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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-14-2014, 08:20 PM
 
Location: Planet Earth
3,853 posts, read 7,632,128 times
Reputation: 1583

Advertisements

Well, let's assume that the OP is referring to transit in areas where it's clear that it won't be utilized.

In some areas, they essentially do run as a social service. But the same way public schools often spend significant amounts of money educating special-needs children is the same way government agencies spend money serving these auto-oriented areas.

As for why they use the full-length buses, rather than minibuses, part of it has to do with flexibility with interlining with the busier routes.

So let's say that you have a lightly-used route with a 70 minute cycle time (the time it takes for the bus to make a round-trip, plus the break time for the bus to be available to start another trip). The agency might want a bus every 60 minutes, so in order to avoid having to add a second bus, they might interline the lightly-used route with a busier route at one of the terminals.

Also, you have the advantages of a uniform fleet (for instance, replacing parts, and things like that).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-14-2014, 08:20 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,057 posts, read 16,066,811 times
Reputation: 12635
Quote:
Originally Posted by grilba View Post
Yeah, what we want is an ever increasing amount of smog.
Which would, again, be a reason not to subsidize transit, especially bus transit, as that is more energy intensive than personal vehicles are. That might be different for natural gas fleets since it is generally much cleaner than gasoline rather than diesel which is more polluting.

Alternatively, you could definitely see it as a reason to subsidize electric vehicles. If you figure the an average bus system pass is at least $50/mo and that covers only 30% of the cost leaving another $166/mo, or $2,000/yr, in taxpayer subsidy, suddenly these $7,500-$10,000 subsidies for electric vehicles are a fantastic deal from a public policy standpoint for reducing pollution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2014, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,650,120 times
Reputation: 26646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Actually it's 43% of households with children. You're thinking of two married parents plus children.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...75097201,d.aWw
A mom with two kids in the car is an occupancy rate of 3.
.
We were both off, looks like households with kids are down to roughly 33% of households!

Census reveals plummeting U.S. birthrates - USATODAY.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2014, 09:16 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,985 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
My link is from April of this year, Bureau of Labor Statistics with 2013 statisitcs, yours is from 2011. I think it probably depends on how the statistics are interpreted. But even 33% is actually a fairly sizable number, 1 in 3 households.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2014, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
27,165 posts, read 29,650,120 times
Reputation: 26646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
My link is from April of this year, Bureau of Labor Statistics with 2013 statisitcs, yours is from 2011. I think it probably depends on how the statistics are interpreted. But even 33% is actually a fairly sizable number, 1 in 3 households.
But it is also a fair assumption that most car trips are alone. 2/3 (give or take) households do not have kids. And single (not coupled) households are on the rise. And adults travel separately pretty often. Trips with kids aren't leading to a decline of single occupancy vehicle trips, as households with kids are declining. As are household sizes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2014, 10:24 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,856,857 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
But it is also a fair assumption that most car trips are alone. 2/3 (give or take) households do not have kids. And single (not coupled) households are on the rise. And adults travel separately pretty often. Trips with kids aren't leading to a decline of single occupancy vehicle trips, as households with kids are declining. As are household sizes.
Kids add new reasons both to take trips and to have more than one person in the car. The kid needs to go to school, needs to go to an event, and you need to haul the kid along due to lack of baby sitting(trust me I HAD to go with my mom to the store sometimes...even if I didn't want to.).

Going car free and single in the City, easy peasy. Try that when you have kids that need to go to many different locations and it is you that needs to haul them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 06:10 AM
 
4,586 posts, read 4,619,186 times
Reputation: 4358
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerriMAC View Post
What incentive is there for cities to provide public transit (bus routes, etc)? Seems like local government officials could just tell the people without vehicles to take a private taxi instead. Is public transit a form of welfare?
WOW! Dude your ignorance is mind blowing. You think people can afford Taxi's??? Have you checked fairs? OMG! It costs $35 for like 2 miles around Orlando!

Now, the reason some cities, or all of Florida, should give up bus transportation is because it is no longer feasible TIME WISE. It would be awesome if it was replaced with high speed rail considering the distances, HOWEVER, our politicians are outdated and stupid, so instead they continue to support a form of public transportation that is no longer feasible to anyone hence why you see only low lives riding it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
3,901 posts, read 3,579,980 times
Reputation: 7180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerriMAC View Post
What incentive is there for cities to provide public transit (bus routes, etc)? Seems like local government officials could just tell the people without vehicles to take a private taxi instead. Is public transit a form of welfare?
It's to allow the poor to get to their minimum wage jobs. They can't afford a taxi.

Even the exurban area where I live has a county-wide public bus system. Almost everyone who takes that bus is poor or learning disabled or both. I'm happy to subsidize it and give these people some independence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 07:47 AM
 
483 posts, read 534,458 times
Reputation: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric View Post
Which would, again, be a reason not to subsidize transit, especially bus transit, as that is more energy intensive than personal vehicles are. That might be different for natural gas fleets since it is generally much cleaner than gasoline rather than diesel which is more polluting.

Alternatively, you could definitely see it as a reason to subsidize electric vehicles. If you figure the an average bus system pass is at least $50/mo and that covers only 30% of the cost leaving another $166/mo, or $2,000/yr, in taxpayer subsidy, suddenly these $7,500-$10,000 subsidies for electric vehicles are a fantastic deal from a public policy standpoint for reducing pollution.
Busses hold more than one one person so even a bus that drives on dirty fuel is cleaner than the 5-6 taxis driving around people seperately, or the run down cars the poor often are forced to ride around in, and yeah, I don't mind welfare for the rich either so subsidizing electric cars seems like a good deal to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2014, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Northern Virginia
1,473 posts, read 1,692,725 times
Reputation: 3211
Why do many cities provide public transit?-image.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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