Top Twenty Cities - Transit Savings Report (MIAMI RANKS 16) (Kendall: apartments, insurance)

[WINTERFRONT]

Riding public transportation saves individuals, on average, $9,381 annually and $782 per month based on the August 10, 2010 average national gas price ($2.78 per gallon- reported by AAA) and the national unreserved monthly parking rate. Riding public transit as an alternative to driving is a proven way for individuals to cut monthly and yearly transportation costs while also reducing their carbon footprint.

See list and Methodology HERE

Public Transportation Takes Us There - Riding Public Transit Saves Individuals $9,381 Annually (http://www.publictransportation.org/facts/100811_transit_savings.asp - broken link)

[flyers29]

Of course it saves money, but the opportunity cost of taking a bus is high for many in Miami.

[rogerbacon]

First, that article is from a web site called publictransportation.org. Yeah, they sound unbiased.
Secondly, I DO agree with the idea that public transportation saved money for those who use it. NOT because it is more efficient but because the costs are subsidized by those who don't use it. i.e. taxpayers. If it was private, even if run by a non-profit group, costs would be higher.

Lastly, I question the cost given for using a car. Most people do not have to pay for parking when they go to work. Only those people who work downtown usually have to pay and they don't pay the daily rate; they get a longterm rate, often subsidized by their employer. The article lists a SAVINGS of $759 a month for Miami transit users over drives. There is no way my driving costs came to even half that figure when I was in Miami. LOL. Are they assuming the average worker is using valet parking every day when they go to work?

[Wild Style]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

First, that article is from a web site called publictransportation.org. Yeah, they sound unbiased.
Secondly, I DO agree with the idea that public transportation saved money for those who use it. NOT because it is more efficient but because the costs are subsidized by those who don't use it. i.e. taxpayers. If it was private, even if run by a non-profit group, costs would be higher.

Lastly, I question the cost given for using a car. Most people do not have to pay for parking when they go to work. Only those people who work downtown usually have to pay and they don't pay the daily rate; they get a longterm rate, often subsidized by their employer. The article lists a SAVINGS of $759 a month for Miami transit users over drives. There is no way my driving costs came to even half that figure when I was in Miami. LOL. Are they assuming the average worker is using valet parking every day when they go to work?

a single vehicle (train) that can carry say 100 people as opposed to a car or suv that generally holds 1 occupant multiplied by how many ever people are driving cars, trucks and SUVs on the road is the definition of efficiency. Besides driving is subsidize too. Don't kid yourself into think that gas tax is enough to pay for road work, it isnt. We all pay for that.

[rogerbacon]

Originally Posted by Wild Style

a single vehicle (train) that can carry say 100 people ... is the definition of efficiency.

Only if they all want to go to the same place.

Besides driving is subsidize too. Don't kid yourself into think that gas tax is enough to pay for road work, it isnt. We all pay for that.

Roads promote trade and commerce. They are a net positive for the economy. Localized mass-transit is not.

I had the misfortune to have my car in the shop for the past three days. I had to take the bus(s) here in Houston. My 21 minute drive took between one hour and five minutes one day to one hour and fifty five minutes on the worst day. That's not efficient. Remember money is not the only measure of efficiency. Time is important too.

[WINTERFRONT]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

Only if they all want to go to the same place.



Roads promote trade and commerce. They are a net positive for the economy. Localized mass-transit is not.

I had the misfortune to have my car in the shop for the past three days. I had to take the bus(s) here in Houston. My 21 minute drive took between one hour and five minutes one day to one hour and fifty five minutes on the worst day. That's not efficient. Remember money is not the only measure of efficiency. Time is important too.

People do take a certain road to get to point B, especially if the transit system covers most of the roads. They all might not go to the same place, but with a help of an efficient system they might be able to make it to their respective destination with ease.

Canals and trains work better as infrastructure than roads. The reason why the Holocaust prospered (in a negative way), was due to the efficiency and numbers of rail roads available at that time.

There is also good and bad transit system, it all depends on how they work (time, quality,etc...)and how much of the metropolis they cover. Miami has a not so good mass transit system, therefore setting it as an example of public transport is not fair, since it's not efficient.

Time is indeed important - a good transport system covers that Need.

[Your.Decision]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

Only if they all want to go to the same place.



Roads promote trade and commerce. They are a net positive for the economy. Localized mass-transit is not.

I had the misfortune to have my car in the shop for the past three days. I had to take the bus(s) here in Houston. My 21 minute drive took between one hour and five minutes one day to one hour and fifty five minutes on the worst day. That's not efficient. Remember money is not the only measure of efficiency. Time is important too.

Having an extensive mass transit network is important for any major city, including Miami. With a metro area as large as Miami-Dade, you cannot just keep building roads or widening them. It comes to a point where you have to invest in mass transit (rail). Having traffic clogged roads is actually very bad for trade and commerce. As time is money, time stuck in traffic = lost money. There's also the environmental consequences to bear in mind, although Miami is fortunate in the sense of not being a smog magnet like other major cities because of the Gulf Stream.

Look at all of the famous global cities on earth - all of them have extensive mass transit systems. Miami needs the same, if it is to evolve.

[Your.Decision]

Originally Posted by WINTERFRONT

People do take a certain road to get to point B, especially if the transit system covers most of the roads. They all might not go to the same place, but with a help of an efficient system they might be able to make it to their respective destination with ease.

Canals and trains work better as infrastructure than roads. The reason why the Holocaust prospered (in a negative way), was due to the efficiency and numbers of rail roads available at that time.

There is also good and bad transit system, it all depends on how they work (time, quality,etc...)and how much of the metropolis they cover. Miami has a not so good mass transit system, therefore setting it as an example of public transport is not fair, since it's not efficient.

Time is indeed important - a good transport system covers that Need.

Miami is long overdue for the creation of an extensive mass transit network. I don't know if you've noticed, but apartments/homes tend to be more expensive, if they're close to the Metrorail. The Metrorail needs to be expanded to incorporate destinations in West Kendall, North Miami, Doral, Westchester and the Blue Lagoon area. I don't buy that crap about it being too hot for people to take mass transit here either. If the train is there, people will use it and you'll see the traffic problem becoming far less of a problem.

[hurricaneMan1992]

The thing about many of these studies is that they assume that if you take transit, you wouldn't have to pay ANY of the costs of car ownership. This is true only in a few select areas of the country (NYC, San Francisco, ect.), which by the way tend to be the most expansive places to live in. Plus you can save money by your choice of a vehicle, location, and driving habits. Not everybody drives a full-size SUV!

If you need a car for anything, you still pay insurance, fees, and maintenance at a minimum, and in many cases a car loan payment. These "sunk costs" add up to much more than just gas and parking! While I do agree that it is possible to save money using transit in Miami, the actual amount saved is probably not that significant.

In my case, with a company transit discount, the amount I could potentially save in a year is less than what the study says I should be saving in a month. It's not practical for me to take the bus every day, so I still need a parking permit, and I don't get the discount. When I ride the bus, it is not because I'm looking to save money, I actually prefer to take public transportation to/from work and read things on the bus. But I can practically do this only a few days a month because I have personal commitments right after work most days.

[Wild Style]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

Only if they all want to go to the same place.



Roads promote trade and commerce. They are a net positive for the economy. Localized mass-transit is not.

I had the misfortune to have my car in the shop for the past three days. I had to take the bus(s) here in Houston. My 21 minute drive took between one hour and five minutes one day to one hour and fifty five minutes on the worst day. That's not efficient. Remember money is not the only measure of efficiency. Time is important too.

Mass Transit has worked in ALL of the worlds top cities and funny enough cities with little to know real mass transit do not make the list of top world cities. I am talking about GOOD systems now, not half baked ones. And roads, net positive? Err nope. It is not a money maker but operates at a loss and that my friend is a fact. You could just as easily build a stelar rail system (to transport goods) and trucks to distribute which does not require as much roads.