Rob -
<blockquote> I suspect the math behind your numbers is highly subject to debate especially the supposed increase in health care costs.</blockquote>
Of course. These are very complex matters.
</blockquote>Construction of infrastructure in order to promote or support business expansion is not considered a subsidy. </blockquote>
The question is whether they are "de-facto subsidies," in particular with respect to the cost of gasoline. Would gasoline costs be higher if the construction of roads were not socialized? Now there are user fees for operating vehicles that help pay for the infrastructural costs, but every analysis I've seen finds them to be insufficient to cover the entire cost.
</blockquote>The localities that actually fund the construction of said infrastructure go through an economic analysis to determine whether the additional tax revenues generated by the business will be adequate to fund the investment in the infrastructure over the long term. That really is not a subsidy, but a long term investment by the city or State. All of these “investments” do not turn out well, but the analysis is pretty simple.</blockquote>
Perhaps not so simple. I would say that even if we take all those that "turn out well," there are choices made that are relevant to gasoline costs. Investment in public transportation can have a very significant stimulative effect on businesses and subsequent tax revenues. When federal or state or local funds are spent on maintaining automobile infrastructure, there are opportunity costs (related to the question of spending on public transportation) that may or may not then be reflected back into the cost of gasoline. In other words, if we had spent more federal/state/local dollars in this country on public transportation, relative to the amount spent on automobile infrastructure, we might get the same stimulative effects with a lower cost of public transportation and a higher cost of gasoline, along with a better ratio of positive to negative externalities.
One man's "investment" is another man's "boondoggle."
At any rate - I don't see how people can seriously discuss the cost of gasoline in the U.S. without attempting to address these issues comprehensively.