U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-19-2014, 09:54 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,988 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33050

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
You said: " There is no "right" to subsidized public transit".

I asked: So do you think there is a "right" to subsidized public roads?

It was a simple question.
Considering my history with you, with you constantly needling me, making snarky comments to my posts and being generally hostile to me, I assumed you were doing the same with that post. I have no interest, none whatsoever, in getting into any kind of discussion with you.

You've seen my answer, so the repetition was totally unnecessary except if you wanted to start a back and forth which will end like all the others, with all posts being deleted. Best not to start it.

 
Old 08-19-2014, 10:09 PM
 
2,493 posts, read 2,193,007 times
Reputation: 3351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Considering my history with you, with you constantly needling me, making snarky comments to my posts and being generally hostile to me, I assumed you were doing the same with that post. I have no interest, none whatsoever, in getting into any kind of discussion with you.

You've seen my answer, so the repetition was totally unnecessary except if you wanted to start a back and forth which will end like all the others, with all posts being deleted. Best not to start it.

I could not care less about your history. I'm just curious if someone that does not believe public transit is a right, also does not believe public roads are a right.

The US developed as a VERY car centric society. If we consider mobility in the form of public roads, public sidewalks and public bikeways a "right", what about mobility for those without a car?
 
Old 08-20-2014, 12:05 AM
 
2,824 posts, read 3,347,681 times
Reputation: 3030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
I could not care less about your history. I'm just curious if someone that does not believe public transit is a right, also does not believe public roads are a right.

The US developed as a VERY car centric society. If we consider mobility in the form of public roads, public sidewalks and public bikeways a "right", what about mobility for those without a car?
You haven't really clarified what "right" you are hypothesizing about: a mythical right to the existence of the infrastructure or a mythical right to the use of the infrastructure so you shouldn't mind a response that is just as ambiguous. No one claimed public roads were a "right". Public transit certainly isn't a right. You can stay where you are, move, walk, catch a bus if one is around, ride your bike, call a taxi, call a friend, or get a car. Next.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 10:18 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,988 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33050
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight View Post
You haven't really clarified what "right" you are hypothesizing about: a mythical right to the existence of the infrastructure or a mythical right to the use of the infrastructure so you shouldn't mind a response that is just as ambiguous. No one claimed public roads were a "right". Public transit certainly isn't a right. You can stay where you are, move, walk, catch a bus if one is around, ride your bike, call a taxi, call a friend, or get a car. Next.
Thank you, IC_deLight! Roads are a part of infrastructure. While there is no "right" to infrastructure, other than post roads mentioned in the constitution, there is a long, long, longstanding tradition of public roadways. Transit is how you get from place to place on the roads. Apples to oranges.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Youngstown, Oh.
4,893 posts, read 7,653,336 times
Reputation: 4508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Thank you, IC_deLight! Roads are a part of infrastructure. While there is no "right" to infrastructure, other than post roads mentioned in the constitution, there is a long, long, longstanding tradition of public roadways. Transit is how you get from place to place on the roads. Apples to oranges.
A way to solve this might be for the government to spend on auto infrastructure and rail infrastructure more equitably. Then, private entities can drive cars, or run for profit rail transit companies, on the publicly funded infrastructure.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 11:52 AM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,988 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33050
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR_C View Post
A way to solve this might be for the government to spend on auto infrastructure and rail infrastructure more equitably. Then, private entities can drive cars, or run for profit rail transit companies, on the publicly funded infrastructure.
Putting aside how complicated that would be to figure, I think autos would end up with more funding! Railroads have long been highly subsidized. And you can't walk, ride a bike, horse, take a bus, etc on the railway. It's for one specific purpose, and generally for inter-city travel.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 01:09 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,828 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Any way we talk about it, economic demand should exist for the infrastructure to be built. Whereas, for several decades and even now, the infrastructure has lead the economic growth.
Malloric: the above references much of American growth post-60s. Horizontal growth even before existing growth has reached some basic level of full capacity.

Look at LA, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, etc.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 01:14 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,003,828 times
Reputation: 1348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Putting aside how complicated that would be to figure, I think autos would end up with more funding! Railroads have long been highly subsidized. And you can't walk, ride a bike, horse, take a bus, etc on the railway. It's for one specific purpose, and generally for inter-city travel.
Amtrak is subsidized, as are local regional commuter systems, but much of our trackage is privately owned. UPRR, BNSF, SPRR, etc. And, if the interest is on pedestrians, cyclists, and buses, each of those require far less land, and thus less subsidy, than if the focus is on cars. In short, I disagree with your assertion that roads would naturally take over more funding in this hypothetical split.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,060 posts, read 16,066,811 times
Reputation: 12635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Putting aside how complicated that would be to figure, I think autos would end up with more funding! Railroads have long been highly subsidized. And you can't walk, ride a bike, horse, take a bus, etc on the railway. It's for one specific purpose, and generally for inter-city travel.
Actually, it's not really all THAT difficult, at least with back of the napkin accuracy.

Fuel taxes cover about 50% of road expenditures. Weighted average fuel tax is 49.9 cents (call it 50) per gallon. Average personal vehicle in the US gets what, maybe 20 mpg, and the average drivers drives 15,000 miles. So average driver is paying about $375 in gas taxes and getting about $375 in "subsidy".

Most regular transit users are getting far more than $375/yr in operating subsidies alone.
 
Old 08-20-2014, 01:33 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,060 posts, read 16,066,811 times
Reputation: 12635
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Malloric: the above references much of American growth post-60s. Horizontal growth even before existing growth has reached some basic level of full capacity.

Look at LA, Atlanta, Houston, Phoenix, etc.
^^

Yes, infrastructure should lead growth. That's called smart planning.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top