OldMan wrote:Yes and no. While the cost to repair the roads is more, verses a longer life cycle, it serves a secondary purpose. It employs local labor. (most states require local labor) And while I truly think it winds up costing the tax payer more in the long run, I also believe that the jobs it creates probably brings it closer to a break even point.
I would much rather my tax dollars go to paying a repair crew, that now has the ability to care for their families, than those same tax dollars being used on welfare. The pride one gets from holding down a job, the social problems that are prevented by those jobs, (ie. crime) tends to make me a little less likely to complain about the road crews.
This is of course only my opinion, but it's how I chose to look at it.
I'd rather have functional, efficient transportation, welfare, and temporary unemployment than endless expensive repairs and horrible traffic. Roads are much more useful as things people can eventually drive on, rather than purely cosmetic construction projects.
Edit: Again, that comment may sound crazy to some, but people who have driven there understand. When, at any time, a major portion of a city's roads are under repair, it really is a big inconvenience when the traffic all gets rerouted. The economic burden of a bad transportation system is a big problem for anyone who isn't in the business of repairing roads.