What do you think?
Rate this book
Gridlock: Why We're Stuck in Traffic and What to Do About It
Americans are the most mobile society in history, yet our transportation system is on the verge of collapse. Traffic congestion today is five times worse than it was 25 years ago. Many of our bridges are in desperate need of replacement. Worst of all, many transportation planners believe their job is to make congestion worse in order to discourage mobility. Gridlock reveals how we got into this mess and how we can fix it. The United States has two paths before it. Some say we should build an expensive network of high-speed trains and urban rail transit lines that will mainly serve a narrow elite. Gridlock argues instead that we should focus on improving methods of transportation that will increase everyone's mobility and pay for themselves, whether it's cars, buses, planes, or trains.
- GenresHistory
232 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2010
4 people are currently reading
53 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
May 18, 2016
The author provides a thorough review of how transportation has improved humans' well-being and the associated costs of roads and mass transit.
With the cost of public roads essentially no charge at use, there must be rationing through congestion. To eradicate congestion, user fees for using the roads should be implemented. One type is the gas tax, but as the author notes, this is an arcane revenue source as vehicles are more fuel efficient resulting in less gas tax revenue. This will be more apparent with driverless cars.
Until we can get to driverless cars and the associated reduction in congestion, toll roads using congestion pricing is an optimal strategy. Unfortunately, this is not politically popular so it's a difficult sell for politicians working towards their next reelection. However, it should be strongly considered as we move to more private sector activity in transportation and away from inefficient government spending and plans.
This is a good book but a more in-depth analysis of how these market-driven approaches would work is lacking.
With the cost of public roads essentially no charge at use, there must be rationing through congestion. To eradicate congestion, user fees for using the roads should be implemented. One type is the gas tax, but as the author notes, this is an arcane revenue source as vehicles are more fuel efficient resulting in less gas tax revenue. This will be more apparent with driverless cars.
Until we can get to driverless cars and the associated reduction in congestion, toll roads using congestion pricing is an optimal strategy. Unfortunately, this is not politically popular so it's a difficult sell for politicians working towards their next reelection. However, it should be strongly considered as we move to more private sector activity in transportation and away from inefficient government spending and plans.
This is a good book but a more in-depth analysis of how these market-driven approaches would work is lacking.
January 12, 2015
What a frustrating book. As someone who hates urban sprawl and wishes mass transit made economic sense, I really desire that this book weren't accurate.
Sadly it is though. The American people want their cars, their cookie-cutter McMansions, and their ridiculously low-density way of life. And as such, trying to forcé reasonable urban planning onto them just isn't working, as cities across the U.S. are finding out. Even supposed New Urbanism models such as Portland are grave failures. O'Toole's recommendations: more busses and more highways -- are disspiriting, but inarguably correct from an economic standpoint.
Frustrating but spot-on accurate book. 5 begrudging stars.
Sadly it is though. The American people want their cars, their cookie-cutter McMansions, and their ridiculously low-density way of life. And as such, trying to forcé reasonable urban planning onto them just isn't working, as cities across the U.S. are finding out. Even supposed New Urbanism models such as Portland are grave failures. O'Toole's recommendations: more busses and more highways -- are disspiriting, but inarguably correct from an economic standpoint.
Frustrating but spot-on accurate book. 5 begrudging stars.
July 14, 2015
Biased on its face. The book does little to discuss highway improvements beyond advocating for driverless cars. Any possible benefit is coldly described in comparative figures, which even if you could trust them to be accurate in the context they're presented, do not begin to consider the external costs of highway construction. While the author rails against transit receiving subsidies, never is the issue of auto-loan debt ever raised as a comparable issue. The cost of actually owning a vehicle is not considered at all, which tilts all the numbers toward his preferred mode of transportation.
June 2, 2010
Quite disappionting, actually. A book about how to improve our transportation infrastructure written from a libertarian perspective. I was really looking forward to reading this, but it was so zealous in advancing its arguments that it lost all credibility and I had trouble trusting any of the arguments or statistics. Shame.
June 9, 2021
See all notes. User-fee-driven system, and really, why is government involved in local and state transport decisions?
January 17, 2022
Gridlock : Why We’re Stuck in Traffic and What to Do about It (2010) by Randal O’Toole is all about how transport is subsidized and paid for in the US and around the world and how this has led to some perverse outcomes. O’Toole describes himself as someone who loves trains and has indeed owned five carriages at one point but who doesn’t think the government should pay for his hobby. He advocates forms of transport paying for themselves as much as possible and doing a cost-benefit analysis and serious comparison of alternatives that have to be reviewed on transport expansions. The book provides an in depth numerical view of transport’s recent history and current costs.
In the city where I live public transport’s farebox recovery ratio last year was 7.7%. Admittedly this was a bad year for public transport but normally it’s 20% or less. At 7.7% and with a $5 fare this means each trip is costing ~$50 per passenger. Taxis or Uber would be cheaper. It’s also a city of ~450K people with essentially no bad traffic and where less than 10% of trips to work or school are on public transport. The local government is very sensibly adopting work from home policies for their employees, thus recognizing that less transport will be required in future and critically less peak hour transport will be needed. At the same time they are building a multi-billion dollar tram expansion that will be considerably slower than the buses it will replace. It’s this kind of very strange decision that Gridlock examines.
Gridlock starts with a historic overview of how transport has changed since 1800 with the distances people traveled on average, their average speed and what forms of transport they used. O’Toole points out that Americans travel more that most people and sees this mobility as a very good thing, enabling people access to more jobs, more goods and more other people and more recreational opportunities. He also points out that using fossil fuel driven farm equipment meant freeing up a massive amount of pasture and grazing land that was required to feed horses.
Many people who have visited Europe or Japan go to big cities and marvel at the quality of public transport there. O’Toole points out that this is paid for by making petrol taxes high and using they money to massively subsidize public transport. But even then Europeans and most Japanese still travel more by car than on public transport. High speed rail paid for itself on the Tokyo to Osaka line but the expansion and much of European high speed rail has been a costly failure while freight rail has been neglected leading to more trucks on the road.
In Gridlock O’Toole then examines the incentives in the US for public transport companies to try and get more money for trams and trains. He goes on to describe how he has looked over many plans and found them to be severely lacking and often disingenuous. He also points out that the claimed riderships and improvements in traffic rarely eventuate.
Gridlock then recommends that congesting charging be used for roads and the resources generated put back into roads. The same thing is recommended for other forms of transport. In the US this means little change for cars, planes, freight rail and shipping.
Gridlock is a really interesting book that carefully outlines the case for not massively subsidizing forms of transport that cannot generate sufficient revenue to come near covering their own costs.
In the city where I live public transport’s farebox recovery ratio last year was 7.7%. Admittedly this was a bad year for public transport but normally it’s 20% or less. At 7.7% and with a $5 fare this means each trip is costing ~$50 per passenger. Taxis or Uber would be cheaper. It’s also a city of ~450K people with essentially no bad traffic and where less than 10% of trips to work or school are on public transport. The local government is very sensibly adopting work from home policies for their employees, thus recognizing that less transport will be required in future and critically less peak hour transport will be needed. At the same time they are building a multi-billion dollar tram expansion that will be considerably slower than the buses it will replace. It’s this kind of very strange decision that Gridlock examines.
Gridlock starts with a historic overview of how transport has changed since 1800 with the distances people traveled on average, their average speed and what forms of transport they used. O’Toole points out that Americans travel more that most people and sees this mobility as a very good thing, enabling people access to more jobs, more goods and more other people and more recreational opportunities. He also points out that using fossil fuel driven farm equipment meant freeing up a massive amount of pasture and grazing land that was required to feed horses.
Many people who have visited Europe or Japan go to big cities and marvel at the quality of public transport there. O’Toole points out that this is paid for by making petrol taxes high and using they money to massively subsidize public transport. But even then Europeans and most Japanese still travel more by car than on public transport. High speed rail paid for itself on the Tokyo to Osaka line but the expansion and much of European high speed rail has been a costly failure while freight rail has been neglected leading to more trucks on the road.
In Gridlock O’Toole then examines the incentives in the US for public transport companies to try and get more money for trams and trains. He goes on to describe how he has looked over many plans and found them to be severely lacking and often disingenuous. He also points out that the claimed riderships and improvements in traffic rarely eventuate.
Gridlock then recommends that congesting charging be used for roads and the resources generated put back into roads. The same thing is recommended for other forms of transport. In the US this means little change for cars, planes, freight rail and shipping.
Gridlock is a really interesting book that carefully outlines the case for not massively subsidizing forms of transport that cannot generate sufficient revenue to come near covering their own costs.
May 21, 2025
Plainly written and exhaustively researched. Planners and politicians enact anti-mobility policies that make us poorer and more frustrated.
October 13, 2012
The other review/er hit the nail on the head. And more succinctly then my more lengthy review. Disappointing, and the writing so zealous that it just left a sour taste in your mouth rather than any informative or positive effect.
Admittedly, I didn't know much about the book or author before reading and on the surface it looked interesting. Even some of the points made in the book were interesting and I feel worthwhile - to find the most effective solution for end goals by focusing on them rather than the means. But the disdain shown for government here just reminds me of the Family Guy episode "Tea Peter." And the fact that O'Toole works for the Cato Institute that is funded in part by Shell, Exxon and Chevron among others, and also disputes climate change, really shines a light on why perhaps he might be advocating for more roads and cars as the solution to congestion and other transport related problems.
Further, possibly the most frustrating point that I found, was the fact that O'Toole seems to disagree that transport should consider anything other than specific transport related goals of reducing congestion, reducing transport related pollution and energy use, increasing transport safety etc. While these are all important goals, and probably the most relevant when planning transport, transport exists in an ecosystem and wider economy and community - and other interrelations must be considered. This neo-classical economist stance is outdated - the invisible hand does not work, first of all because there are too many externalities not considered in our current economies. But also because it does not consider that an economy exists within the wider world and that is vital to maintain in order to maintain an economy.
I must admit, it was interesting however to read something that differs so considerably from my own point of view. This is because I subscribe to the scientific method as defined in Wikipedia:
"The scientific method (or simply scientific method) is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[2] "
So I'm open to listening to others in order to correct any previous knowledge I may have had or thought I had - but that is dependent on the new information being empirical and having measurable evidence subject to principles of reasoning. If you're not looking at things from a whole system perspective, I find it hard to see the reason and empirical evidence without taking it with a healthy grain of salt.
If you read this book, you should do the same.
Admittedly, I didn't know much about the book or author before reading and on the surface it looked interesting. Even some of the points made in the book were interesting and I feel worthwhile - to find the most effective solution for end goals by focusing on them rather than the means. But the disdain shown for government here just reminds me of the Family Guy episode "Tea Peter." And the fact that O'Toole works for the Cato Institute that is funded in part by Shell, Exxon and Chevron among others, and also disputes climate change, really shines a light on why perhaps he might be advocating for more roads and cars as the solution to congestion and other transport related problems.
Further, possibly the most frustrating point that I found, was the fact that O'Toole seems to disagree that transport should consider anything other than specific transport related goals of reducing congestion, reducing transport related pollution and energy use, increasing transport safety etc. While these are all important goals, and probably the most relevant when planning transport, transport exists in an ecosystem and wider economy and community - and other interrelations must be considered. This neo-classical economist stance is outdated - the invisible hand does not work, first of all because there are too many externalities not considered in our current economies. But also because it does not consider that an economy exists within the wider world and that is vital to maintain in order to maintain an economy.
I must admit, it was interesting however to read something that differs so considerably from my own point of view. This is because I subscribe to the scientific method as defined in Wikipedia:
"The scientific method (or simply scientific method) is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[2] "
So I'm open to listening to others in order to correct any previous knowledge I may have had or thought I had - but that is dependent on the new information being empirical and having measurable evidence subject to principles of reasoning. If you're not looking at things from a whole system perspective, I find it hard to see the reason and empirical evidence without taking it with a healthy grain of salt.
If you read this book, you should do the same.
July 16, 2016
If you, like me, are suffering through the incompetence of WMATA and the inconvenience of SafeTrack, read this book.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews