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.
It amazes how people will always find a reason to argue against something that benefits a majority of people. *Sigh* I guess there always has to be someone on the wrong side of history
Mass transit allows the poor to migrate to potential work opportunities. Since the ranks of poor are only going to grow in America, we better figure out a system that will serve them better. Somehow, I don't see poor people purchasing driverless cars in the next 20 years...
liberal give up?
"since the ranks of the poor are only going to grow?"
really?
that doesn't need to happen. just stop voting for poverty making liberals.
Roads are thousands of years older. Romans used them. Its not the railroad, but the devices runing on them that matters.
its hard to guage the future. I could imagine driverless drones moving us about to. Yet I would still figure that point to point high speed travel will be needed. right now we have jets. . but China and other countries have trains that are going faster and faster.
Trains could be just as fast as jets of today. . and more effecient. So lets not shut down the future before it arrives. . .please
that doesn't need to happen. just stop voting for poverty making liberals.
Technically neither party is associated with having a strong influence on poverty. in fact a lot of the ideas to really improve our global competitoness seem more progressive (year round schools; pre-k mandates; increased access to post high school education)
But wanting people to only travel by vehicle isn't trying to control where you live, work, and travel? Sorry, but liberals are for options which is the opposite of control.
Who said "only by vehicle"?
Automobiles = freedom to go wherever you choose whenever you choose
Automobiles = freedom to go wherever you choose whenever you choose
Rail = you must go where liberals tell you to go.
Ah yes, as long as you only choose automobile, there you go again saying people shouldn't have a choice in modes of transportation. It is funny that you can't see your own contradiction.
Not really. Studies have shown that driverless cars can increase road capacity. And obviously, for every driverless bus or van you make a huge reduction in the number of cars on the road.
Cars are cars....doesn't matter if there is a driver or not....they are still on the road. How exactly would there be a reduction.
Yes, less than one percent of miles traveled are on rail and yet rail gets (using your numbers) 23% of the federal subsidy.
The highway trust fund is not a subsidy, with the exception of the last few years where they have had to bolster it with money from the general fund it's almost entirely from fuel taxes. The portion siphoned off to the mass transit account can be considered a subsidy.
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.
