Atlanta’s relationship with the automobile is reaching a crossroads. (to eat, friendly)

[arjay57]

It would be nice if the folks who are always trying to "get us out of our cars" would realize that many of us may not want to be gotten out of our cars. We are not morons, we just like our cars, and the convenience and freedom they give us.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It would be nice if the folks who are always trying to "get us out of our cars" would realize that many of us may not want to be gotten out of our cars. We are not morons, we just like our cars, and the convenience and freedom they give us.

You act like people are forcing you out of your car at gun point.

All that is really happening is trying to scale back the subsidies and encouragement of driving and offering more realistic alternatives for people who choose not to drive.

Drive all you want. We just don't need to be encouraging more of it. There are already plenty of people clogging up our roads.

[ddm2k]

Originally Posted by jsvh

You act like people are forcing you out of your car at gun point.

All that is really happening is trying to scale back the subsidies and encouragement of driving and offering more realistic alternatives for people who choose not to drive.

Drive all you want. We just don't need to be encouraging more of it. There are already plenty of people clogging up our roads.

Pushing employers to allow more employees to work from home is a better solution IMHO.

"Scaling back the subsidies and encouragement of driving" is synonymous with imposing penalties.

I am not aware of any "subsidies" I get for driving my car.

[stoxdiamond]

The pro-driving folks on this thread should be in favor of better transit and funding to it. A better transit system directly benefits them by removing cars from the road. It makes people's driving experience better, decreases wear on the roads, have fewer car accidents, and reduces pollution.

By giving those that need it a GOOD alternative mode of transportation, you are also less likely to get crashed into by an uninsured motorist driving a piece of junk. This is good for insurance premiums.

Yes MARTA is not great and inconvenient for most people RIGHT NOW, but taking funding away from transit will make it worse and force more people to drive and contribute to bad traffic and make the experience for all drivers even worse than it already is. Drivers should be in favor of any initiative that gets OTHER DRIVERS off the road.

The hardcore libertarian viewpoint of "I don't use transit so funding for it should be 0" is incorrect here because removing people from cars benefits everyone, from drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and homeowners. One again, no one is being forced out of their cars. Better transit will allow those who don't wish to drive to not have to.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by stoxdiamond

The pro-driving folks on this thread should be in favor of better transit and funding to it. A better transit system directly benefits them by removing cars from the road. It makes people's driving experience better, decreases wear on the roads, have fewer car accidents, and reduces pollution.

By giving those that need it a GOOD alternative mode of transportation, you are also less likely to get crashed into by an uninsured motorist driving a piece of junk. This is good for insurance premiums.

Yes MARTA is not great and inconvenient for most people RIGHT NOW, but taking funding away from transit will make it worse and force more people to drive and contribute to bad traffic and make the experience for all drivers even worse than it already is. Drivers should be in favor of any initiative that gets OTHER DRIVERS off the road.

The hardcore libertarian viewpoint of "I don't use transit so funding for it should be 0" is incorrect here because removing people from cars benefits everyone, from drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and homeowners. One again, no one is being forced out of their cars. Better transit will allow those who don't wish to drive to not have to.

I am not suggesting we take funding away from transit. Most of us are already sending MARTA a hefty check and we've been doing it for 50 years. The amount just went up by 50% and we'll be paying that for the next 50 years, too.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by stoxdiamond

The pro-driving folks on this thread should be in favor of better transit and funding to it. A better transit system directly benefits them by removing cars from the road. It makes people's driving experience better, decreases wear on the roads, have fewer car accidents, and reduces pollution.

By giving those that need it a GOOD alternative mode of transportation, you are also less likely to get crashed into by an uninsured motorist driving a piece of junk. This is good for insurance premiums.

Yes MARTA is not great and inconvenient for most people RIGHT NOW, but taking funding away from transit will make it worse and force more people to drive and contribute to bad traffic and make the experience for all drivers even worse than it already is. Drivers should be in favor of any initiative that gets OTHER DRIVERS off the road.

Agreed, and I think everyone wants more better transit alternatives. The issue is you have a handful of fringe anti-car nuts in here who think the way to do this is to punish drivers and/or remove all public planning and funding for improvements to our road network.

Many making whole arguments suggesting that transit is more deserving of subsidies. We need more and better transit options AND we need to improve our road infrastructure and arguments in the extreme that don't want this to balance is why we have this silly bickering going on.

Originally Posted by stoxdiamond

The hardcore libertarian viewpoint of "I don't use transit so funding for it should be 0" is incorrect here because removing people from cars benefits everyone, from drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and homeowners. One again, no one is being forced out of their cars. Better transit will allow those who don't wish to drive to not have to.

It's the self-proclaimed libertarians in here who want all subsidies to go to mass transit vs road improvements. Absolutely no on the forum disagrees we need more transit option including commuter rail.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

Pushing employers to allow more employees to work from home is a better solution IMHO.

"Scaling back the subsidies and encouragement of driving" is synonymous with imposing penalties.

I am not aware of any "subsidies" I get for driving my car.

Unfortunately, the studies are tending to show people on average are more productive in the office, so employers are starting to push back against that.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by ddm2k

I am not aware of any "subsidies" I get for driving my car.

Yeah, a key problem is most drivers aren't aware of the subsidies that are making driving artificially appear to be the cheaper choice.

Take this massive new Emory midtown deck as an example. It is being spun as there is obviously demand for it since the other deck is filling up. However, I have family that works for Emory and they get their parking for free. If they stared charging the $100+ a month to all users that is really reflective of the costs of this deck then some workers might consider other alternatives. And that is just the tip of the parking iceberg all that free parking is not really free.

Next ask yourself how much you are paying for the roads on a five mile drive in metro Atlanta. For MARTA it is $2.50 and basically all transit systems it it pretty obvious what you are directly paying when you ride. But no one can tell you how much you paid to drive through that new non-tolled billion dollar highway interchange.

Seriously, I assume you do your car commute every day. Can you tell me how much that one-way commute is costing you? How much money stays in your pocket if you work from home one day?

For MARTA I can tell you it is $2.12 and a half each way because I buy the $42.50 discounted 20-fare set.

Now the amount of the subsidy is a separate discussion. Just like how much is the subsidy on the $2 hot dog at Mercedes Benz stadium? But we do know it is $2 directly out of your pocket and that "fan-first" pricing has resulted in a 3X increase in concessions sales at MBS. How much of an increase in driving do we really want to be encouraging? If people are given more direct information about the true costs of each trip they are driving such as knowing they directly have to pay a $10 toll to drive five miles into the city and $15 to park many people will more seriously reconsider their options in how they get around. And that is a good thing.

[Otakumaster]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Yeah, a key problem is most drivers aren't aware of the subsidies that are making driving artificially appear to be the cheaper choice.

Take this massive new Emory midtown deck as an example. It is being spun as there is obviously demand for it since the other deck is filling up. However, I have family that works for Emory and they get their parking for free. If they stared charging the $100+ a month to all users that is really reflective of the costs of this deck then some workers might consider other alternatives. And that is just the tip of the parking iceberg all that free parking is not really free.

Next ask yourself how much you are paying for the roads on a five mile drive in metro Atlanta. For MARTA it is $2.50 and basically all transit systems it it pretty obvious what you are directly paying when you ride. But no one can tell you how much you paid to drive through that new non-tolled billion dollar highway interchange.

Seriously, I assume you do your car commute every day. Can you tell me how much that one-way commute is costing you? How much money stays in your pocket if you work from home one day?

For MARTA I can tell you it is $2.12 and a half each way because I buy the $42.50 discounted 20-fare set.

Now the amount of the subsidy is a separate discussion. Just like how much is the subsidy on the $2 hot dog at Mercedes Benz stadium? But we do know it is $2 directly out of your pocket and that "fan-first" pricing has resulted in a 3X increase in concessions sales at MBS. How much of an increase in driving do we really want to be encouraging? If people are given more direct information about the true costs of each trip they are driving such as knowing they directly have to pay a $10 toll to drive five miles into the city and $15 to park many people will more seriously reconsider their options in how they get around. And that is a good thing.

You think the true cost of 5 miles on Marta only cost $2.50? Lol.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Otakumaster

You think the true cost of 5 miles on Marta only cost $2.50? Lol.

Do you think the true cost of a hot dog at MBS is $2?

The true cost of MARTA to my pocket is $2.50. So every time someone considers a MARTA ride is worth it, they ask themselves is that trip worth $5 round trip.

You cannot tell me what a five mile trip is worth in your car. You cannot even have a real discussion about subsidies if you cannot even figure out what you are paying out of pocket to do your commute every day. Let alone if it is worth it to drive five miles further down the road to save $5 dollars on a purchase. If I am taking MARTA I will just save the time and pay the extra $5 at the store across the street instead of going across town because I know how much MARTA costs me.

Your out of pocket car costs are so subsidized most people think they are basically free. Yet when they are faced with a $40 bill for a five mile Uber ride (from an under paid driver and company bleeding money) they go on an on about how affordable it is. At what price can you say: "yep, taking this alternative is going to save me money over driving". You can't so you just lock yourself into car dependency and drive everywhere.

That should show just how disconnected people are from the subsidized costs of driving. People don't even have a clue what it costs them to drive a trip they do every single day.