Cincinnati Streetcars (Canton, Findlay, Washington: closing, restaurant, to eat)

[austiNati]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

Federal highway system is funded by user fees. Please read a little about DOT before embarrassing yourself.

What about highways that aren't interstates? And I'm sure you'd have to pay a fee to ride the streetcar, just like you have to pay a fee to drive on I-80/90.

[jjakucyk]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

Federal highway system is funded by user fees. Please read a little about DOT before embarrassing yourself.

No...it...is...NOT.

At BEST, i.e. even stripping out the diversion of user fee money (mostly gas taxes) to other uses, those fees still only cover 2/3 of the operational and maintenance costs of highways. I already showed this in another thread (History of Local Rail Transportation), using the Federal Highway Administration's own data. That is also ONLY for federal and state operated highways. Nearly all local roads, which make up the VAST majority of the road network are 100% funded out of non-user fees, which come mainly from local property and payroll taxes.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by austiNati

What about highways that aren't interstates? And I'm sure you'd have to pay a fee to ride the streetcar, just like you have to pay a fee to drive on I-80/90.

If you can't see the difference between a public street and the toy streetcar, I have no need to argue with you.

[austiNati]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

If you can't see the difference between a public street and the toy streetcar, I have no need to argue with you.

Dude, we pay for public streets don't we ??? Is the streetcar not a public service? Are you arguing for me? And really, why don't you like mass transit? I just want to know why lol.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by austiNati

Dude, we pay for public streets don't we ??? Is the streetcar not a public service? Are you arguing for me? And really, why don't you like mass transit? I just want to know why lol.

Dude, the toy streetcar is not "mass transit." It is a novelty entertainment facility that its promoters claim will fascinate people with Cincinnati. They are wrong.

I support mass transit. We have the system we need for the next 20 years or so, surface buses. Eventually, personal cars will be publicly controlled on highways. Anyone who can;t see that has their head in the sand. Trains are technology of the last century.

Read something from someone other than the promoters of these stupid trains. Try this:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp113.pdf

[jjakucyk]

Streetcars, trains, airplanes, and automobiles are ALL 19th century technologies, yet somehow that's ok for cars but not for trains and streetcars? They've all advanced significantly as time has progressed, and they all have their place in the transportation hierarchy. Buses serve a purpose, yes, but streetcars are the next step up to better service and higher capacity. Their value for revitalizing neighborhoods, fostering more efficient land use, and improving the tax base of the city has been proven around the US and in many other countries. That's the whole point, spurring redevelopment in Over-the-Rhine by making it more accessible to downtown and uptown. The added property tax revenue from that redevelopment will easily pay for the streetcar's operating subsidy and then some, putting the city in a better financial position. How is that a bad thing?

[Cincy-Rise]

The cutest $350,000,000 investment I've ever seen in my life! BRING IT!!!

http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~tshields/ponies.jpg (broken link)

[austiNati]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

Dude, the toy streetcar is not "mass transit." It is a novelty entertainment facility that its promoters claim will fascinate people with Cincinnati. They are wrong.

I support mass transit. We have the system we need for the next 20 years or so, surface buses. Eventually, personal cars will be publicly controlled on highways. Anyone who can;t see that has their head in the sand. Trains are technology of the last century.

Read something from someone other than the promoters of these stupid trains. Try this:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp113.pdf

If we can't even build a national hi speed rail network, what makes you think we can have expressways like in 'Minority Report' and 'I Robot' ? You'd have to alternate far too much infrastructure to support that. Why completely engineer the walkability out of society?

Yes, the streetcar is a form of mass transit. It's just the first phase of a much larger vision. You have to start with the core and then branch out. A future rapid transit system wouldn't solely revolve around the streetcar, it would incorporate other forms of light rail and possibly commuter rail. It frustrates me when people say this is "The street car to no where" !!! Seriously, downtown and uptown/CUF are the only places in this city of immediate interest if you look from an outsiders perspective or as a whole. The objective isn't only to serve people that live in these areas, but also to attract new residents as well. Yes, there are people that are attracted to living near or in transit oriented developments. Places like Chicago, NY and Atlanta aren't unique to this phenomenon. It's really not that hard to understand, and the animosity towards it makes it seem like a bigger deal than it really is (in a bad way).

Do we need to improve our expressways? Yes. A more sustainable bus system? Yes. Another option for transportation? Yes.

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by wilson1010

Trains are technology of the last century.

Please show one fact that dismisses the laws of physics that recommend steel wheel on steel rail.

Mag-lev is still far too expensive and costly to operate in comparison to electric traction rail.

In a finite resource world, with a fixed budget, wisdom leads us to select modes that move the most for the least cost. . . if only government had not skewed everything with interlocking subsidies and interest groups.

The most efficient mode of land transport is still electric traction rail. It consumes the least fuel / power, requires the least amount of surface area, emits far less pollutants, and can scale up in capacity far better than paved roads.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by jetgraphics

Please show one fact that dismisses the laws of physics that recommend steel wheel on steel rail.

Mag-lev is still far too expensive and costly to operate in comparison to electric traction rail.

In a finite resource world, with a fixed budget, wisdom leads us to select modes that move the most for the least cost. . . if only government had not skewed everything with interlocking subsidies and interest groups.

The most efficient mode of land transport is still electric traction rail. It consumes the least fuel / power, requires the least amount of surface area, emits far less pollutants, and can scale up in capacity far better than paved roads.

But you are advocating only Engineering and physical principles as reasons to build trains. It has been a long time since fundamental facts were the basis to construct a business. In today's world everyone is looking for government subsidies, long term tax abatements, and anything else they can get from the public dole to do business. While it may be considered smart business, it no longer is private business as they are dependent on the public (taxpayers) money.

Our major businesses make huge mistakes and then receive government bailouts because their failure is too important to the national good (or at least the politicans who bail them out).

I understand and appreciate that fossil fuels are finite and will run out. Maybe not in my lifetime, but within my grandchildren's. But when they do, what is the replacement? To power your traction railways, where does the electricity come from? It may be prudent to conserve our remaining fossil fuels and get the most out of them, but is this really going to happen?

You are right about our government skewing everything with their special interests legislation. But now you are expecting this to change due to what? They will suddenly realize their errors and vote for legislation to benefit the country as a whole?

The discovery of petroleum is generally agreed to have been in Pennsylvania in 1859. Think about that, just 151 years ago! And think about the global impact today, the wars fought over it, the whole nine yards.

At my age I tend to think about more simple things, the fact my parents grew up with outhouses for sanitation, iceboxes (with an outdoor panel where the iceman replenished the ice block), a cistern to capture rain water off the roof to provide water, etc. While this may sound ancient to most of you, it only dates back to the 1930s and early 1940s.

So for you proponents, rail was here and disappeared. Getting it back is going to take a lot more than most of you realize. Name me one technology which lost favor and than came roaring back on a national scale, because everyone concluded they had been wrong.