In my book, The Affordable Housing Crisis: Causes and Cures, I examine how socialized roads have impacted the affordability of housing. A real-life example is currently taking place as the government attempts to expand Interstate 45 through downtown Houston. The project will result in the displacement of 1,079 homes, 2 schools, 5 churches, and 344 businesses. Those who will be impacted are predominantly lower income “people of color.”
On one hand, Houston—like nearly every city—has a severe shortage of affordable housing for low- and moderate- income households. On the other hand, the state wants to remove more than a thousand affordable housing units from the rental stock. This is an inevitable consequence of socialized roads.
More than a century ago, the Good Roads movement pressured the federal government to build better rural roads. One of the movement’s demands was that the new roads be free for motorists to use. Attempts to require motorists to pay for the roads through a gas tax, tolls, or similar mechanisms were quickly shot down. As a result, non-motorists were forced to subsidize the transportation expenses of those who owned automobiles.
It is commonly known that if you subsidize something, you will get more of it. As an example, the government has subsidized solar panels, and the result is more solar panels on homes and commercial buildings. Because motorists were not required to pay the full cost of their transportation, there was no incentive to economize. Freeway usage—demand—increased, and when congestion increased, motorists demanded that the freeways be expanded. When the government complied, the problem was exacerbated and calls for more expansion soon ensued. This process has been repeated multiple times since.
The Good Roads movement argued that free highways were a “public good.” Defenders of socialized roads continue to make that argument. Like all policies founded on the “common good,” socialized roads destroy the lives of many of the individuals comprising “the public.”