitting an expansion crack every 50 feet will drive you insane!

[@GuitarSamurai17]

Technically it's the weather and sun that breaks down the roads, at least that's what I thought, rain and soil erosion

[@RYMAN1321]

You’re right, but also the rock salt poured on the roads during the winter takes a toll on them too

[@IamSpiders]

It's pretty simple. USA has more roads per person than any other country yet the GDP/person and definitely the Tax revenue/person does not match. We overbuilt to support suburban sprawl and now have an ever increasing backlog of maintenance. Our response? Pass infrastructure bills that encourage building MORE roads (and therefore more maintenance obligations). We will never get out of this hole.

[@imagine7408]

Going from a 2 lane highway to a 3 lane highway even in a “declining population of a city” is huge quality of life and congestion relief for interstate travel. The particular population of a city doesn’t matter as much as the amount of vehicles on the road each week.

[@seandepagnier]

It is for sure that adding lanes increases the amount of cars. Removing the roads completely would remove vehicle congestion and is the obvious solution.

[@anneonymous4884]

1. Raise the gasoline tax to both compensate for inflation and reduce road over-use. 2. Rebuild the old railroads and if necessary build new ones. 3. Legalize buildings and layouts that don't waste so much space, such ADUs, multiplexes, townhouses, apartments, etc. Legalize smaller lots, lawns, etc. 4. Enable alternatives to driving with sidewalks, bikes, and transit. 5. Legalize smaller vehicles, particularly pickups. Compare pickups from a few decades to modern ones. They have bloated up nearly as much as the country's waistlines, and that's not a coincidence.

[@rogeriods1]

I'd would take Brazil out of being fabulous compared to the US, primarily because we are still decades behind in terms of infrestructure and only recently (3 years) privatized through concessions of our roads and rails, in other words we are not there yet.

[@joachimsmith]

Also almost all freight in Brazil goes by truck and there is no intercity passenger rail.

[@Xtopher822]

The reason we make crappy roads is because maintaining them is a big business and a LOT of money gets funneled to powerful people and organizations.

[@Wqghfxz]

I have been a truck driver since 2014. I have always complained about the roads here. The only okay roads in America are in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and maybe few other states. I hate those sticks on bridges that are always crooked or broken. Besides bad roads, there are also bad road work signs that result in unnecessary accidents and traffics. I think those contractors either don't know how to build roads or they intentionally build poor quality roads so that they won't run out of business next year from doing no work. If you look at western and Central Europe, they have trucks that are heavier than trucks in the United States but still have best roads in the world for some reason.

[@MrMatteNWk]

Of course you'd think the roads in the U.S. are always under construction if you went to Pennsylvania....

[@hackman669]

California too.

[@briangasser973]

You didn't mention the ice/freezing condtions on North American roadways compared to most of Europe. The pot holes don't just come from asphalt vs concrete.

[@maythesciencebewithyou]

Most of Europe has freezing winters. European roads are full of potholes. What she showed of Europe are new roads.

[@fredhelmuth4399]

I'm all for a better base. The negatives for concrete: 1) Tires are much louder on concrete. 2) stopping distance in the rain is 2X further on concrete than asphalt.

[@DCMarvelMultiverse]

The interstate system was designed to get military vehicles from A to B at 100mph. They were not built thick.

[@WillmobilePlus]

Yeah....that isnt it. Why some of you keep repeating that is beyond me.

[@williammcfarlane6153]

Most of the reports that I've read have called for at least 5 trillion dollars in investment to truly get our roads backup to standard. A 1/2 a billion is like throwing a glass of water on a bonfire... what makes it even worse is that this is a 10 year plan and will be handled by 4 profit corporations which will probably absorb at least a 1/3 of that money to their bottom...so, we're screwed

[@justinfowler2857]

If Indiana is any indication it's shoddy work.

[@gnnascarfan2410]

Because the U.S. has doubled and tripled down on "adding lanes to fix traffic" instead of building mixed use developments and good public transportation.

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

And all that money that has to keep going into repairing and expanding highways could have instead been going into getting us an interstate rail system like Western European countries have and an interurban rail system like we used to have in the Northeast and parts of the Midwest.

[@yia01]

why are people still butt hurt about US not having train. at thsi point it will cost to much to convert to a public transportation nation after being a car nation for 100 years. keep in mine that western europe, japan, korea china, all those nation was ruin by airial carpet bombardment during the last great war. after teh war, when they rebuild their nation again, they get to start over, they choose public transportation base society which is best for them at that time and cheaper and then plan their cities around it. after the last great war, here in america, we choose the private car and build our nation around it. after 100 years, switch over is too late adn will cost too much. a simple switch over to metric with all out sign will bankrupt our nation and u want to replan all out cities and road and switch over public, ding so also might as well redo all our road sign as well, lol.

[@Lucius_Chiaraviglio]

@@yia01 It was an extremely bad choice, and we need to reverse it, for the environment and for our national security. Make those who profited from that bad choice pay for it.

[@r.a.6459]

Here's the paradox: widening roads and freeways by adding more lanes, will create more traffic jams and made existing traffic jams worse, not better. It's a paradox. Some countries, particularly in Europe, removed certain highways and replaced with parks and bike/running lanes, and reported less worse traffic jams.

[@austinhernandez2716]

Having less peoole drive would help... There would be less traffic and less maintenance needed. But trains, or public transportation in general in the US is almost nonexistent. Only metro areas have them and they usually don't cover much space and are slow so they're not practical. We need it to cover the entire country, not just connecting suburbs to urban, connect all of the suburbs, go up and down all of the main highways, etc. A train can carry hundreds of people at once. This can't be done by itself though. Cities would also have to change. They would have to become more walkable. This is the problem. There's no one solution. There are many things that need to be done together. But people get offended and jump to conclusion saying that it doesn't work when just one thing is tried. It's like someone saying that exercise doesn't work for weight loss while they continue an unhealthy diet.

[@ACasualCustomer]

The US is doomed in terms of sustainable cities. Reversing the effect of building car centric cities is going to be a massive problem. We would need to remove roads, add bus/train stops, remove huge swaths of parking and repurpose them, etc. Good luck convincing the general public of this

[@shinnam]

Exactly. Hate going to the US because of no public transportation and not walkable. But it can change, I am hopeful it will. . My sister lives in a Cincinnati suburb, there are are a total of four buses a day that are 2 km from her house. No transport to get to the airport. I live in a Stockholm suburb, STO is about the same population as CVG, with in 500 meters of my apartment is some from of public transportation every 8 minutes. I can take the subway, bus ,commuter train or bike downtown. I don't have a car, it would more trouble than it is worth.

[@betula2137]

"Solving obesity by loosening your belt"

[@jimtrikakis9985]

It's about political job creation. Some areas of the US local authorities demand special payments before they accept federal funds. American roads will always be under construction

[@RealTylerBell]

that bill didnt do anything to help the roads, just put more money in rich people pockets

[@Limewire1984]

I'm a NYSDOT road engineer, and for me it comes down to job security. Between a new road that might last 50 years, or an overlay one can repair again in two, to stay busy. Tough choice! Also, most politicians have two to four years election cycles to contend with, and they create their budgets accordingly.

[@thesilentone4024]

Why cant citys use thirsty cement to reduce flooding and increase groundwater aquifer levels. Or take all those big and massive parking lots and reduce the land use by 80% how go up and start planting trees and add solar to the new land being freed up.

[@Conantas]

Because uhm... uhh... because uh... well you see... "it costs too much"

[@massimookissed1023]

Thirsty concrete doesn't do well in places where water can freeze.

[@daveintheblackhills282]

You missed a large part of it. Our interstate highways were built with a design for 80,000 pounds. However they put a weight limit on it of 72,000 pounds giving them a large buffer. Even if a trucker cheated and ran 10% over the legal limit it was still under the limit of design of the road. With 72,000 pounds spread over five axles, each axle would under its 5 ton, 20,000 pound limit. But then we had the gas shortage in 1973 and they lowered the speed limit to 55 mph. To compensate they allowed the trucks to carry 80,000. So each truck was right at the max that the road could handle. It also meant the front two wheel axle had to take more of the load to ensure the back four wheel axles were not over loaded, at least complying with the axle limit 5 tons. (Note that trucks licensed in Canada and a fifth four wheel axle so they did not have to shift weight to the front double wheel axle.) Anyway, it put the load right at the limit of the road design. If the truck cheated and carry anything over 80,000 pounds it was over the design limit of the road. And that is a big reason the interstates started falling apart. Some states did not raise the limit and they did not have near the amount of road damage as the states that raised the weight limit. Want our roads to last longer? Drop the weight back down to 72,000 pounds AND require the fifth four wheel axle like Canada.

[@dbclass4075]

And maybe improve railway network to reduce the need of trucks.

[@WalterBurton]

People dragging the US about its lack of public transport should ask themselves what comprises the backbone of the US economy, because the answer they would land on is personal automobiles, and it would then (hopefully) become obvious to them why public transport consistently gets short-shrift.

[@NewKingBrandon]

NotJustBikes

[@highway2heaven91]

It only does because people in the US want it to be that way, if they wanted to the economy could be based on the movement of people and not cars.

[@Sparticulous]

Listen to not just bikes and strong towns. Car centric design bankrupts cities. It is financially unsustainable

[@WalterBurton]

I'm not saying it SHOULD be this way, just pointing out that it IS this way. As to the comment that it's "financially unsustainable," that's nonsense. It's been sustained just fine for well over half a century.

[@WillmobilePlus]

They think the U.S. is the size of Belgium, with the population of Denmark, with a population distribution of a Norway.

[@blahsomethingclever]

Rome's roads lasted 2000 years. Somehow that still impresses me deeply. The US roads and country are flashy and fast to build. Maybe it's time to think like a farmer and invest for the future with solid construction. In twenty years of we don't like it we can always use AI controlled bots to remove the deep foundations, or we'll have new material science etc. But the backbone of the roads should be quality. In a way fun time is over, America. Show me what you've got

[@denisruskin348]

Imagine the roads you guys would have if the state spent 20% less on the army. The Germans would envy you.

[@__jonbud______________________]

Imagine the roads China (and soon Russia) will increase construction of in other countries if we spend 20% less on the army... Just basing this off of historical trends and the rise and fall of empires and roads throughout history.

[@Schlabbeflicker]

Imagine the security you would feel after you neglected your military spending and NATO obligations for decades, only to realize you're hilariously vulnerable to foreign invasion, while also being right next door to an aggressive neighbor; like Germany.

[@cesarealkemist5055]

I'm a truck driver and I was just today wondering about why the hell is there so much road construction..lol. thanks for the video.. makes sense..

[@Ex_christian]

Well, here in Utah, our roads need to be redone constantly because the roads are done crappy to begin with. It takes way longer than it should and the quality is terrible which is why the roads won’t last. But also, Utah wastes billions where mass transit should be the focus and ignore the rest of the state. But, that’s a Republican state for you where they only support the construction companies are family friends, etc….

[@MagdaleneDivine]

Anyone with half a brain avoids Houston and Dallas areas like the plague. Their highways are a nightmare

[@Ice_Karma]

6:22 "I'm excited about the fact that I think, in the next five years, if we're successful in doing things differently" -- Imma stop you there and laugh uproariously for the next several minutes.

[@mathisnotforthefaintofheart]

Not only US roads. In Germany you also find a baustelle every on and off...Well you want a smooth highway? It needs maintenance...

[@Sparticulous]

We need more transit oriented design as car centric design bankrupts cities. Strong towns and not just bike tells it well

[@WillmobilePlus]

Not just bikes is a myopic dope that thinks the U.S. is just a larger version of Rotterdam, and that we can all just ride a Huffy to everything we do.

[@edipires15]

@@WillmobilePlus so what are you waiting for making videos disproving what he’s said?

[@edipires15]

@@davidcoen5547 The guy behind Not Just Bikes is Canadian, and Strong Towns is an American non profit organization lead by a former traffic engineer. These are no “smug condescending Europeans” looking downs their noses, these are your fellow Americans (and neighbors) that realize that designing cities based solely on the car as the only method of transport is space inefficient, expensive and dangerous. If you don’t agree, go start your own channel and make videos explaining why they are wrong, instead of being butthurt about people (rightfully) criticizing your city planning.

[@Linda-sq2ti]

This is why city streets are neglected , more work is being done on state roads or roads being added to keep up with traffic .

[@nobodyspecial4702]

City streets are the financial responsibility of the city, while state roads are the financial responsibility of the state. If your city has shitty roads, blame your local government.

[@Linda-sq2ti]

@@nobodyspecial4702 I blame the whole system .

[@Erez-the-Berez]

the roads r broken D:

[@ANDREASRIAL]

It is job security, burocracy and corruption plays a big part in the budget.

[@napoleonibonaparte7198]

STOP BUILDING MORE LANES. BUILD MORE DAMN TRAINS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT. ELECTRIFY YOUR RAILS.

[@jarynn8156]

Problem is it isn't that easy. Rail is also super expensive. And rail has the added downside that American cities werent built for it. Cool, you built a fancy new train. Now watch no one use it because they'll notice that they'll still need to rent a car and, if they need to rent a car, might as well just go through the airport. Its faster and cheaper to fly than rail can ever hope to be.

[@napoleonibonaparte7198]

@@jarynn8156 1. Your cumulative cost for building + maintaining highways (+ car-centric infrastructures, ie. wide stretches of parking lots, suburbia, etc.) are more expensive than building trains. 2. “US cities are not built for trains” is patently false, you clearly don’t know US history during the Gilded Age. Rail infrastructure and public transportation were gutted because of the oil + car lobby. 3. To make cars unnecessary to more people, public transport is needed, and a rework of priorities by DOTs to pedestrian from cars. 4. Italy has shown that rail can compete against flying, that it caused domestic travels via flying unprofitable, and made Alitalia restructure itself.

[@jarynn8156]

@@napoleonibonaparte7198 Italy is 700 miles across from its northern to its southern tip. I live in the Colorado Front Range area. The closest major city outside of this urban corridor is Albuquerque at 400 miles. Next is Salt Lake City at 500 miles. If I wanted to go to Kansas City, 600 miles. Vegas, 750 miles. The United States is utterly massive. The distance between America's two largest cities is 3,000 miles. It would take the fastest train on the planet somewhere around 9 hours to accomplish the trip, assuming it is unphased by the three different mountain ranges in the way, can go full speed all the time, and doesn't make a single stop. On point 2.. You know the gilded age was over a hundred years ago, right? The US had a population of around 70 million at the end of the Gilded Age. Today it is 330 million. Our cities have grown a lot since those days and they have grown with cars in mind. Trust me, as much as I love using mass transit when its an option, most destinations in the US require renting a car. My home city has a pretty comprehensive bus system. I'd still recommend renting a car because it will cut your travel time from an hour to 15 minutes on some journeys.

[@moonmelons]

@@jarynn8156 The first step is to get goods transported across America more by train than by truck. Road damage by vehicle weight is an exponential factor and a vehicle just 4 times as heavy as your average car carries 400 times the road damage with it. Think rails are expensive? Imagine spending an average of 50 billion a year on your roadways and still saying "Yeah we're horribly underspending and need another 500 billion to hopefully bring it back up to where it should be."

[@jarynn8156]

@@moonmelons The US already transports a ton of stuff by train. The United States transports the third most freight by rail on the planet, behind China and Russia. And we transport about 8 times as much freight by rail as the entire European Union.

[@karlgalko]

I have a lot of gripes about American things, including infrastructure(looking at you passenger rail!), but the interstate highway system is unmatched in efficiency and quality. Having been to 50+ countries on all continents, I have not encountered anything that can compete. The simple fact that interstate highways are minimum 4 lane with no traffic lights, only exit and entrance ramps is amazing. Cases can be made for some freeways to be turned into city streets or that widening doesn't help, but the system as a whole is the most consistent and efficient highway system in the world in my opinion.

[@_Super_Hans_]

We don't need some smug Brit telling us what to do with our highways. Sort your own out first, I've been to the UK it's like driving on the moon with the amount of craters you have to avoid.

[@austinhernandez2716]

Wtf is wrong with you? It doesn't matter if he's British. Do you know where he lives? This is pathetic. This is being defensive because you got nothing to say. Extremely childish and pitiful

[@Big1nz]

I'm sorry but what? Fuck the criticism cuz this man is British, first time I've heard that one ey

[@Lando-kx6so]

I've been to the UK & the roads are in much better condition than in the northeast in the US especially motorways so I don't know what you're on about

[@NateClay]

Highways should be for long distance travel with basically nothing beside it, and very few exits. Boom, traffic solved. Oh wait. Now your roads are clogged because nobody walks to work? Well. I guess we'll have to design better cities that don't rely on car dependence.