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.
In the disaster insurance thread fishmonger brought up a national mass transtit system. Let us discuss this here. I beleive we already have a nationalized mass transit system and it is working fairly well.
I cannot see what sort of system could effectively replace the private ownership of automobiles....people live too far apart.
If you are referring to the rail system as working well is that truly the case?
Doesn't it require additional funds to simply stay in business?
Also it has quite limited service routes.
I guess if you live in a urban area mass transit might work but otherwise I cannot see it.
The major segment of our transport system most heavily subsidized by government (local, state and federal) is the airline system. If the passengers had to pay the full cost of airline transport including airports, traffic control, crew training, maintenance and safety airline tickets would be too expensive for even the business class (subsidized by their employers) let alone other travelers.
If the passengers had to pay the full cost of airline transport including airports, traffic control, crew training, maintenance and safety airline tickets would be too expensive for even the business class (subsidized by their employers) let alone other travelers.
Would this be a bad thing?
Not too long ago air travel was a major undertaking,people didn't fly as much and it was 'special'(probably due to the cost).
In the disaster insurance thread fishmonger brought up a national mass transtit system. Let us discuss this here. I beleive we already have a nationalized mass transit system and it is working fairly well.
You're right in that we already have federal funds going to various transit systems in larger cities across the country, as well as AmTrak and airline subsidies. Oz suggested that providing universal health insurance was equivalent to universal car insurance, since transportation is a necessity... I agree with the second part of the statement but think a better way to meet the need of those without cars (or unable to pay the combination of $3.00/gal for low-grade gas, insurance, repairs, etc.) or with only 1 car for multiple people would be an improved mass transit system, with
A. Increased federal funds for traditional urban mass transit
B. "On-demand" style transit with smaller buses for rural areas where fixed routes and large buses would be stupid
and
C. High-speed, convenient rail lines between larger cities where the demand is highest -- make Amtrak faster and more expansive. You'd have to gague the demand to see where the benefits would outweigh the costs for this
All three of these exist to some extent already (the vast majority of federal and local transportation funds go to roads/road construction, though) but an expansion could greatly improve air quality, reduce pollution and improve mobility for many thousands (or millions?) of people.
Here's a summary of US / Canadian Commuter Rail (compiled from American Public Transit Association data), sorry about the table:
Quote:
RANK CITY AVERAGE WEEKDAY RIDERSHIP
1 New York 911,400
2 Chicago 325,600
3 Toronto 151,200
4 Boston 140,500
5 Philadelphia 112,800
6 Montreal 58,100
7 San Francisco 45,900
8 Washington 44,900
9 Los Angeles 43,000
10 Miami 11,400
11 Vancouver 8,900
12 Dallas 8,800
13 Seattle 6,800
14 San Diego 6,400
15 New Haven 1,900
16 Albuquerque 1,800
17 Harrisburg 1,400
18 Nashville 500
Our driveway in NC is a quarter of a mile long and from there it is another mile or so to a state maintained road.
From there you would walk probably two miles to a main road.
Our driveway in NC is a quarter of a mile long and from there it is another mile or so to a state maintained road.
From there you would walk probably two miles to a main road.
And we live close to town.
Yes, rural living presents a MASSIVE problem to transit ideas. While some on demand type ideas would work very good in slightly rural areas, once you are so rural that it is 5 minutes between houses or more, it makes a lot more sense for individuals to have their own mode of transportation. A park and ride system with set times might be somewhat of an option, but its hard to get enough people from small rural areas to fill up even a small bus.
I would actually agree it makes sense to have mass transit in heavily populated areas,as long as it is profitable.
If it needs to be subsidised or runs continously at a loss there is something fundamentally wrong with the system.
In our little county,a enterprising individual put forward the plan to have a ferry service,he asked fo rnothing more than a small amount of infrastructure at select boat landings and exclusivity rights.The ferries would be used to transport workers to and from Hilton Head Island,alleviating the awful traffic conditions.
Our leaders denied him the chance and instead we expanded the roads that are still congested as it is impossible to keep up with growth.
Private enterprise is oftentimes denied any chance in this nation of regulations.
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.
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.
