Will there be more options for US cities offering European levels of walking/transit friendliness in the near future? (crime, planner)
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.
The complaint was spending tax dollars to subsidize roads, bridges, Highway Patrol, airports -- "underwriting infrastructure and operation of flying and driving". When nybbler pointed out that roads are used by buses too, your response was "not all the roads", and "before we had buses we had streetcars". By that, I thought we were getting started on one of these "roads are unnecessary" exchanges, yet again.
Well, I never said "roads are unnecessary", I don't how you get to those from the two quotse to "roads are unnecessary". I didn't make the complaint in my post. My point was that public transit doesn't really need a highway system or a modern road system. Before buses, there were trains which had the same level and often better service. Before the investment in the highway system, New England had a rather dense rail network for intercity transportation and street running rail for local transportation. None of the added roads led to any benefit for transit, therefore I wouldn't say tax dollars for roads are subsidizing transit. That is all.
Well, I never said "roads are unnecessary", I don't how you get to those from the two quotse to "roads are unnecessary". I didn't make the complaint in my post. My point was that public transit doesn't really need a highway system or a modern road system. Before buses, there were trains which had the same level and often better service. Before the investment in the highway system, New England had a rather dense rail network for intercity transportation and street running rail for local transportation. None of the added roads led to any benefit for transit, therefore I wouldn't say tax dollars for roads are subsidizing transit. That is all.
OK, maybe you didn't say it, but you've seen these arguments. Re: the bold-that is untrue. First you say, before buses, there were streetcars, and now you're saying trains. I'd like to see some proof that trains had the same level and/or better service. Not for the average American who lived elsewhere than NYC or urban New England. And life has changed in the past, oh, 100 years. People don't live the same as they did then. What worked then may not work now. Tax dollars for roads are subsidizing transit right here in Boulder County. US 36 Bus Rapid Transit Project Home
OK, maybe you didn't say it, but you've seen these arguments.
I have, but you responded to my post not someone's else's arguement.
Quote:
Re: the bold-that is untrue. First you say, before buses, there were streetcars, and now you're saying trains. I'd like to see some proof that trains had the same level and/or better service. Not for the average American who lived elsewhere than NYC or urban New England. And life has changed in the past, oh, 100 years. People don't live the same as they did then. What worked then may not work now. Tax dollars for roads are subsidizing transit right here in Boulder County. US 36 Bus Rapid Transit Project Home
why is that untrue? Bus Rapid Transit is one exception, but there haven't been that many of those, especially until recently.
It seems a bit of an obvious point that train service back then was superior to bus service today. I don't feel like digging it up old train maps and schedule, most sizeable towns in the Northeast (and probably most of the country) had a train station. If you go across upstate NY, you'll find old train stations that are no longer train stations, many of these towns have little or no intercity bus service. Not all of these have intercity bus service today. Trains are obviously better than buses for the simple reason they don't get stuck in traffic congestion. As for long-distance service, any bus that uses a highway has to exit and enter the expressway to make a stop. This makes stopping much longer than a train, and the old train stations were usually in the center of town. Why would you think current day buses could better than trains?
You mention your father taking the train into Pittsburgh. That train service is gone. Is the current bus replacement service (assuming there is one) as good
I have, but your post was a response to mine so that's not really relevant.
why is that untrue? Bus Rapid Transit is one exception, but there haven't been that many of those, especially until recently.
It seems a bit of an obvious point that train service back then was superior to bus service today. I don't feel like digging it up old train maps and schedule, most sizeable towns in the Northeast (and probably most of the country) had a train station. If you go across upstate NY, you'll find old train stations that are no longer train stations, many of these towns have little or no intercity bus service. Not all of these have intercity bus service today. Trains are obviously better than buses for the simple reason they don't get stuck in traffic congestion. As for long-distance service, any bus that uses a highway has to exit and enter the expressway to make a stop. This makes stopping much longer than a train, and the old train stations were usually in the center of town. Why would you think current day buses could better than trains?
You mention your father take the train into Pittsburgh. That train service is gone. Is the current bus replacement service (assuming there is one) as good
I don't know if it is so obvious that train service "back then" was better than bus service today. And it's a moot point anyway. "Back then" not as many people had cars. People had to use some other form of transport. People did "vote with their feet" or in this case, with their cars. People quit riding the trains. I have an uncle who worked for the railroad; I've heard all this stuff a million+ times. I don't know if the status of bus service from Beaver County into Pittsburgh these days. Here's a link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver_...nsit_Authority
I don't know if it is so obvious that train service "back then" was better than bus service today. And it's a moot point anyway. "Back then" not as many people had cars. People had to use some other form of transport. People did "vote with their feet" or in this case, with their cars. People quit riding the trains.
That's true, my point was without highways that buses use, there was still rail. At the very least, I can't understand how rail could be worse, it should have been at least a little better for the reasons I described in a previous post.
Of course, part of the voting with their feet was that highway were built at taxpayer expense. If they weren't, cars would have less of an advantage. Note, to prevent a response from words I did not write, I am NOT saying highways should not have been built (or should have). I'm saying it's a bit more than voting with your feet, people's votes depend on the infrastructure available.
That's true, my point was without highways that buses use, there was still rail. At the very least, I can't understand how rail could be worse, it should have been at least a little better for the reasons I described in a previous post.
Of course, part of the voting with their feet was that highway were built at taxpayer expense. If they weren't, cars would have less of an advantage. Note, to prevent a response from words I did not write, I am NOT saying highways should not have been built (or should have). I'm saying it's a bit more than voting with your feet, people's votes depend on the infrastructure available.
In small towns in rural areas, there was maybe one train a day, each way. This is what I got from my mom who grew up in such a place in northern Wisconsin. There wasn't a huge ridership, either, which probably explains the lack of service.
I'm not surprised that very small towns had only one train a day to neighbouring towns, but I'd be pretty surprised if they have more frequent buses today (unless maybe the towns are much bigger now than then).
Agreed. In years past, such trains/buses were privately run. As ridership declined, the government took them over. My inner Libertarian says why should the govt. provide transportation? Now, mind you, I'm not opposed to publicly funded transportation, as long as the citizens being taxed get to vote on it. But I do think some of these public transit activists who want service every 10 minutes (as has been suggested on these forums, though probably not by you) need to take another thought about this. Just what IS the govt's responsibility in regard to transporting people?
Agreed. In years past, such trains/buses were privately run. As ridership declined, the government took them over. My inner Libertarian says why should the govt. provide transportation? Now, mind you, I'm not opposed to publicly funded transportation, as long as the citizens being taxed get to vote on it. But I do think some of these public transit activists who want service every 10 minutes (as has been suggested on these forums, though probably not by you) need to take another thought about this. Just what IS the govt's responsibility in regard to transporting people?
Admittedly, I live in one of the best public transportation cities in the U.S.
That being said, for those that can't drive, public transportation is necessary and sensible.
Do you know anyone in a wheelchair? I see people in wheelchairs often taking the bus in Chicago. Old people that shouldn't be driving due to vision? Yep, they get on the bus all the time. They even have ramps that come out of the buses for the folks confined to a wheelchair. Blind people? Yep, they get on the bus, and hear their stops and know how to navigate impressively.
Blind people and the elderly should not be operating motor vehicles (normally) the elderly lose parts of their field of vision and this can result in serious accidents. My grandmother, who absolutely shouldn't have been driving, drove under a semi trailer once. I don't think of her as an exception, more the rule. She was lucky her car height was lower than the semi-trailer bottom.
Lots of older folks don't have children that can drive them to the hospital or out for groceries. People tend to move where the jobs are, and if you are old and retired, and shouldn't be driving, Chicago is a great place for someone who wants to be mobile without having to rely on others. Buses run frequently, often every 10 minutes on some lines, and same with the trains between 7:30 or so and 8pm. Less frequent service occurs outside of standard business hours.
Should the government support this? Absolutely. It increases city/state revenue through taxes, provides a relatively environmentally friendly solution to car ownership, costs significantly less, and allows seniors and the disabled to be able to be self-sufficient. It takes potential nightmare drivers off of the streets, and most likely saves hundreds of traffic deaths per year.
Now Libertarianly speaking, do you guys have a dollar figure for a life? I'm guessing you probably do, and am dreadfully curious what it is, they don't normally say it during the Libertarian conventions.
Now they (the seniors) do pay for the bus passes, but they pay for a discounted one, not the full price one that work commuters pay. Most work commuters tend to love the public transport, as it's safer, easier to park, and gas/auto upkeep doesn't take half your paycheck.
I know for whatever reason the libertarian and tea party perspective is that the government = pure incompetence, but what solution do the anti-government people have for disabled/elderly commuters? Some private company that they could never dream to afford since they are on social security?
What neurons fire in such a way to create such a black and white perspective on a topic? take for example government. Seldom in my experience is something 100% good or 100% bad. Isn't it possible to say that well, I don't like certain aspects of X due to Y, but they do Z well?
Last edited by Isotope-C14; 01-11-2014 at 07:24 PM..
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.
