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.
Yeah, but what is interesting is that despite not expanding for 12 years, MARTA's daily ridership is more than Houston, Dallas and Miami combined.
This is true for rail transit only. I don't understand Miami's excuse because they at least have heavy rail. But I'm sure you would have higher numbers than Houston and Dallas considering that both cities use light rail compared to Atlanta's heavy rail. But when you add the entire system together, I doubt MARTA has higher numbers than these three cities combined.
This is true for rail transit only. I don't understand Miami's excuse because they at least have heavy rail. But I'm sure you would have higher numbers than Houston and Dallas considering that both cities use light rail compared to Atlanta's heavy rail. But when you add the entire system together, I doubt MARTA has higher numbers than these three cities combined.
yeah i doubt it would be more if we talked about the entire system But transit is though i think thats because its been around sine the 70s and people here in atlanta are used to using the trains vs houston and dallas with it being still new i guess people will have to get used to riding the trains and maybe after a ouple of yeas the numbers will be high for houston and dallas
Houston's and Dallas' mass transit system which involves everything including rail, bus, and more is about the same as Atlanta and Miami. Not to mention that even though it's only light rail, Dallas and Houston are currently expanding it's system while Atlanta and Miami hasn't for years.
Dallas and Houston's rail ridership is nowhere near Atlanta's. Atlanta's rail system is a heavy rail system based on the Metro system in D.C. It's difficult for a light rail system to carry as many people as quickly as heavy rail. Many people in Atlanta do actually jam into the trains every weekday. It's just that the trains don't travel to enough areas, especially in the suburbs and almost every effort of MARTA to expand their rail lines in the past decades has been thwarted by suburban politicians and local N.I.M.B.Y influenced residents.
But the Beltline which will add light rail to Atlanta's heavy rail system is developing full speed ahead and should be visible in a few years.
Last edited by Galounger; 12-24-2008 at 07:32 PM..
The term "best" is subjective. To me, a radical anarcho-capitalist, the best "public" transportation is none at all: I prefer free competition of private (non-governmental) roads, rental vehicles, taxis, buses, etc, etc, etc. Rail transport is an inflexible relic of the 20th century kept alive by government interventionism, especially in the fields of energy production. In a purely free market, we'd probably all be flying around in huge hover-trailers by now! So, to answer your question, I'd have praise for cities with good airports, roads, and taxi companies. I hear a company in Singapore is looking into helicopter buses / taxis, which I think is just awesome!
Alex, because this country was/is led by people with such views, US public transport system looks like that from 19th century India...
After WW2, the loosing party (Japan, Germany) had to rebuild their infrastructure. They were in ruins. Take a look at them and at the (capitalist oriented) winners and see the difference. As for government interventionism all car manufacturers that Americans can't get enough of, were pushed ahead by their... governments.
In the US however, since governments aren't supposed/used to managing things, they usually do a poor job. (See Amtrak).
As to the city with the best transport system - NY because they operate 24/7 and then SF and DC. (Sorry but I didn't visit seattle yet)
Alex, because this country was/is led by people with such views, US public transport system looks like that from 19th century India...
After WW2, the loosing party (Japan, Germany) had to rebuild their infrastructure. They were in ruins. Take a look at them and at the (capitalist oriented) winners and see the difference. As for government interventionism all car manufacturers that Americans can't get enough of, were pushed ahead by their... governments.
In the US however, since governments aren't supposed/used to managing things, they usually do a poor job. (See Amtrak).
As to the city with the best transport system - NY because they operate 24/7 and then SF and DC. (Sorry but I didn't visit seattle yet)
don't forget chicago...I've lived *in* Chicago and in the Bay area and Chicago > SF...
Alex, because this country was/is led by people with such views, US public transport system looks like that from 19th century India...
After WW2, the loosing party (Japan, Germany) had to rebuild their infrastructure. They were in ruins. Take a look at them and at the (capitalist oriented) winners and see the difference. As for government interventionism all car manufacturers that Americans can't get enough of, were pushed ahead by their... governments.
In the US however, since governments aren't supposed/used to managing things, they usually do a poor job. (See Amtrak).
As to the city with the best transport system - NY because they operate 24/7 and then SF and DC. (Sorry but I didn't visit seattle yet)
I don't think that's necessarily true. It's just that Europe (and most of the earth) has a much more socialist attitude towards public transportation and everything else. They don't hesitate to spend however much money it takes to get a good system and then charge it's cost to the public with no care of whether it's making any money or not. Paying taxes for such things is just considered a necessary duty of living in an advanced civilized society.
In America on the other hand. Every little penny spent is scrutinized and protested and opposed by somebody so the budget is limited. Then, when the resulting project is lacking in quality and size because of this it's deemed a failure. Not to mention if it doesn't make money right away or looses money alot of people want to pull the plug on the whole thing.
It's really just a cultural thing. If the U.S. government and public were as anti highway spending as they are anti rail spending we would have a dreadful interstate system as well.
Alex, because this country was/is led by people with such views, US public transport system looks like that from 19th century India...
As I've been saying, that's not necessarily a bad thing. USA leads the world in airports / air travel, automobile ownership, and road network size (though it would have been far better with more private roads, less airport red tape, etc).
Your subway worship is irrational: rail is slow, inconvenient, and inflexible compared to the aforementioned alternatives. Other countries wouldn't depend on it as much if they could afford not to.
Your subway worship is irrational: rail is slow, inconvenient, and inflexible compared to the aforementioned alternatives. Other countries wouldn't depend on it as much if they could afford not to.
Excuse me, but "subway worship," as you put it, is at the opposite end of the spectrum from irrational. Wasn't the original question in this thread about cities with public transport? I'm very curious to learn about the wonderful alternatives to a subway system in a large (or even mid-sized) city.
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.
