Why Biden’s Infrastructure Plan Calls for Highway Teardowns | WSJ
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 май 2021
- President Biden’s infrastructure plan calls for non-traditional projects like the removal of some highways. What Democrats want for cities like Baltimore says a lot about the President’s goals in the next wave of development. Photo: Carlos Waters/WSJ
More from the Wall Street Journal:
Visit WSJ.com: www.wsj.com
Visit the WSJ Video Center: wsj.com/video
On Facebook: / videos
On Twitter: / wsj
On Snapchat: on.wsj.com/2ratjSM
#WSJ #Infrastructure #Highways
Looks like Biden watches 'not just bikes'and City beautiful too
Good channels
Their analyses are quite insightful.
Hope he tries donoteat while he’s at it
God I wish
@@jameswincott7552 will do.. thanks
I see myself as a libertarian but I would agree that highways are of huge detriment to cities. We should embrace pre-WW2 city planning and pedestrian plazas/walkways, and allow developers to build something other than single-family housing to allow for mixed-use neighborhoods
unusual based libertarian
Perfectly said. This shouldn't be a political issue just because the democrats are pushing it. This is a city planning issue that has a very clear problem and a very clear answer
This right here. This is it, chief. Exactly what we need more of in this country. Urban design and the conditions that it causes are in no way, shape, or form a partisan issue. The solutions to these problems are something we should all agree on based on practical means. A tiny piece of my hope for this country is restored.
Same here
I may not like Biden on other issues but he must at least do something to improve public transit and people-centric urban planning
If we can just fix our zoning so commercials and residential districts don't have to be separated that'd be great....
Gotta happen at the local level
@@videoguy640 why should governments at any level be able to have such control over what property owners do with their property? It seems absurd that we tolerate such tyranny from government. If you’re gonna tell someone they can’t do something on their property you should have a reallly good reason aside from it will “ruin the character” of the community. Controlling property owners to that extent is what they do in communist countries, we shouldn’t tolerate or allow the tyranny and top down control just because it’s at a local level
@@Hans_Peterson because you wouldn't want a smoke spewing factory next to your house would you?
@@sweting yeah I think that would count as a really good reason. That is hardly ever a scenario, there’s almost always other market forces that naturally separate residential/commercial areas from industrial ones. An overwhelming majority of the time a city won’t let a property owner build something that something is non-single family housing or a non-industrial business in an area that isn’t zoned for commercial stuff
@@sweting You could still have theaters, schools, restaurants, and stores next to housing.
Finally US is doing it’s first steps on the way to normal cities where you have freedom not to have to own a car. Congrats to those who live there!
Aka the entire state of Texas. Badly in need of infrastructure especially if it pertains to power
if they want nicer cities then yea remove some highways and invest in public transit and active travel
Agree, but some idiots will want the car oriented rail systems.
Those people are not car drivers. They are rail riders. Wait, that's also cwr drivers.
That would be too convenient. The big boys would never let that happen
Don't need public transit... thing of the past. Use a scooter lol, get a lyft, buy a bike, order online, walmart is 2 blocks away, 711 is in your backyard no matter where you live. Everything is we Todd did delivery... you work from home or you don't have a job lol, unless you serve people... then your a servant, and nobody cares lol... tear it all down you morons 😆, then charge em quadruple when they want it back. Lol real life
Yesssssss! Cycling is so fun, good for the planet, and a good way to exercise.
Or build more freeways public transport sucks as you need to take a taxi from you home to the bus station and then from the bus station to the you want to go
I drive an elderly lady that his have bad knee so she would have to take a taxi everywhere she need to go
I been to place that built public transport over the best this in the world the freeway and the parking is always horrible in those places
A lot of those freeways were constructed in the 50s and 60s and are considered mistakes
The American Association of Engineer say that we need 6 trillion dollars just fix the road and bridges that we already have. That no new freeways. 2 trillion over ten years, is only 200 billion a year. Sorry James Ricker that won't even cover inflation cost.
@@Madame702 you got money for war but no money for food, infrastructure, housing
@@axios7603 How about get a job.
Only mistakes because of busybodies fighting against progress , nimbys stagnating growth. I despise traffic in San Francisco because of freeway 🛣 revolts
@@mrtee3477 Thats the response that stupid people always give because theyre too dumb to give a well thought out retort.
That freeway would be a great opportunity to lay internet fiber
I was thinking maybe Singapore Wi-Fi level speed.
Or even a High Line style park. Perhaps the future of highways would be to take the Boston Big Dig approach and bury them.
Backbone fiber already runs on the rail ROW right next to it
@@DDELE7 This. I support this. (Also, Melbourne doesn't have many freeways that can be buried, but it doesn't have many freeways to begin with despite having more freeways than any other city in Australia)
@@DDELE7
I don't think America can afford another Boston Big Dig.
This happened in my city, Rochester NY. They infilled and developed 1/2 of a stretch of highway called the inner loop, and it was the best development decision they could've made. It was previously so underutilized that no public transit offset was really even needed. This kind of spending would have a multiplier effect on this too: more housing for lower rents, and additional property tax base replacing unneeded highways that cost money.
They should get rid of the rest. I don’t understand why they built that. Such a waste of money and so useless.
@@samuelfraser9199 I feel torn on this all... The reality is without highways, people use surface streets, and before you know it, kids are getting hit by cars playing in front of their house, so they put speed bumps everywhere, and then it takes you 15 minutes with traffic to go 1 mile to the grocery store.. This is my situation in San Francisco, where they refuse to build a highway to take traffic from south of SF where 101 turns into a surface street to get to golden gate bridge. The net result is thousands of cars per hour on surface streets, creating chaos. These aren't people stopping at local businesses, they just want to get through the city, and the city forces them onto over crowded surface streets creating a dangerous situation and lots of traffic for those of us living near by. We need a quick through pass for cars to avoid surface streets in the city to reduce our traffic. Everybody loves this idea, until they realize the chaos on your surface streets.
@@heyaisdabomb Okay, remove parking minimums. Tear down parking lots and develop that land, then the cars will stop coming.
@@ASS_ault Sure it is, get rid of parking and cars will stop coming. Add bike lines, trams, and buses to replace transit.
@@ASS_ault it very much is how it works and there is considerable empirical evidence and studies to back it up.
In some cases road diets, where poorly designed oversized roads are shrunk down to intelligently planned, complete streets, actually reduced congestion and improved travel times, while reducing noise pollution and improving air quality.
YES! Urbanists and City Planners have been calling for this for DECADES! Tear down the highways, build parks and mass transit in its wake.
That's actually a good idea. If built improperly, freeways can actually increase traffic and hurt the local economies. Plus, they're expensive to build and maintain! Instead, freeways running through downtown areas can be repurposed as tree-lined boulevards with high-density housing, public spaces, and small businesses.
That would be amazing and create nice car free zones of cities with green environments
Yes
Gang fights
Shoot outs
Drug dealers havens
Murders and rapes. Ots of minorities opportunities
@@soillife1 what?
During Eisenhower’s presidency, the handsome superhighways were built. Towns across America lost their funding from speed traps, advertisers lost their unsightly billboards. Ladybird Johnson crested the Beautify America plantings along all the highways.
🤦 All they have to do for example in Michigan is repave them to last longer as in like 90 to 100 years.
Actually in Indonesia most people complained because the current administration is building toll roads. They said that Indonesians eat rice, not asphalt or concrete.
as someone living in jakarta, i can tell you this city urgently needs more flyovers
@@lm_b5080 We need more elevated trains, LRT and MRT.
@@asantaraliner i don't think all the ppl blocking the roads (mostly 1 person in a car that takes 4 people), are interested in any kind of public transport
@@lm_b5080 I don't think stacking highway on top of an elevated highway is a good idea.
You’d be surprised. They do all 3. Willingly
Some of these urban highways should be boulevards.
The highways are grade separated so train lines could be easily put in the highways place.
@@G-546 but they’re not
@@Ben-ok2ue I said could
So long as the boulevards are walkable, and not just stroads. I live near two stroads, they're better than having highways there, but still not pleasant to walk along. Stroads have the worst of roads and streets, and none of the advantages of either.
Whittier boulevard 😎
Make America Walkable Again
Amused by the swing from "build that wall" to "tear down that highway"
Welcomed change! Destruction can be creative.
ok this was good
i think it would be more comparative to "mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall" then to "build that wall" both separated community's and plenty more people wanted them destroyed
@@justanotherguy3215 big difference between the two concepts and uses.
Left wing. Right wing. SAME BIRD. You're right...moving from construction to destruction....no difference they both costs money.
intercity highways are the perfect foundation for high speed rail. It would be cheap to just bolt rails onto what was previously a car lane.
I think, that everywhere where there is even one more lane that needed, it should get converted into highspeed rail for cheap.
EXCELLENT idea. It's so natural a thought, I'm almost embarrassed I never thought or heard of it.
On the other hand. Here in Europe we rarely have freeways running right through the middle of the city and rail exists already in the first place.
No similar issue, no similar thought.
You have to remember two problems though; Trains have a very shallow maximum grade, because their wheels slip so easily, so it would work in flat areas, but not in hilly or mountainous areas.
@@specialopsdave cities had to be severely levelled to even accommodate streetcars 120 years ago, due to grade restrictions and slippage.
Entire neighborhoods and vibrant commercial districts were buried to accommodate the new better,cleaner,faster way for the hipsters of the day to travel quickly past the poor without seeing them. Underground Atlanta, Underground Seattle are just tiny examples of areas covered over or mowed down to build rail.
So no, unicorns don't exist.
Every new deal ruthlessly replaces the deck and shuffles it. Rail too.
US Rail travel is woefully pathetic. It is time we fund public transit that benefits everyone and is enjoyable to ride. So many other nations and continents have excellent rail travel. Franky I'm envious
@@himbourbanist what is your ratio of Train/Bus riding to automobile riding? Do you always take a train or bus if one is available? They do exist all over North America... Maybe near you
Why is infrastructure such a partisan issue. It pays for itself through increased productivity and innovation in the private sector. You can borrow the entire amount for infrastructure and the economy will be okay. Infrastructure is an investment in national capital, similar to business investment in tool and machinery. If you really care about US influence around the world, infrastructure investment is a no brainer.
republicans HATE spending any money, doesn't matter what its for and it doesn't matter if it'll pay itself off. They have always run on tax cuts, even though a century's worth of data has shown that government spending is a key part of economic growth.
@@abcdefgdude2843 well this is the same party that believes that massive tax cuts and big military spending can balance the budget as long as we cut social spending, which doing the math doesn't make sense because defense spending is the largest piece in the discretionary spending bucket.
United we stand, divided we fall. Let's just get things done, infrastructure is important
Anyone who tells you infrastructure pays for itself has never seen a city or contractor go out of business. Typically yes infrastructure is a good investment IF:
1. The project is competed on time
2. The project does not have adverse impacts on the surrounding area
3. There is already investment in other sectors to utilize the new infrastructure effectively
4. The infrastructure actually has a real public good
@@brian2440 well we are talking about the federal government and infrastructure has a spending multiplier. But I agree that it depends where it goes but the US needs better infrastructure overall. Especially in the area of power grids, 5G/broadband, and etc.
Not sure about the child care, but childcare support would boost aggregate supply as more women go in the workforce and more jobs created through childcare support jobs.
Cities need robust public transportation
Leave cars for suburbs and towns that don't have them
It would be a great idea to remove highways but we have to create great public transportation networks while we do it.
Por que no los dos?
Whenever the highways are torn down, should be replaced with urban forests.
No, let ppl in the neighborhood who were hurt by it decide
Or mixed use apartment buildings.
Or urban farmlands to create more jobs.
I live in a city with a highway like this and like, PLEASE tear it down. The stretch through downtown was closed a couple years back for renovation and traffic got better, plus it’s loud and trashes property values.
Build freeways underground along with subways to maximize transit and greenways simultaneously; simply removing old freeways does very little in future planning to sizable challenges.
@@johnkeller5163 Agreed
If they truly wanted to fix the Infrastructure in this country; trade unions and the department of public works would be recruiting in high schools, just like the military does.
Ok dummie, the problem isn’t the labor, it’s the money. “Recruiting in high schools” LOL wow what a genius
The problem isn’t a shortage of labour.
Public works department launders money. Recruiting good children will digress government s large pay checks.
Do you know how many unions are in the United States? They are GONE! Only 7% of workers belong to a union.
@@YT-mp7ei 😂😂😂
I’d be happy to see the US instead either create tunnels for the highways, or wrap the highway around the city, instead of cutting directly through it.
Yes, remove highways, invest in bike infrastructure!
Build high-speed rail, and limit flights
It won’t work in the US due to population density
@@gustavomercado1599 overused argument that is not convincing at all. I’d use HSR all the time if we had it here. Much more convenient than flying or driving depending on how far you’re going
@@gustavomercado1599 I think nobody suggests to build a HSR from Montana to Iowa... However, the US does have some densely populated areas and also lots of urban areas within reasoable range from each other where HSR perfectly fits in. Northeast corridor, California, Florida, Texas, Illinois... In such areas it makes sense to build HSR-lines
dont limit flights. hsp has been a money pit
@@gustavomercado1599 Not a bad argument, but not applicable to urban areas in the US. Population density in Europe or China is not that much different relatively to US metros like Florida, Northeast, Texas, Great Lakes and more.
Paris- Bordeaux, Madrid-Barcelona, Rome - Milan Non-stop 600km (350 miles) routes that serves around 8-12 million people. These are very profitable routes. That's very comparable to Miami-Orlando-Jacksonville, Dallas-Austin-San Antonio et cetera.
And this is not even considering the impact on urban life quality in American cities, because honestly, they are not first world standard.
baltimore needs MUCH more than an infrastructure overhaul
i fear its already beyond hopeless
We have nukes. That can do something
just tear down baltimore. No amount of funds can fix it LOL.
@@honkhonk8009 Ah yes, tearing down a city, displacing hundreds of thousands of people that can’t afford to move creating a inevitable homeless crisis and the destruction of the metropolitan area just because some random guy on the internet wanted to be an arzhole. 👍
@superfuresh Mk, have fun watching the economy collapse without them!
@superfuresh disposable human life. Spoken like a true politician. 👍
Robert Moses' ghost must be freaking furious...seeing how many old - lived in - he tore down in NYC to make his grandiose highways to the Glory of the Automobile....without a thought of where all those families would now go to, the businesses, hospitals and churches. Greenwich Village only exists due to the folks who protested it after he was involved in tearing down NYC's Pennsylvania Station. Amusing. I can imagine Fioretto LaGuardia's ghost ragging on ol Robt Moses ghost...
I'll bet Jane Jacobs' ghost is his nemesis still. Reading /The Power Broker/ is instructive about Moses and his effect on New York and cities around the world.
He only got the poor minority neighborhoods, the rich whites prevented him from their neighborhoods. Luckily we still have good public transit, and he didn't do as much damage as he wanted
Without a thought? No, a great percentage of those displacements were intentional. You can see it right now as NYC has forced homes and businesses to close in low income areas... And then the Mayor and folks on the City board buy the homes at low prices.
Excellent journalism WSJ! Before watching this video, I knew nothing about this part of the infrastructure plan, and now I feel reasonably informed.
Keep researching. Get counter views to this in order to be reasonably informed.
It’s really up to us to get infrastructure passed but it has to be infrastructure. Not political add ons
Always research multiple types of media to get the full view of a situation.
Not to say this wasn't that bad of a video, but keep yourself informed.
@@justSTUMBLEDupon It's not that much infrastructure. Just look at the breakdown of the spending.
*propaganda
not journalism
Let's be honest Philadelphia Baltimore Detroit needs overall infrastructure rebuild. But we rather give Israel billions of $ every year.
Free Palestine, brother
People like yourself continue to point the finger at Israel but say nothing about the money given to countries like Pakistan for gender studies or other nonessential programs.
@@leoredfield2645 Israel is non essential poophole tyrany country too. No pointing -typing
@@alphacentauri7381 do you confuse typical things like literal and figurative often? Name legitimate reasons to fund one and not the other.
Explain to me how funding Israel is bad compared to the pork in the relief bills?
The interstate system in Detroit was built when it was a majority white city. Just a correction.
Yeah this race stuff is kind of a bad sell for bipartisanship. It is true that highways segregate communities but we could easily sell the numerous other benefits of this to right wingers yet we’re making it about race. This is something that benefits everyone but as you can see from right wingers in the comments they cry every time they hear about black ppl lol.
Highways are never run straight through a wealthy city or town. Many just built elevated highways right over and through a poor neighborhood. Manhattan gets the tunnels and the boroughs get the elevated subways. It's the same all over the country. Boston spent billions to resolve this. Money well spent.
While tearing down highways going through cities would be ideal, American cities would need a massive restructuring that is almost completely opposite of what they are now: planned and sprawled. You would not only need to remove highways, but also need to reconstruct cities so that they are mixed development instead of separating houses from everything else. And not to mention that American houses are huge so they're not going to be suitable for a walkable environment.
Well, not everything is lost. Massive restructuring is possible. For instance, you could give (a group of) sprawl neighbourhoods a transport hub with some shops, restaurants, and a bit of more dense housing, turning them into towns within 10 years. More and more jobs will become local to that town, reducing traffic. In the Netherlands, we were unhappy with the uniformity of many areas built in the 80s and 90s; when bulk constructing required uniformity. Nowadays, we replace (modest) parts of these neighbourhoods with totally different category of buildings to stimulate social diversity. This really helps them.
Wow this is incredible, I would never have expected such amazing action in the US.
Cities like Boston, Portland, and Seattle have already removed highways and they have been very popular
@@cesyneighistaut3451 those cities aren’t like the rest, remove one highway in the DFW area and it would cause total collapse.
@@blackhole9961 That’s because sunbelt cities are incredibly car centric and need to start building denser, walkable communities
@@cesyneighistaut3451 can’t really do that, they are stuck as is
@@blackhole9961 They can change, but it would take a generation. Not my problem tho, I’m never moving down there
I totally believe in the interstate highway system, yet totally agree with this premise that many of our Federal, State, and County roads divided cities and neighborhoods with a racial agenda. It's time to end this and I agree with Biden, it needs to change. Let's bring communities on a human scale together, not rip a frigging super highway through it like a dividing line.
Not to mention, highways that go through dense urban areas are awful for the city as a whole. It creates a very hostile, unpleasant place. Let's leave highways to cut out through the country where they belong!
Understandable, highways can connect up places but also devide places and are hotspots for air and noise pollution, so in the country side these negatives don't matter but in a city it does.
I do think we should use freight and passenger rail to move as many people and goods across states as we can, but if we maintain highways for the rest we could do it like some cities in the Netherlands, which join highways with ring roads around the city. Once cars enter the ring road, they can turn onto narrower roads that are designed to slow traffic. They also have better pedestrian, cycling, and transit infrastructure.
In the 60s city planners made the decision of spreading cities with single home suburbia, where everything is miles apart, people are stuck to their cars, kids don't have any freedom, and infrastructure is too expensive to maintain.
It's about time 4 lanes stroads are converted to roads with pedestrian paths and bicycle and bus only roads, and those zoning laws are repealed so you can have commercial operation inside neighbourhoods, like shops, cafes and restaurants.
The American city is still just too far spread out and big, things are zoned away from each other which is why American cities are really nothing but suburbs.
The infrastructure is already there and cities have adapted to it. I don’t think taking something as vital as a highway is a solution. If you were to take away a highway in the DFW area it would cause a total collapse of the metro.
Something i actually agree fully with, ‘City Beautiful’ and ‘Not Just bikes’ would be happy
Dumb people are often happy
@@DeimosSaturn then urbanist like them would be the most intelligent people. Almost everything about the state of US cities today are depressingly sad. There is nothing to be happy about the condition of today's US transit infrastructure
@@DeimosSaturn It's actually been proven that intelligent people have better mental health
@@DeimosSaturn smart people to when improvement is happening
the highway was highly supported by the big oil conglomerate in 90s, now time to build high-speed rail systems
Hopefully
The United States had 2 subway system construction times. Philadelphia, NYC, Boston, Chicago, and Newark built subway syestems between 1890-1920. Between 1970-1990 San Francisco, Los Angles, Atlanta, Miami, Baltimore, and Washington DC opened their subway syestems. Hopefully in the next 10 years some cities without subways like Seattle, Houston, San Diego, and San Jose start construction on subway networks.
But hope it won't be like the Californian so-called High Speed Rail
Oh, it goes much further back than the 1990s. It goes back to the 1930s.
@@G-546
I think Boring tunnels are cheaper/faster transit.
These bitcoin spam-bot conversations are everywhere, kind of amusing to read.
The rich do everyday what the poor do only occasionally. Cryptocurrency is the way of the future. I've been investing with Jane Howard and her strategies have proven to be efficient.
Almost like a whole bunch of people have realized that Bitcoin is effectively a Ponzi scheme and the only way they're getting their money back is if they can get other people to buy in, huh?
@@dynamicworlds1 Well, that's not necessarily a ponzi scheme, just the laws of supply and demand. All stocks and currencies increase in value with demand.
@@ALC0LITE real currenies get their exchange value fromt the universal demand created by the government accepting them as taxes (and are fundamentally a quantized debt relation).
(Legitimate) stocks get their base exchange value because of the potential for dividends and/or voting rights.
Bitcoin gets its exchange value purely on the potential that some other sucker will buy into the game at a higher price in the future.
That makes it a (at least defacto, if we're to be charitable with assuming intent) Ponzi scheme.
@@dynamicworlds1 Okay, so remove the stock comparison, which you are correct in saying is differentiated by dividend yields and stockholder utility. Bitcoin is still a legitimate currency, and isn't even a "defacto" ponzi scheme. You still need to pay capital gains tax on bitcoin investments. There are many ways to spend bitcoin as a legal tender. For Bitcoin to be a Ponzi scheme, there would need to be a lack of economic utility outside of another person buying it off of you.
I am not the biggest fan of bitcoin for various reasons, but you can't say that because other people are trying to create external interest in it as an investment, that it is basically a Ponzi scheme lol
FINALLY! Invest in transit, make American cities walkable, stop urban sprawl
Throughout California one thousand five hundred eighty bridges and overpasses are listed critically endangered of catastrophic collapse. Why?
They're preparing for the 10.0
@@notforgotten2798 I think they’re preparing to get the biggest piece of the pie.
Well most politicians only care about pushing their personal agenda in the few years they spend in office, rather than the boring stuff like bridges. Same problem in my state
Because states and the federal government kept stealing public funding from infrastructure and then never created a new infrastructure policy for over 40 years.
If you’re in California I’d personally be most concerned about the Mojave Dam in San Bernandio which according the US Army Corp of Engineers has a catastrophic hazard level which points to high potential for failure.
That dam has the potential to flood 300,000 Americans with 280 million cubic meters of water
@@ASS_ault Can that be truly foreseen with the division evident in our government?
Good, honestly. My city has a giant highway running right through the heart of it. Its totally splits the city in two in a detrimental way.
Okay so can you be more specific? Lol
And my city needs a highway going through it cause the traffic of people trying to get from south of San Francisco to the North Bay is unreal. Imagine a 4 lay surface street that is backed up for 15 blocks, all times of the day, because it's not designed for the amount of traffic it sees. So then people cut around onto the neighboring streets, so now they put speed bumps everywhere, so people go another street over. Meanwhile, kids are in danger from the increased traffic on surface streets, and traffic living here is a nightmare. Everyone blames the highway, but it's humans that created this divide using the highway that's your problem. If the highway wasn't there, you'd see what I'm dealing with and people would still find something to divide the population based on. It's called racism, and this country is full of it, the highway is being used as a scapegoat.
Tearing down highways however may make traffic worse, it could make it even more difficult for freight to come into the city as truckers need a road into the cities.
@@battlefieldworld that why u need to improve public transportation. We need to improve public transportation and get rid of uneeded highways(not all cuz like u said fright and cars need ro get to the city) it also would help is all suburbs closes to the city center become mix us at it would help a lot with housing problems cities have. now I'm not talking about high-rise apartments but small apartment building duplexes town houses and small businesses with housing on top is what im talking about. that would help a lot of the problems with people using cars at all as living in those type of neighborhoods u have the feel of a suburbs but u can walk everywhere so u don't need a car. add that whith everything u get rid of the problem of traffic form these these highway removal projects.
@@heyaisdabomb Studies showed that more lanes wont solve traffic problems only worsen them. Public transport and bikes are the solution, you dont even have to go to europe to see this, just look at NYC. Traffic isnt that great but the amount of people living there is insane and 5,7 million people uses the public transport system daily, try to do that with cars, it would be impossible. And nowadays they try to free up space for bikes because bikes doesnt require much space, its environmentaly friendly they can increase green spaces.
addressing the issue of highways destined to be torn down is seemingly a real political impasse 😎
Ayeeee good one
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH (guitar solo)
Why even pay taxes at this point
You pay taxes because bond holders want their money back
You pay taxes for US global hegemony
You pay taxes because you have to, lol... because you are the New England and your nation is divided and collapsing. On the bright side look how long it is taken the UK to roll over and die so hang in there buddy.
@@MyTopVideosTV Abolish government
As if you has a choice
Cities should be built for people, not cars.
And people on bikes!
Cities (indeed, the country in general) should have fewer people. Humans aren't meant to be packed like sardines, and the rate of mental illness and crime illustrate this fact quite well.
Cars are people
@@chad_bro_chill we have a very low population density in the US, crime tracks to poverty (which means it only has a correlation to population density), and if you want to look at the living situation that causes mental health problems, it's not dense cities, but (especially American) suburbs that are the problem
@@chad_bro_chill BS. Where's the crime in Chinese and Japanese cities?
what happens to the high volume of traffic that already passes through on the highway once it is removed? Does it all get funneled through a now pedestrian heavy area with traffic lights?
Good question. Take a look at what Providence, RI did with a route called "Iway." That might give you an idea of what's also possible.
No they have to go through longer routes of freeways.
Basically, induced demand works in reverse. When the freeway was built, people moved further from their destinations, made more trips by car instead of transit, and visit things further away along the freeway corridor. When the freeway is demolished, all those car trips become too slow to be practical, so they change their behavior, and in the long term, their job and living locations. This is obviously a big change, so freeway removals tend to only be done where traffic is low or has good alternatives, and where the freeway removal has the most potential to be a positive change.
probs leads to chaos people aint gonna start using the bike overnight
@@Sanyu-Tumusiime Everytime when freeways are under construction and are closed off people adapt to it by taking different routes. Majority use gps so it’ll lead them somewhere else other than the route they used to take.
Paradoxically the more lanes you build on a highway, more frequent a traffic jam occurs.
The Chinese invest in their infrastructure and that sector employs a huge amount of their population and helps them in accelerating their skills and technologies.
The USA needs to do that badly
@@qjtvaddict Yeah. We let way too much fall to the wayside.
@@qjtvaddict they are. But in cHINa. Who do you think builds a good portion of their projects. USA
@@bcv2372 are you sure about that? Doesn’t sound right to me.
@@bcv2372 totally incorrect man.
They should build subway trains for the long term development of these cities and let the city ie shops, stores, apartments etc develop around these stations
High speed train will help reduce car traffic if they build more rail lines. I am excited that you may now be able to take a train to anywhere in the country soon maybe.
HSR is a political compromise. Politicians can't go after the auto industry, they can't go after new developments that generate tax revenue, so they distract with a "man on the moon" project that would have such a insignificant impact on the transportation industry. People travelling to another city once or twice a year is not as important daily commuter and the airline industry is more flexible. Eminent domain laws and a history of ignoring train travel has made HSR a no go.
If the US wants to improve transportation they need to rethink the bus. New marketing and new smartphone informed logistics could change how people perceive and use the bus.
Train is too expensive to be build in the US, we've lost the race since we surrendered the future development of our transport to Auto & Gas Giants
Good. Cities are for people, not cars.
Demonrat
Agreed
Agreed! United we stand, divided we fall
I am totally convinced Detroit’s major problem is the highway 🙄. It wasn’t insane riots that scared people away, heavy drug use, unions, increased regulation, increased taxes, or wasteful spending. There was a time when journalists actually told real stories instead of propaganda 😓
Seriously though, Detroit’s highways help contribute to the city’s decline and today, these highways themselves are in bad shape.
Those were all contributing factors, including urban freeways.
Guess where many of the predominantly African American people displaced from Paradise Valley and Black Bottom ended up.
12th and Clairmont
So it's not entirely about the highways, it's more about the effect that everything's having on the black people.
nothing exists in a vacuum, causes and effects, the big picture.
No not really, the highways are just bad overal, highways shouldn't go trough cities but around them
@@Lunavii_Cellest Your clueless.
@@cuzr702 he’s right
Most highways were built away from cities which later cities grew around them but later yes some highway where built in cities and honestly where can u build if there's no way for it to go.
As well most of the highways talking about here where built in cheap land even if black or white people owned it it's cheaper to build on land that is cheap. As well some of these highways weren't even finished which is why people call them scars
Can you imagine how the East Side of Manhattan would look without the FDR Drive? That would be something.
Just like the westside, very nice. I hope they do tear it down one day, but Manhattan does need some highway going thru it imo.
@@yuriydee No it doesn't.
@@arthurbdt2329 Yes it does.
Traffic is a nightmare in the small streets of NYC.
@@neeljavia2965 Removing road capacities can ease traffic. Hellish traffic will discourage people to take their cars.
@@arthurbdt2329 But for that subway and other public transit facilities have to be improved.
People pay for highway, now they need to pay for teardown, do you think we are fools to pay such governments??
Clearly we are. We voted for this.
@Krabbs Mister i mean not as many as we're told but obviously some people did, silly guy.
@Krabbs Mister and you're funny if you think you actually know what happened just because you read it on the interwebs.
You are lost. This country is decaying. Why are you against keeping the country intact, competitive, modern, etc. Other nations that are also very powerful have invested in their country.
Government isn’t the enemy.
Expecting something for paying taxes is normal
Corporations haven’t been paying their fair share and neither have the wealthiest of the wealthiest Americans
It's a lot cheaper to tear down a highway that's reached the end of its life expectancy than to rebuild it.
Lets be real they're just going to tear them up and then use the broken roads as a campaign issue for the next 50 years like everything else they claim to be fixing.
😂😂😂
It’s sad that you have been lead to believe that investing in a modernization of our infrastructure to keep our country safe is a bad idea. The US needs to look around and see how other nations have done in this regard. Spoiler: They have done amazing! The US is becoming a failed state because of people who have this notion that because you were great once that’s good enough in a world rapidly changing and passing the United States behind. It is almost as if one who says such things wants the country to fall apart.
@@atomicstyle7344 I don't trust in the government to destroy something and replace it in a timely manner no, I trust that it will be tied up in bureaucratic redtape for years, potentially decades, as that is what has happened my entire life whenever the government touches something. The left have become establishment boot lickers, the type of people they would have openly mocked fifteen years ago.
the interstate that's planning to be removed in detroit is I-375, not I-345, which is in dallas, texas
Although there is a lot of activism in Dallas currently to tear down 345 too
Downtown Los Angeles desperately needs a total overhaul. It’s a mess. It’s dividing. There’s no room for the increasing number of drivers. Multiple major accidents daily. Then there’s terrible public transportation.
Jesus Christ now the roads are racist!?
If blue states want to tear down their own highways, I have no issue with that, but it should be those states funding it, not the federal government. There is a similar highway in Denver where residents complained that the highway divided the neighborhood in two. (not sure how, the whole section was elevated, with the original road still driveable under it) For years they complained, so they started building a $1.8 billion tunnel to bury the highway and eliminate the elevated portion. Now the same neighborhood is whining that the construction is too noisy and dusty. Heaven forbid they actually be grateful that we wasted over a billion dollars so that we could eliminate an eyesore in the neighborhood that has been there longer than most of the people living there have been alive.
federal govt pushed for those highways, federal govt should help remove them
I'm from Baltimore. 1.4 miles of road won't change a thing. NOBODY CARES!!! Waist of money. We need better schools
Ah yes, it shall only be delayed 10 years and cost 6 times more than originally planned
we could pay ISIS to do it for free bruh
Tearing down freeways financially irresponsible socialism.
In respect to Baltimore, how will this address the high number of violent crimes year after year?
How will this overhaul the much needed public education system that consistently fails inner city students year after year (Google Project Baltimore)?
Short answer, it doesn't. It's nothing more than a distraction for politicians to avoid the real issues at hand.
Facts.
Diverse people have themselves to blame.
You don’t appreciate how interconnected everything is. More access to public transit usually corresponds to an increase in property value because its easier to get to a greater variety of jobs. People are able to make more and then pay more in taxes to fund schools. With better funded schools and a more financially stable home life from easily accessible, higher paying jobs, violent crime decreases. It won’t be an instant fix, but it’s not nothing.
@@saahiliyer11 Have you ever used the public transit system in Baltimore? It's underutilized because of fear of the violent crimes against passengers. It has been a constant money loser for the city due to low ridership on an annual basis.
A city/province needs to be able to provide basic services such as public safety, education, utilities etc. before something like mass transit system can flourish. If you can't provide these basic services, your core tax base will leave the city for other areas. Baltimore has one of the highest property tax rates in the nation but what do you get in return - high crime rate, poor education system, etc.? It's a huge reason why Baltimore has experienced continual population decline since the 1980's.
As for the education system, please Google Project Baltimore which uncovers the gross mismanagement and corruption within Baltimore. It's not an issue of lack of taxpayer funding, I can promise you.
Can you explain to me how tearing down highways will fix any of these issues in Baltimore?
This actually sort of does- Read the book Strong Towns... or just follow their work online- or Check out Not Just Bikes or a playlist called Suburbian Wasteland. You will find the way American cities have sprung up is unnatural and just outright fiscally crippling- Rich car-dependent suburbia surrounding a crippling downtown- yet by yield/area- Cities out do every other mode of human settlement. I've lived in Switzerland, Scotland, England, India, Singapore, Indonesia, US, and Canada- This flavor of urban sprawl is only possible in places with Space- North America Countries have this very issue. The funding people spend on police, community health, parks, water pipes, local schools (partially), walk ways- or wait till your city becomes Detroit. (the last part is Charles L Marohn Jr
's Words). Cities should be made for people- walking, biking, commuting trains,etc, not Cars.
Think This: You don't have a Job, you don't have a car, you get a job, but you need car to commute everywhere- I've been to Baltimore (Raven's game was fun) yet the roads are awful and only for cars- but you don't have a car, you have no license, you have no license you cannot vote, do things that matter, you cannot get to job on time you get fired, you get fired, no money, no housing-rent taxes... well no taxes if you can't even purchase something, No taxes- no funding your schools, no funding treatment facilities for addiction rehab, no funding for fair policing to stop drug crimes (manufacturing and selling- not consuming). No money, no woman- No Woman, No Cry- oh wait that's Bob Marley- but you get the point. When someone says Systematic Change- I think this should be a start!
TRAINS! BUILD TRAINS!
I highly doubt tearing down feeways will help black communities. Why dont they just make gas cheap, lower the cost of living allowing them to build wealth.
Now they can't leave the ghetto 😂
Reparations for all Americans! A car centric economy is NOT in anyone's best interest!
If the government can get the people to joyfully put on their chains there will be no revolt. And you are just the type of willing slave the Deep State is looking for.
Car=freedom and choice. Mass transit does not. People use it out of necessity not choice.
The freeways and interstate systems that ran through cities also allowed people to move out of the cities and into suburbs. This lead to more car dependency and hurt inner city communities and businesses. Cities need to start removing these large freeways and invest in public transport systems throughout their cities. I hope cities in Ohio start soon, Cincinnati should have and a subway a century ago.
And then those in the suburbs will move into the city forcing those residents out to the suburbs, or those cities populations will decrease.
Cheap Public transportation in rich cities equals homelessness in your nice suburban backyard next week, and drugs in your kids backpack, and the smell of urine at bus stops from old women who can't sleep in a graveyard yet, cuz they still crazy, your malls have been taken over, downtown to uptown.. its all downhill from here... watch Frisco, watch Seattle, watch San Diego... these infrastructure ridden downtowns are west coast zones that need to be disconnected from anything business/industrial and turned into cities of refuge. Where humans that make the community are not the commodity... you're all imbeciles, go join a cult lol
Eisenhower punching the air rn
It accomplished its purpose. His administration was the dawn of the Cold War and high potential for one of the largest global conflicts in human history with the potential for multiple attacks on US soil from USSR.
I’d say his plan largely worked. We have some 46,000 miles of interstate connecting cities in nearly every corner of this vast country. The issues with freeways divided urban neighborhoods is definitely a mistake that needs fixing, but aside from that the highway system has done wonders for travel.
@@duncanmcauley7932 It is the most critical infrastructure for any economy which the whole world is trying to copy.
Here in Buffalo we have the ugly, dangerous and loud 33 running right through a beautiful park. It was built mainly for the money. Shame.
Highways are collapsing anyways. Best to tear them down as they're a threat to public safety.
Focus on public transport and the easing of zoning laws in many cities which then promotes the construction of small apartments, not single family housing.
Agreed!
People use mass transit out of necessity not choice
@@bcv2372 Many people outside of the US use public transit as their choice of transport even when they have their own cars or motorbikes.
The truth is freeways have contributed to white flight and racism. They literally served as the reason why minorities were forced out of homes legally, and how Caucasians were able to leave cities for suburbs. When cities started failing, that's when crime and low education grew.
Freeways have also contributed to cultural and economic decline in urban cores. Instead of collaborative and friendly neighborhoods with identities, there's concrete and division.
We don't need all the freeways we have!
The United States Highway system makes it difficult to improve other transportation and create new transportation systems
Wait, we're blaming people for not effectively stopping highways from being built?
I must be hearing things.
You obviously must think highways are a good thing. I can hear your arrogance and ignorance from hundred miles away.
@@MyTopVideosTV you must be having hearing problems then
@@MyTopVideosTV some are good some are bad
And what will be the carbon footprint cost of tearing down all these highways? And what will these highways be replaced by?
Boulevards
Hopefully more housing, public transportation, and business
Trains and busses which are better for the environment
Public transportation, housing, small businesses, etc. Things that grow an economy
Urban linear forrests.
This bill is not about infrastructure its about socialist agenda...Republicans, Americans have the courage , unity and strength to vote this bill down...give the American people a reason to have hope for their future!
Leave it to the Democrats to spend trillions of dollars to build a negative quantity of roads.
This is a multi faceted issue if one is talking about the well being of a community. One thing that wasn't mentioned here but has shown to be true is that ownership of where you live as opposed to being a renter has created a better well-being for the local community.
Would definitely serve communities better with more public transportation funding
True!
For people that dont drive
That's not what ruined these towns and cities. Bad governance ruined these cities. Thousands of other towns and cities in the country have had land taken and used to build highways and they are doing just fine with no complaints.
Look up highway removals in cities like Boston or Portland, they made parks out of the land and it’s widely popular with city residents
No mention of "White Flight"...
@United Black Peoples, There no mention about the Sky High City Income taxes that is the true reason people are leaving.
@@es-qf2gw exactly, and not to mention, how big are these parking lots going to be? This is a cluster f$uck of epic proportions. Biden already stuck his nose in our business in Houston delaying the 45north project. The neighborhoods he's talking about are abhorrent, and that's coming from a black person.
If city income taxes are high and personal security is low, then no one in his right mind would stay.
Proper planning needs to be done on the state level. Of course you can open up federal land for private investment but will that help the communities in the long run and in a environmentally friendly way?
If you take away roads going into a city, the cost of transporting food to feed the city's residents becomes more expensive resulting low margin supermarkets becoming unprofitable and closing resulting in food deserts.
There are so many easy solutions to this capitalism your trying to defend. Like neighborhood farms and stores that benefit their residents rather than the usual corporations which eventually went offshore leaving America in an economic downfall and the biggest wealth gap in our history
And if protecting our nation and corporations was the answer why is the country still falling apart?
The more people use alternative modes of transportation, the emptier the roads are for the trucks that need them.
Also if you're worried about food deserts, directly subsidizing grocery stores is a lot more efficient maintaining large highways that waste valuable real estate and cause pollution that causes health problems in nearby residents.
@@MyTopVideosTV Neighborhood farms do not produce a constant supply of products or have a sizable amount of land to raise livestock to sustain the needs of an urban population.
We are not talking about removing roads, we are talking about removing highways that are there just to slice the city into multiple parts/divide it
This is not a partisan issue. It is unsustainable to drive drive drive. I am not a member of any party.
Spending money we don't have to unbuild things we don't need to fix cities that are shrinking anyway...
Our government at work.
I unlike most of you actually watched the video and agree with what is being proposed. Its a 1 and a half mile stretch of road that probably was a good idea in 1950, not so much today.
If you don't have a car, you lag behind in commute. This severely affects your economic prospects and hurts you financially. This in turn holds you and your future generations back.
Go look up the prisoner's dilemma.
@@dynamicworlds1 I did. Just now. Interesting problem. But what's it got to do with my statement??😁😁
@@priyanshujanrao7710 it's about how everyone simply persuing their own self interest can produce worse outcomes for everyone.
Swap out rush hour commute times for prison sentences and you've got the same dynamic. The more people drive, the longer everyone else's commute takes because it increases traffic. An urban area where everyone (or nearly everyone) uses public transit will have the lowest commute times. If you want to make things better for future generations, you invest in mass transit.
@@dynamicworlds1 Sadly that is how things are going in the country. It's become very polarized.😭😭
SURPRISE!! Busy highway areas are more pollutant?! Who knew 🤦♀️🤦?!
..
Imagine being so woke that you want to tear down highways that get you were you want to go faster.
What you said makes no sense
@@justanghozzst8218 now it makes sense
The American road system is the worst in the developed world, anything is better than what we have now
Imagine not knowing that the freeway removal movement predates wokism by several decades...
Imagine not knowing that the specific freeways targeted for removal are useless spurts that don't really take you anywhere a surface street can't for a comparable amount of time.
Why Highways Are Racist? Jokes aside, those highways prevented lower income comminities from gentrification, I think they do more good than harm.
375 in Detroit absolutely did more harm than good. That freeway is doesnt really speed up commute and makes traffic before or after a big event worse.
Where will the homeless live if you take away their underpasses?!
In $4000 a month hotel rooms. In SF its $8000 a month
Finally. Get rid of these atrocities and provide some decent mass transit to the people.
Don’t know where you live but in much of the south that’s not really possible because of the stupid way we have built over hundreds of years.
@@colinl992 Germany, but we are fighting against new highways here as well. I'm thankful that, at least in the US, Volkswagen had to pay a lot of money for what they did. The car lobby is just way too strong here.
@@flourbvoy1269 Lived there for 7 years in Wiesbaden I know exactly what you’re talking about.
@@colinl992 savannah, GA is walkable
@@greenmachine5600 I live around Augusta Georgia outside the city proper .The issue isn’t if the city is walkable the issue is if you cut off the roads in and out the people who live in the city can’t get out .Worse the people who work in the city but don’t live there and that’s a lot of people like medical professionals can’t get to work. Because how do you build a rail network in a massive subdivision .
Ok. I want the utopia as much as the next guy but what lol?? Tearing down highways is not the solution
i345 is in Dallas, the one in detroit i375
When congestion around those homes near the 'demolished highways' creeps up and people complain about the traffic...don't be surprised!
It won't. Not much, anyway.
Congestion comes from the traffic the freeways bring in. Remove the freeway, the traffic melts away. It either gets redistributed through the street network which has a much larger capacity, or people simply stop driving into the city. Freeway removal is not a new concept.
They say that poor air quality is due to highways yet they also say we will all be using electric cars in the future. This seems like a contradiction, you cant promise clean transportation and also call highways dirty in the future sense.
It's both. The development and maintenance of cars always takes energy. Personal vehicles are and for the foreseeable future will be environmentally and economically unsustainable. The fiscally responsible future is ride share, public transit, walking and biking.
No we won't be using any cars in the future. Its the trolley train that is the future
How can we create a larger trucking shortage?? Let's tear down the highways... We are paid by mileage not hourly.
What does Baltimore have to do with America’s Infrastructure? Clickbait title much?
It's an example. You can replace Baltimore with pretty much every other city in the US and it's the same thing.
Remove highways for development huh, Sounds taxable.
Even highways are connected with race, what has happened to America
HOW can anyone be for this? This is the stupidest idea I’ve ever heard. Connecting suburbs to downtown is essential for cities and without highways you force longer commutes.
There not talking about demolishing highways from suburban areas or long distances between city’s but to demolish it in the hart of urban areas where it splits the city. The highway should if necessary go in underground tunnels through the city if highway capacity is needed into the hart of the city. Else its much better to stop the highway at the outskirts of the city