U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-23-2018, 11:51 AM
 
1,252 posts, read 544,568 times
Reputation: 1052

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
Don't the big companies here subsidize transit passes? Now that's probably not the case for smaller employers.
The only one I successfully had do that was ASA Delta Airlines and it was ONLY because they did not want to validate parking at the Airport.

No one else did. (IBM, Hewlett Packard, AirWatch, UPS, NCR, ect)

 
Old 06-23-2018, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
4,873 posts, read 3,195,906 times
Reputation: 4100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
The only one I successfully had do that was ASA Delta Airlines and it was ONLY because they did not want to validate parking at the Airport.

No one else did. (IBM, Hewlett Packard, AirWatch, UPS, NCR, ect)
I've worked Downtown and at Perimeter before I became home-based, and both jobs paid my full monthly transit cost. There are a lot of companies here that subsidize transit.

And you can't compare commuter rail to MARTA. None of the systems you mentioned go to their cities Airports, and MARTA has been ranked as one of the top Airport connections anywhere. We haven't driven to the Airport in years, and you never factored in the cost of parking.

And while the Sounder in Seattle is a great asset, their ridership and frequency are a joke for the size of Puget Sound.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 12:59 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 544,568 times
Reputation: 1052
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
I've worked Downtown and at Perimeter before I became home-based, and both jobs paid my full monthly transit cost. There are a lot of companies here that subsidize transit.
None of the jobs I've worked anywhere in the metro besides Delta covered mine..and I've worked for several large employers companies around the Metro... Its easy to say that several companies pay for it, but in the grand scheme of all employers within the metro, only a fraction of them do, with your greatest odds of getting it covered being working in Downtown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
And you can't compare commuter rail to MARTA.
I compared the two because like for like, Commuter rail ALWAYS costs more to ride, regardless of what circumstance, they're simply put more expensive. Saying that, a Commuter Rail in Seattle traveling twice the distance of MARTA for half the cost would be embarrassing on MARTA's behalf...sorry no getting around that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
None of the systems you mentioned go to their cities Airports, and MARTA has been ranked as one of the top Airport connections anywhere. We haven't driven to the Airport in years, and you never factored in the cost of parking.
Did you read the whole post? Or did you stop at Seattle?... I mentioned several other cities besides Seattle with HRT with comparable or even cheaper pricing than MARTA all of which service their major airports:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
And while the Sounder in Seattle is a great asset, their ridership and frequency are a joke for the size of Puget Sound.
Atlanta has a much higher population than Seattle (thus more ridership potential), don't look at ridership numbers...look at percentages of the population who actually uses it... Seattle has a 20% ridership census, Atlanta has a 9%...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...nsit_ridership

Edit: Actually I take that back, In terms of the actual Sounder TRAIN, you are correct, MARTA rail does have more Ridership, but MARTA rail also covers a bit more of the city than the Sounder Rail as well, The Sounder is really only convenient if you live near it.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
4,873 posts, read 3,195,906 times
Reputation: 4100
Quote:
Did you read the whole post? Or did you stop at Seattle?... I mentioned several other cities besides Seattle with HRT with comparable or even cheaper pricing than MARTA all of which service their major airports:
Oh, I read your entire post. Yet again, you are comparing and confusing Commuter Rail with Metro type systems such as MARTA. They are totally different. You were thrashing Atlanta for not having Commuter Rail, now you have switched things up to include Heavy Rail.

Quote:
Atlanta has a much higher population than Seattle (thus more ridership potential), don't look at ridership numbers...look at percentages of the population who actually uses it... Seattle has a 20% ridership census, Atlanta has a 9%...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...nsit_ridership

Edit: Actually I take that back, In terms of the actual Sounder TRAIN, you are correct, MARTA rail does have more Ridership, but MARTA rail also covers a bit more of the city than the Sounder Rail as well, The Sounder is really only convenient if you live near it.
Seattle's transit ridership is more than ours because people are more comfortable with buses there. Show me any East Coast metro that does the same. You can't.

And I don't really care if you haven't experienced employers here that don't subsidize transit. It's common not only Downtown, but in Midtown, Buckhead and the Perimeter whether you believe it or not.

Most people aren't required to regularly drive between Gwinnett and Griffin like you were when you lived here either.

By the way, how's the transit in the fabulous Austin, LOL! The traffic there is just as bad as here, in a Metro area less than half the size.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 02:18 PM
bu2
 
9,260 posts, read 5,934,125 times
Reputation: 3689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
The only one I successfully had do that was ASA Delta Airlines and it was ONLY because they did not want to validate parking at the Airport.

No one else did. (IBM, Hewlett Packard, AirWatch, UPS, NCR, ect)
Interesting. I remember in Houston pretty much all the big employers subsidized transit passes.

Sounds like the ARC or at least the Dekalb/Fulton/Clayton commissioners needs to get together a meeting of the major employers and push that.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 02:20 PM
bu2
 
9,260 posts, read 5,934,125 times
Reputation: 3689
Similarly, they need to get together and quit subsidization of parking in the major employment centers.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 02:33 PM
 
10,142 posts, read 7,137,613 times
Reputation: 3132
N4C, If driving really is the cheaper way for people to get to / from the airport then great.

I can see the argument for wanting to subsidize transit since it is more environmentally friendly, healthier, and gets people off the road. We certainly need to adjust the way we price highways. No one can really tell you how it costs for a 20 mile drive down a highway because we have hidden and subsidized basically in its entirety.

I am advocating that the true costs are better reflected in both transit and cars and let the people make the choice that way. If driving is still the most cost effective method for you after that, then good for you. I have no problem with that. I really don't think $10 fare vs $2.50 fare is going to make that Forsyth business traveller decide between MARTA to the airport or not. But that extra revenue being enough to cover increase train frequency or additional police certainly might. On the flip side having to pay tolls for the real costs of highways might give him some perspective on how good a deal a $10 MARTA ride really is.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 03:12 PM
 
2,123 posts, read 495,432 times
Reputation: 2368
AT&T reimburses transit/parking up to a total of $250 a month.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 05:22 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 544,568 times
Reputation: 1052
I'm going to try to be respectful about this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
Oh, I read your entire post. Yet again, you are comparing and confusing Commuter Rail with Metro type systems such as MARTA. They are totally different. You were thrashing Atlanta for not having Commuter Rail, now you have switched things up to include Heavy Rail.
I switched nothing up. Please re-read and see the bolded and refer to my original post...you will see the bolded is all there. You skipped the rest after seeing commuter rail which I even noted in the post those were commuter rail variants, I included the heavy rail and their fares after that commentary and bolded them in the direct quote from my own post below. Also asside from that, they ARE comparable in the sense that in every major city where both are employed, commuter rails are always more expensive. If a commuter rail which covers more distance than MARTA costs less to use than MARTA...something is wrong with that picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
&



Sorry but I have to disagree. Although I do agree MARTA should imply distance based fares, $20 to the airport is excessive. $10 for one person round trip should be the absolute max and I will show you by comparing to fares across the country. $20 to take a train to the airport, its cheaper to drive...much cheaper, sorry but I can get to the Airport and back to Gwinnett with about $15 in fuel fairly easily.

The distance between Doraville and the Airport is aproximately 25 miles which is hardly anything in the scope of transit.

The Sounder for example is a commuter rail system, by default should cost more to use, but the trip from Lakewood Washington to Seattle Washington (approximately 50 miles by rail) only costs $5.75 one way.
https://www.soundtransit.org/Fares-a.../Sounder-fares

Then there's METRA in Chicago which goes a GREAT distance further than the Gold Line (the longest line is aproximately twice the length)... and the highest Fare for the longest ride is $11 one way, or basically alittle over $22 round trip, thats WITHOUT a transit pass.

Paying for Your Ride
https://metrarail.com/maps-schedules/system-map

Both of these are commuter rail variants which are known to cost a good bit more than heavy rail to use as well. In heavy rail comparisons

The Chicago CTA EL train also only costs $2.50 one way, and also covers a great deal more distance than MARTA does.

https://www.transitchicago.com/fares/

Same goes for Washington D.C.
https://washington.org/navigating-dc-metro


And even New York City....



MTA/New York City Transit - Fares and MetroCard




I'm not seeing how driving any further or not is costing the city or state a penny more, but even if it were, longer drives require more fuel and thus are already funded by gas tax.

Increase the cost of using MARTA to $10, most people will begin to drive again. Most people don't use Mass Transit because its an efficient people mover, but because its an economical way to reach their destination and sometimes to avoid traffic.



Don't count on it. I've only had one employer in my entire work career that subsidized / paid for MARTA trips.

The bolded are all HEAVY RAIL variants, not commuter rail... all costing the same or less than MARTA.

The Commuter Rail was used as a loose reference based on the fact that in ALL cases, Commuter Rail is more expensive than Heavy Rail -- If a Commuter Rail travels more distance and costs less than a MARTA heavy rail (of which by my case would make MARTA the most expensive Heavy Rail in the nation) there's simply no excuse..

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
Seattle's transit ridership is more than ours because people are more comfortable with buses there. Show me any East Coast metro that does the same. You can't.
Seattle does have good busses, but there's other reasons besides that. Sounder does not run all day like MARTA rail does. They only run during commute hours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
And I don't really care if you haven't experienced employers here that don't subsidize transit. It's common not only Downtown, but in Midtown, Buckhead and the Perimeter whether you believe it or not.
I'm failing to see how this makes your opinion hold any more weight than my own. Your concern or lack of it over my experiences is irrelevant, you have no evidence here that can truly "justify" your point over my own. You can say what you want, but so can I...both of us have different experiences when it comes to the point of MARTA subsidies, I've never seen them...I'm sure they're there..but after working through most of the metro, I would personally call it an exaggeration to believe most companies are willing to subsidize MARTA fare. The only probable location where it happens is Downtown, where believe it or not, most commuters do not work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
Most people aren't required to regularly drive between Gwinnett and Griffin like you were when you lived here either.
I don't commute to Griffin for work in a 9x5 sense, although lately more than not... I have investment properties in South Atlanta that I still own and am selling. Before I left Atlanta I was fortunate to work nights only and commute within Gwinnett. My main frustrations with traffic were when I had to go someplace other than work. Before I started my job in Gwinnett I also worked nights and commuted to North Fulton, and when I started that job I worked days, days driving to North Fulton even from Gwinnett... are not fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
By the way, how's the transit in the fabulous Austin, LOL! The traffic there is just as bad as here, in a Metro area less than half the size.
Austin is a city of approximately 2 million and already has more alternative routes than most of the Metro Atlanta of nearly 7 million does... apples and oranges. I don't have much hope in the way of Austin getting anything serious for transit either though...They do have a fair amount of bus coverage and one rail line but its nothing serious...but at its current size, its understandable... As far as traffic, I can clear Austin in about 45 minutes on a bad day. It takes about 2 hours to clear Atlanta on a bad day. My current commute is only about 7 miles and even during rush hour can be done is about 10 - 15 minutes. Usually never taking longer than 15.

And Austin Traffic is still nothing in comparison's to Atlanta...who's currently placing #8 in the worlds most congested cities where as Austin isn't even on the first page.

Last edited by Need4Camaro; 06-23-2018 at 05:53 PM..
 
Old 06-23-2018, 05:50 PM
 
1,252 posts, read 544,568 times
Reputation: 1052
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsvh View Post
N4C, If driving really is the cheaper way for people to get to / from the airport then great.

I can see the argument for wanting to subsidize transit since it is more environmentally friendly, healthier, and gets people off the road. We certainly need to adjust the way we price highways. No one can really tell you how it costs for a 20 mile drive down a highway because we have hidden and subsidized basically in its entirety.

I am advocating that the true costs are better reflected in both transit and cars and let the people make the choice that way. If driving is still the most cost effective method for you after that, then good for you. I have no problem with that. I really don't think $10 fare vs $2.50 fare is going to make that Forsyth business traveller decide between MARTA to the airport or not. But that extra revenue being enough to cover increase train frequency or additional police certainly might. On the flip side having to pay tolls for the real costs of highways might give him some perspective on how good a deal a $10 MARTA ride really is.
Honestly its difficult to say. I personally wouldn't use MARTA if I had to pay $10 for it even if the highway was slower because at the minimum, I get the privacy and freedom of my own vehicle for less money than it would cost me to use MARTA round trip. In a sense I see your point about making MARTA safer and using the funds to improve it but... on the other side, if MARTA lost subsidization and it were paid entirely by commuters, are you certain the extra funds would really go toward improvements versus the maintenance and upkeep of the system since they no longer would have anything supporting them? Im thinking the only thing this may accomplish is taking tax off of people who don't use the system and off the government as well. You see basically...It may improve the system (and thats a maybe at best...) but I don't see how it would encourage more ridership... Even if it were expanded it would become more or less like something people may use only once in awhile.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top