Motoring is Unfair and Confused

in section Commentary

26 Jun 2004

[comments]

[770w]

A version of this article first appeared in The Times of 26 June 2004

............

My mother, who in the Autumn of her years still goes by bicycle to do her shopping at Sainsbury’s in Cromwell Road, makes a modest proposal about road safety. Outlaw seatbelts. Instead, fit a large spike to every steering wheel, point toward the driver’s chest. Well, it may never catch on. But like Swift’s modest proposal to end child poverty by eating poor children, it would solve the problem. Drivers take more care, and an innocent cycle ride to the supermarket is much less hazardous.

Like any sound satire my mother’s proposal has good sense behind it. Mountaineering is dangerous: but climbers rarely fall on anyone else. Your Atlantic cod is the product of a hazardous industry: but the risks are born by men who chose to accept them with their pay packets. Fair enough. But with cars it doesn’t work like that. In the road safety numbers published here yesterday you can discover that for every two people who died driving a car, one person got run over.

In cost-benefit terms, motoring is a plumber’s nightmare. You get in your car; you know it’s hazardous; but the risk of death is the cost of comfortable travel, and you accept that. What you didn’t know is, you’re getting a subsidy. The boy playing footie in his street, the merchant banker coming out of Guildhall tube, or for that matter my mother with her panniers full of organic lettuce, are bearing risks created by your travel happiness. One third of your risk is suffered by someone who is not getting anything in return.

Any economist will tell you that where benefits go to people who don’t bear the costs, wrong choices get made. Airbags and crumple zones create a sense of invulnerability in the driver. Worse, this sense is not illusory. I can drive more recklessly in a Volvo than in a Morris Minor, without taking any more risks. For the poor mug on the pavement or in the cycle lane, though, it makes no odds whether I have a side impact protection system. It’s a ton of steel at forty miles an hour either way. The safer I feel, the faster I drive, the more likely I run you down.

Road safety is just one egregious example of the crossed up incentives in which all motoring is clouded. Driving is jolly pricey, but you pay it all up front. Every hundred miles you drive costs you £41, but only a quarter of that is what you take out of your wallet at the point of decision. Poor old Thomas the Tank Engine is cheaper all round, but the punter pays something close to the full cost of the journey every time he steps on the platform. This is the real reason for congestion charging and road tolls and higher fuel duty. Not to punish the motorist, but to help us read the price tag. Driving is not wicked, but we do more of it than makes us happy, because what we pay for it today doesn’t tell us how much it costs over a lifetime. In much the same way, people smoked more before they knew it would kill them.

Of course, many of the solutions are worse than the problem. One of the worst by-products of motoring is a hideous body of costly, unenforceable laws which lower the respect in which the Law in general is held. Multiplying laws, even to untangle cost and benefit in the motoring economy – that way madness lies. We might try pay-as-you-drive insurance, with which some insurers are experimenting already, or even plough road charges back into subsidising third party cover. Or how about some prohibitions on accident insurance? Both bring the cost of driving this journey closer to the lifetime cost; the second makes drivers warier, without resorting to the spike.

One thing’s for sure though: the less driving we do, the less we will want to do. Often one gets in a car because it’s the only place free from the stink and racket of other cars, and safe from the alienated anger of other drivers. To this extent, driving is a sad but apt metaphor for the mental condition of our times. We are at odds with one another because my pursuing my own personal fulfilment goads you to pursue yours, and vice versa; we hide in sealed capsules that make us less worth finding; we wear armour because everyone else is wearing armour. That’s the real hidden cost of motoring.

printer-friendly version 

Comments

Your name:
pardon me! please don't post anything that is or looks like a link! too much comment spam alas!               [terms on which you comment]

hehe wrote on 10 Jun 2008

i can see that many people like me thought that this was something like the ramson thing, and just typed random letters to see what happened

asd wrote on 10 Jun 2008

sad

mkzajrop qrin wrote on 21 Nov 2007

nvjlhow dekjp xvywphl acqhotj uwenzsgix uxjym zpxre

wrote on 8 Oct 2007

hi

tjmguibnc qaltgoxm wrote on 27 Sep 2007

iysmtgwqa rbjglfx wtzeyl yitekvjrm fhgkutncd ycdvrkf xtjwiuyv

rktwy vgfdj wrote on 1 Sep 2007

ubmf txgps xrgyno qdog aiswr clnxwsz ywmhc

kduci xjlp wrote on 27 Aug 2007

thasjyo ljwrx kzfql wfear axtsweg nsmyhzei ohlce

fhjbdy lthbr wrote on 26 Aug 2007

hvoesw staeywu jnkl yukip snmbl nqcmfxtv ewgbtlhdu

Aleksiu wrote on 22 Jul 2007

Cool...

Demetrios wrote on 22 Jul 2007

Cool!

Epaminondas wrote on 20 Jul 2007

Cool...

Aleda wrote on 20 Jul 2007

Cool!

Dimitrios wrote on 19 Jul 2007

Cool.

Bikos wrote on 19 Jul 2007

Cool!

Rhigas wrote on 19 Jul 2007

Sorry :(

Leo wrote on 19 Jul 2007

Nice!

Moris wrote on 19 Jul 2007

interesting

Doxiadis wrote on 18 Jul 2007

Interesting...

Markos wrote on 18 Jul 2007

Nice

Lazaros wrote on 18 Jul 2007

Cool!

Kypros wrote on 18 Jul 2007

Cool...

Stefanos wrote on 18 Jul 2007

interesting

Yioryios wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Nice

Haralambos wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Cool...

Evagelos wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Interesting...

Glafkos wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Nice...

Andros wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Nice

Athanasios wrote on 17 Jul 2007

Cool.

Aris wrote on 16 Jul 2007

Interesting...

Bin Laden wrote on 1 Jul 2007

Get a life would you.....

Why not become a communist. You seem to be all for that.

I will say that you really need to be in plotics, you are very good at slanting statistics to your own views

wrote on 25 Jun 2005

wrote on 18 May 2005

wrote on 18 May 2005