San Francisco named "second best" transit city in the USA (Los Angeles: credit, unemployed)

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by jade408

Looks like you have set up a new goal post.

So even though Oakland is "poor" all kinds of people take the bus. Which is different than LA. And this also means lots of people use the bus....even without fancy light rail or subways or whatever. So the lowly bus is doing OK in Oakland. That is actually pretty good for transit in the US. When a mix of incomes use the bus willingly it is a sign of a decent transit system. (FYI: AC Transit mostly covers the inner easy bay, which tends to have comparatively high transit ridership)

Nope, just a new topic to discuss since the original one fizzled out.

Yes Oakland is very poor, and according to statistics, "poor" ridership is underrepresented by quite a bit. That IMO could be a negative.

Regardless, AC Transit is great, but it's not an Oakland-centric system, and certainly not comparable to the metro systems of LA, SF, or NYC in terms of scale.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

So because there isn't an agency called the "Oakland Metropolitan Transportation Authority" it doesn't count now?

No that was YOUR point, not mine. Remember?

Originally Posted by sav858

the city of LA doesn't have it's own transit system either, it's the Los Angeles COUNTY Metropolitan Transportation Authority FYI.

To which I responded...

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

Umm, New York's system is handled under the "Metropolitan Transportation Authority" and covers 12 counties in the state and two counties in Connecticut. Does that mean NYC doesn't have its own system either? That seems to be a profoundly silly Non sequitur IMO.

But I can see why you would ignore that since, well, I completely crumbled your point. Don't worry, we can move on to something else if you don't want to continue with your original thought.

Regardless, what I pointed out was actually that Oakland is not comparable to Los Angeles, SF, or NYC because it's really a system of buses and I believe a few shuttles that cover two counties and numerous cities in the East Bay. LA, SF, and NYC have to maintain hugely expensive rail systems, on top of having large bus systems. That's not exactly the same thing as Oakland's relationship with AC Transit. The scale is completely different.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

No that was YOUR point, not mine. Remember?



To which I responded...

You're the one that claimed Oakland doesn't have it's own transit system like LA and NYC, which is false. As even you pointed out, the transit system in all of those places cover multiple jurisdictions. You pretty much just contradicted yourself and made absolutely no sense and still don't.

Regardless, what I pointed out was actually that Oakland is not comparable to Los Angeles, SF, or NYC because it's really a system of buses and I believe a few shuttles that cover two counties and numerous cities in the East Bay. LA, SF, and NYC have to maintain hugely expensive rail systems, on top of having large bus systems. That's not exactly the same thing as Oakland and AC Transit.

Oh you didn't realize BART ran through Oakland? I'll repeat this again since you chose to completely ignore it and go off on a tangent that doesn't even make sense:

"I'm not sure what that matters at all as this is looking at all public transit users in each city whether they're using a regional or local system, the report wasn't agency specific."

This report is based off CENSUS data of residents and how they get to work, it is not agency specific. Meaning Oakland BART riders count in the data for Oakland. So your whole point about AC Transit or any specific transit agency for that matter is completely irrelevant to begin with.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

You're the one that claimed Oakland doesn't have it's own transit system like LA and NYC, which is false. As even you pointed out, the transit system in all of those places cover multiple jurisdictions. You pretty much just contradicted yourself and made absolutely no sense and still don't.

But that's not what I said. I pointed out the distinct differences between a system like NYC and LA have to maintain, and the relationship Oakland has with AC Transit which is basically a bus system for a much smaller population base. Not comparable at all. If you're not going to represent ALL of my words accurately, then don't use them at all. That's considered very rude.

This report is based off CENSUS data of residents and how they get to work, it is not agency specific. Meaning Oakland BART riders count in the data for Oakland. So your whole point about AC Transit is completely irrelevant to begin with.

Actually I believe it makes it more relevant, BART is a shared system that is maintained and developed by revenue from different jurisdictions. Oakland is just part of large network. In Los Angeles, Metro Rail is pretty much only LA County, and really, only LA proper.

Oakland in terms of it's relationship with public transit systems is not really comparable to NYC, SF, and LA as I pointed out.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

But that's not what I said. I pointed out the distinct differences between a system like NYC and LA have to maintain, and the relationship Oakland has with AC Transit which is basically a bus system for a much smaller population base. Not comparable at all. If you're not going to represent ALL of my words accurately, then don't use them at all. That's considered very rude.

You pointed out how AC Transit covers many jurisdictions then tried to point out how LA and NYC transit systems are so different but at the same time admitted how they cover many jurisdictions too, excellent point LOL.

Actually I believe it makes it more relevant, BART is a shared system that is maintained and developed by revenue from different jurisdictions. Oakland is just part of large network. In Los Angeles, Metro Rail is pretty much only LA County, and really, only LA proper.

Oakland in terms of it's relationship with public transit systems is not really comparable to NYC, SF, and LA as I pointed out.

Nothing you are saying here really makes any sense at all and some of it is completely contradictory. You made absolutely no point or argument how talking about specific agencies is relevant BART is a shared system, so....? Oakland is just part of a large network, so therefor that means....? Metro Rail is only LA County and only LA proper (not true at all btw)...so??? When it comes to transit users you made absolutely no argument how any of that was relevant.

I get it, you pretty much have no other points you can argue so you go off on some random tangent about transit agency differences which is compltely irrelevant to the report and recent discussion. We're talking about transit USERS here with no regard to which transit system they use. The stats for LA include Metrolink, the stats for NYC include LIRR and Metro North, the stats for SF and Oakland include BART, etc..

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

You pointed out how AC Transit covers many jurisdictions then tried to point out how LA and NYC transit systems are so different but at the same time admitted how they cover many jurisdictions too, excellent point LOL.

That's not what I said at all. My main point was that Oakland's relationship with AC Transit is not comparable to what the MTA is in LA and NYC. This has been my main point since you tried to compare Oakland to LA and throw it in with NYC. Anyone who knows anything about those systems knows this is true, except for some reason you seem to want to ignore that, twist words, and engage in ad-hominem attacks. Why are you so angry? Are you okay? Very strange.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

That's not what I said at all. My main point was that Oakland's relationship with AC Transit is not comparable to what the MTA is in LA and NYC. Anyone who knows anything about those systems knows this is true, except for some reason you seem to want to ignore that.

You haven't explained how at all and ignored when I asked for specifics so clearly you don't even know what you're actually arguing. Oakland has AC Transit, BART, and ferries people use as public transit to get to work. Those are buses and trains like people in SF, NYC, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc..are using to get to work too. Same thing there.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by sav858

You haven't explained how at all and ignored when I asked for specifics so clearly you don't even know what you're actually arguing. Oakland has AC Transit, BART, and ferries people use as public transit to get to work. Those are buses and trains like people in SF, NYC, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc..are using to get to work too. Same thing there.

That's the thing I'm sort of shocked that it has to be explained. Sure Oakland has buses and a few BART stops. It's totally the same as NYC and the MTA. Right, right.

Good night.

[Folks3000]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

That's the thing I'm sort of shocked that it has to be explained. Sure Oakland has buses and a few BART stops. It's totally the same as NYC and the MTA. Right, right.

Good night.

You seem to argue a lot about one Bay Area transit system at a time without realizing they all function together as one.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by Folks3000

You seem to argue a lot about one Bay Area transit system at a time without realizing they all function together as one.

I was a user of Bay Area Transit for over 6 years. You are incorrect in your assumption. You are also incorrect that they "all function as one". AC Transit serves a very specific area. MUNI serves a very specific area. VTA serves a specific area. Yes, BART technically connects many cities in the Bay Area but it doesn't serve the North Bay with any stops, nor any of Marin County, most of the Peninsula, and as of right now, no stops in Santa Clara or the South Bay.

Yes there are some options for those areas not served with BART, but they are not efficient at all which is why companies, like Google, are investing into buses, shuttles, and even ferry rides.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2...rkers/4400219/

If the system in the Bay Area was truly neatly integrated as one system as you claim, companies in the Bay Area would not have to do this, but the truth is, all systems have gaps that separate them regionally even now.

That is the goal though that all metro areas strive for, one neatly integrated system to rule them all. The Bay Area is closer than LA for sure, and NYC is closer than both, but none are at that level yet which is why billions are still being spent to get to that goal.