Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio
 [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 05-02-2013, 07:43 AM
 
1,066 posts, read 2,418,222 times
Reputation: 643

Advertisements

Speaking of the Cincinnati streetcar....

Reality Check: Is Saving the Streetcar Project Really Feasible?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2013, 02:28 PM
 
Location: Chicago(Northside)
3,678 posts, read 7,224,521 times
Reputation: 1697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksu sucks View Post
Its going to happen...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2013, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,517,208 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Not so much a nut, but certainly kind of naïve. I guess I don't see any particular reason to trust private for-profit business for everything when the evidence suggests that they can just as easily be corrupt, poorly run and inefficient. If we put these companies in charge of services, say infrastructure, I realize that companies can be replaced with others, but that takes time. Meanwhile, what happens to the services they were providing in the meantime? What happens to road maintenance? What happens if a company becomes a monopoly? Who breaks them up? Another private, for-profit company? What prevents them being bought off as much as you say the government is? I'm not sure I trust that there would be true, neutral parties when making money is the first objective.
The government was not involved in transportation until President Lincoln came along. One of his main campaign themes was federal government subsidizing of roads. The Southern states did not like this idea because they knew that if govt controlled transportation they could hurt the South, or anyone else.

BTW, People didn't have to stop and pay tolls either. I see no reason why they would today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2013, 07:40 AM
 
865 posts, read 1,475,043 times
Reputation: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
BTW, People didn't have to stop and pay tolls either. I see no reason why they would today.
Why would a company pay billions upon billions of dollars building roads if they could not recoup any of their investment?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2013, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,517,208 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinciFan View Post
Why would a company pay billions upon billions of dollars building roads if they could not recoup any of their investment?
First off, the private sector normally does things at 2-4 times less cost than the government.

And it's not difficult to recoup the investment without a toll booth at every intersection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-08-2013, 07:00 PM
 
1,066 posts, read 2,418,222 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
And it's not difficult to recoup the investment without a toll booth at every intersection.
Good start, but think more creatively. Today's technology would make it simple to put some type of recognition device on a car which tabulates how much and how often a customer uses a particular road/highway. Monthly fees can be paid to use certain roads, just like any other utility. Physical toll booths strike me as a modern inefficiency typical of governments unable to innovate.

I find it sort of odd that many of the same people who despise the idea of privatized roads simultaneously oppose the widespread use of fossil fuels. One of the most obvious reasons for widespread fossil fuel usage is the public ownership of roads. Why should individuals care how much fuel they use? All driving is equally costly thanks to "free" government roads. Not to mention, today's sprawling suburbs are entirely the result of government planned highways systems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2013, 06:31 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,517,208 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksu sucks View Post
Good start, but think more creatively. Today's technology would make it simple to put some type of recognition device on a car which tabulates how much and how often a customer uses a particular road/highway. Monthly fees can be paid to use certain roads, just like any other utility. Physical toll booths strike me as a modern inefficiency typical of governments unable to innovate.

I find it sort of odd that many of the same people who despise the idea of privatized roads simultaneously oppose the widespread use of fossil fuels. One of the most obvious reasons for widespread fossil fuel usage is the public ownership of roads. Why should individuals care how much fuel they use? All driving is equally costly thanks to "free" government roads. Not to mention, today's sprawling suburbs are entirely the result of government planned highways systems.
True, if an area, say Los Angeles, was having smog issues the road company could just raise the price of travel for the gas guzzlers and lower the price for effecient vehicles.

This same idea could also eliminate drunk driving, speeding etc... Private companies are not going to let drunks on their roads because other customers would be endangered. There is strong incentive to keep customers safe in the business world.

Actually, I might just build a road out in the country for drunk drivers. Put up a cheap hotel/bar next to it. The people that enjoy drunk driving could come buy booze from me, drive their cares loaded on my road after paying me for it, and rent a room from me to sleep it off. They could then drive home in the morning safely. I might even buy an old police car and "chase" them down just to make the experience more realistic for them. At an increased cost of course.

What we have now is a government that is completely ineffective at keeping dangerous drivers off the roads. Which increases risk for everyone.

And virtually every road would be free to travel anyway. If I owned a business it would be to my advantage to work with the other proprietors on my street to ensure customers (the public) had free and easy access to my store. No one is gonna stop in if they have to stop at 20 toll booths along the way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2013, 06:37 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,517,208 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlouisan View Post
Greetings Ohio! I've posted this thread in the forums of several other Midwestern states: Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. What would Ohioans think of bullet trains running out of Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Columbus to places like Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis, and St. Louis, as well as potentially other places? Speak and let your thoughts be heard!
We already have this. They are called airplanes and automobiles.

No need to spend hundreds of millions more building something to fill a need that has already been filled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2013, 12:04 PM
 
16,345 posts, read 18,100,855 times
Reputation: 7894
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
The government was not involved in transportation until President Lincoln came along. One of his main campaign themes was federal government subsidizing of roads. The Southern states did not like this idea because they knew that if govt controlled transportation they could hurt the South, or anyone else.

BTW, People didn't have to stop and pay tolls either. I see no reason why they would today.
Yeah, well if you want to return to the transportation infrastructure prior to the Civil War, be my guest. There were barely any decent roads and rail was fairly dominant, and yes, people did have to pay to use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2013, 12:07 PM
 
16,345 posts, read 18,100,855 times
Reputation: 7894
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
We already have this. They are called airplanes and automobiles.

No need to spend hundreds of millions more building something to fill a need that has already been filled.
So you're against competition and providing alternatives? Air travel is not cheap (even though it is subsidized quite a bit), and many do not like being reliant on cars (the most highly subsidized form of travel and more expensive to build and maintain than rail), especially younger generations.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2022 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > U.S. Forums > Ohio

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top