Cops want it that way.

In the USA, you can follow the average driver on a 10 minute drive and they'll technically commit at least 1 infraction. My FIL got a $90 ticket last month for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign.

The rules of the road are so anally technical so that cops have a valid reason to pull you over whenever they desire. That's it.

The short answer to all your questions is that America specializes in stupid in all kinds of ways. This is one of them.

Because much of your country doesn't enforce speed limits, large portions of your country's population don't believe the Constitution allows speed limit enforcement without reckless driving

1. Why does everyone drive 10-15 miles above the speed limit?

Because speed limits are designed for the largest, clunkiest vehicles on the road (semi trucks, specifically). If they can't handle the road at a certain speed, then the speed limit is dropped to a level that can be comfortably driven by them.

This means that the average car can drive comfortably 10-15 MPH faster than the posted limit. And a lot of drivers feel that desire to drive faster.

Also, I don't know if it's still a thing, but in my childhood (roughly the '90s), cops wouldn't pull you over for speeding unless you were going at least 10 MPH over the limit. The reason being, the speed detector equipment they used had about a 10 MPH margin of error. If they pulled you over for driving 7 MPH over the limit, you could argue in court that their equipment was faulty and you were being unfairly assessed. You could sew seeds of doubt and get the traffic ticket stricken down. So cops just didn't bother unless you could be positively identified, without a doubt, as speeding.

I don't know if the accuracy of their equipment has improved since then, but the mentality back in the day was that you had some leeway with how fast you were driving, leading to people driving faster than the limit in most places.

2. Why don't we raise the speed limit if that's how fast everyone wants to go?

Because it risks all vehicles - including semis, RVs, delivery trucks, etc. - driving too fast for their large, heavy, awkward bodies to handle. Then they become a hazard on the road. You ever see a semi tip over because it took a corner too fast? If you're in a car next to it, you're pretty much toast.

It's like queueing in line. Sure, it would be faster to crowd toward the front, but you're pushing people out of the way; people who may have been there first and deserve a turn before you. And depending on how aggressively they're crowded out, it may become hazardous for some people.

In the interest of fairness, everyone queues and respects the line, so the system stays safe and orderly. Same with speed limits. Everyone is expected to stick to the limit so ALL traffic on roads are safe and orderly. But sometimes, people are people and will do whatever they want, even at the expense of their fellow human beings.

3. Why is traffic enforcement given to very expensive and ineffective police instead of cheaper and more automated traffic cameras?

This is a discussion that's been going on for decades now. I know traffic cams are set up in some European countries and work pretty well, but here in America, historically, we've had a thing against being recorded publicly. Traffic cams haven't taken off here because the idea of a small camera recording data about our cars without our knowledge freaks us out.

Heck, we had to create entrapment laws to prevent cops from hiding while checking speed limits. If you watch old cop movies, they'll sit behind billboards and catch speeders who fly by. That's illegal in the US nowadays; cops have to be out in the open and visible if they're going to watch traffic for speeding. It gives a fair chance for drivers to check their speed and adjust before the cop records them speeding and gives them a ticket.

But most people will miss a camera in the wild. There's no chance to argue a speeding incident in the moment. You get a ticket in the mail a few days later, then need to think back to that day and try to remember where you were and what speed you were going. You can fight it in court, but good luck having any evidence to counter a camera, unless you were recording the interior of your vehicle that day.

With all that said, Flock cameras sprouted practically overnight here in the US and have set off distopian levels of surveillance paranoia. Especially since their setup was so fast that no laws or safety measures have been respected in their usage and the system is already being abused to watch and track people in unprofessional capacities. We kind of skipped the whole traffic cam issue and went straight to 1984 levels of public surveillance. So we'll see how that plays out over the next few years.

4. Why do we refuse to ever use ANY traffic calming measures?

What kind of traffic calming measures do you have in mind? You mentioned the flashing speed limit signs, but that's not going to stop some people. Speeders are gonna speed. It's just human nature. The system we have is ineffective in a grand scale, but it works as a mental deterrent for most people. The fear of being pulled over by a cop for speeding keeps a lot of drivers in line.

I once drove in the small African country of Djibouti, where the government had to post signs every mile to remind drivers which side of the road they should be driving on. Driving education was available, but most people just hopped in a car and took off; no license or training. There were accidents every couple miles. Trucks flipped over and abandoned on almost every sharp corner. Potholes so big you might lose a car in them.

The system in America isn't perfect, but it's a whole lot better than it could be. You're never going to stop people from speeding, even if we did set up cameras everywhere.

My final thought on the whole matter is that speeding tickets should be based on a percentage of annual income. Say, 5% or so. Because a flat rate for speeding is just a punishment for poor people. Rich folks can afford to pay a fine with what amounts to pocket change for them, so there's no incentive for them to correct the behavior. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was Steve Jobs who refused to get a driver's license or plates for his car or something? Every time he got pulled over, he just paid the fine and continued on with what he was doing. Meanwhile, someone living paycheck to paycheck is going to have their life ruined by a fine. If you ask me, making fines a flat percentage rate is the first step to curbing bad driving practices. Punish people fairly across the board.

Why does everyone drive 10-15 miles above the speed limit?

Because speed limits are not strictly enforced

Why don’t we raise the speed limit if that’s how fast everyone wants to go?

Because if that happens that any per-textual stop the police want to do needs an another actual crime being committed before they can stop you.

Why is traffic enforcement given to very expensive and ineffective police instead of cheaper and more automated traffic cameras?

I reject the premise. Traffic enforcement isn't very ineffective because the majority of people aren't driving 50+ MPH over the speed limit. Also, its not that expensive because your premise suggests that if we had cameras, we'd need fewer police. I don't think that's the case. When an emergency response is needed we need X number of police to respond. Therefore X number need to be employed and on shift at all times. If we have the expense of traffic cameras, its not going to reduce headcount below X, and we now have the additional expense of purchase, install, and maintenance of all those traffic cameras. The cameras have an headcount overhead of staff of their own.

Traffic cameras also introduce mistakes of their own including misreading plates, or thieves using stolen/copied plates, which would otherwise ensnare innocent citizens.

It’s a serious confusion I have about how society is supposed to operate because it seems like a complete and total breakdown of logic and sense.

I think you're looking at the rules and assuming the logical outcome is the desired result. Change your mindset. The desired result is what happens when human society is given a set of rules and reacts to them. The reaction is the actual desired result. The set of rules is simply one step to get there. In short, humans aren't 100% logical nor are they 100% rule following, knowing that, you establish a set of rules that you know will have some violation and you account for that in rules.

First off you are wrong. I for instance, drive the speed limit.

Secondly, because whatever limit you set, some people will speed, even if it kills them.

Many speed limits are set so that you can still drive the road in adverse conditions. If they chose to ignore that and kill themselves, well then, I hope they enjoy their Darwin Award.

The best illustrations is the current usa situation were about 40% support trump even as he destroys their livelihood and bulldozers the White House.

You will always get a large percent of people who are self destructive, selfish, ignorant and abusive, had a toxic childhood and grew up to be toxic adults.

I had a friend once who rescued a lady who put her car in a ditch driving to fast for the icy conditions. The moment he got her out, she sped off down the road, going way too fast and weaving all over the place.

You can't cure stupid. Just obey the speed limit and try and stay out of the crazy people's way.

1. Psychology — our minds are thinking about what we do next, so the present is regularly seen as an impediment to getting to the future — our destination. If we speed, we are able to do things we want to do next, sooner. After which we will rush to do the thing after that.

2. Physics — the roads are built according to how curvy the land underneath them is, and according to how much reaction time you need to respond to changes on the road — for example due to weather. Most people speeding are decreasing their calculated and often legislated margin of safety.

3. Economics — automatic enforcement is not necessarily cheaper — and when it is deployed, people just learn where it’s deployed and stop breaking the law in that one place. In many places traffic fines pay for public services, so you don’t actually want to stop the behavior outright, you just want to catch the people in the act.

4. Economics — safety isn’t the only constraint on speed — travel time is important. People tend to do more ecologically important things when they arrive compared to when they travel. Significantly slowing everyone down would have a measurable impact.

Meanwhile Ireland:

1. Go fast

2. Go faster

3. Allows for invasive searching that cannot be performed by a static object

4. Go fast but circle means slow

Thanks for attending my TED Talk.

Because we are very weird about our collective/individual sense of entitlement.

You really wanna start digging into that? it’s fucking bananas.

Because life is better when rules aren't draconian and cruel.

1. Gotta go fast.
2. They technically shouldn’t be going that fast, probably for safety reasons not obvious at all times.
3. Cameras have flaws that are solved with an officer handling it. If someone is borrowing your car and speeding you get the camera ticket vs if an officer stopped them your friend would.
4. Gotta go fast.

Why don’t we raise the speed limit if that’s how fast everyone wants to go?

Why don't we give guns to teenagers because it's fun? Oh, they do in the USA, it's still the stupidest idea ever.