The emergency vehicles cannot A) predict where they are going to be needed or B) use only some "correspondingly small" percentage-clear road to arrive at your home from their garage.
In other words, in order for the emergency response function of local government to be met when there is snow on the ground, all of the roads must be kept reasonably clear.
The amount of general funds required to do so is independent of the number of vehicles using the roads, and instead is dependent upon the amount and type of snowfall.
Let's - as a thought experiment - imagine a world wherein it is as you say: the "percentage share" of roadway use engaged by emergency vehicles is calculated, and that percentage of the cost of road clearing is then borne by the city, and no more.
Some questions about that world:
* Who removes the rest of the snow? As has been previously noted, having only some roads made only partially clear fails to be a useful state for emergency response. In order to clear those roads in a timely fashion requires human intervention - waiting for it to melt is not an acceptable answer.
* How much time does it take to remove the rest of the snow?
Making a couple of assumptions - namely that the snow is removed in a timely fashion by private plow-owners.
* Should those individuals be compensated for their time? For their fuel? For vehicle upkeep?
* Where does *that* money come from?
Now, I'm not suggesting that there exists no other model for the solution of the road plowing problem, but I'm curious to know what you actually have in mind. The "pay for the share of traffic" argument is pretty flawed, and I can't imagine that you actually meant that seriously.
Re: More on the list:
The emergency vehicles cannot A) predict where they are going to be needed or B) use only some "correspondingly small" percentage-clear road to arrive at your home from their garage.
In other words, in order for the emergency response function of local government to be met when there is snow on the ground, all of the roads must be kept reasonably clear.
The amount of general funds required to do so is independent of the number of vehicles using the roads, and instead is dependent upon the amount and type of snowfall.
Let's - as a thought experiment - imagine a world wherein it is as you say: the "percentage share" of roadway use engaged by emergency vehicles is calculated, and that percentage of the cost of road clearing is then borne by the city, and no more.
Some questions about that world:
* Who removes the rest of the snow? As has been previously noted, having only some roads made only partially clear fails to be a useful state for emergency response. In order to clear those roads in a timely fashion requires human intervention - waiting for it to melt is not an acceptable answer.
* How much time does it take to remove the rest of the snow?
Making a couple of assumptions - namely that the snow is removed in a timely fashion by private plow-owners.
* Should those individuals be compensated for their time? For their fuel? For vehicle upkeep?
* Where does *that* money come from?
Now, I'm not suggesting that there exists no other model for the solution of the road plowing problem, but I'm curious to know what you actually have in mind. The "pay for the share of traffic" argument is pretty flawed, and I can't imagine that you actually meant that seriously.