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.
Private companies could never do mass transit, they would have to charge at least 8 times the fair compared to public mass transit. Most people couldn't afford $20-$30 for a one way ticket
If "most people could afford" is the yard stick, we would have nothing today, nothing to eat, nothing to wear.
Once upon a time, only the rich and powerful could afford to eat and wear cloth.
The vast majority of technology or invention is not affordable from the beginning. They often carry an obscene price tag, and even though the demand is high, only the rich and powerful can can afford them. However; because of the free market, competition quickly drives the price down.
When we have government monopoly, there's no free market or competition, we are suck with crappy services and high prices. Yes, we have highways, but have you thought about if private companies can build roads, maybe we have super highways where we can drive 1000 miles per hour at the same cost.
Private companies could, they have a profit incentive where the government is horrible at almost everything it does and inefficient at everything it does.
The texas high speed rail is all private financed and may succeed where Californias government funded high speed rail will probably fail. It has Japanese investment and Shinkansen technology as well
Tokyo, Osaka are probably the most efficient rail in the world and it is privately funded. Singapore and Hong kong has alot of private investment in rail as well.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
If "most people could afford" is the yard stick, we would have nothing today, nothing to eat, nothing to wear.
Once upon a time, only the rich and powerful could afford to eat and wear cloth.
The vast majority of technology or invention is not affordable from the beginning. They often carry an obscene price tag, and even though the demand is high, only the rich and powerful can can afford them. However; because of the free market, competition quickly drives the price down.
When we have government monopoly, there's no free market or competition, we are suck with crappy services and high prices. Yes, we have highways, but have you thought about if private companies can build roads, maybe we have super highways where we can drive 1000 miles per hour at the same cost.
The thing is is you can't have competition in transportation infrastructure. There is only so much land. So there has to be only one choice, and better it be the government then some private monopoly. Same reason you couldn't have competing sewers or electric grids. Only so much space. And I'd rather not have 20 roads right next to each other or a mile wide swath of utilities just because of "competition". Think things through before saying stuff like your post
I live in Kansas City and in black neighborhoods I grew up in it was basically and economic desert. And one of the things people had to do was get on like 2 or 3 different busses just to get to work daily. For me, I really wish there was better public transportation because many of the job opportunities that I really could have used weren't even reachable by bus in our metropolitan area.
And I know that for many conservatives, they don't like the thought of "thugs being able to commute to our nice neighborhoods or shopping centers".
But I will say, especially in this city many of these people fight with every thing not to make the city step into the future. Then the same people complain that it's boring all the time. They don't understand that things like lightrail and spending money on you know event centers and arenas is what attracts things like Superbowls or NCAA Final Fours or Republic National Conventions...events that bring in millions to local economies. These people have no sense of spending money to make money.
Americans invented and/or optimized train travel. I would rather have a combination of real cars and trains than getting shuttled around by a robot in a Prius, anyday.
How are self-driving cars/busses "Un-American"?
That may one of the most preposterous statements I've heard on a forum regularly indundated with nonsense. That's not to say I wouldn't have reservations getting on such a vehicle for the first time, but it hasn't got anything to do with being 'Murican.
It would be interesting if you could name one privately-funded and operated, intracity rail system, anywhere in the world, that is successful today, even with major tax write-offs. I'm not saying that one doesn't exist, but I'd like to take a close look at it, if it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by azriverfan.
What would be the point of that? They were not designed to make a profit but to facilitate travel and make life more efficient which comes with it's own opportunity gains
I'm not recommending privately-funded transit projects; the poster I quoted in my original message was. Go back and read those claims about how tax breaks are all that private investors need to successfully build and operate light-rail systems. I don't think it could be done in this country and keep the fares low enough to attract many riders.
I am still bitter about my state voting for a $50 billion light rail system. I use public transportation and can tell you that the metro buses are perfectly fine except that there aren't enough of them. For way less than $1 billion they could simply buy more buses and hire more bus drivers.
Do some research and find out how much it cost to build and maintain 1 lane of highway
You are going to be surprised
The thing is is you can't have competition in transportation infrastructure. There is only so much land. So there has to be only one choice, and better it be the government then some private monopoly. Same reason you couldn't have competing sewers or electric grids. Only so much space. And I'd rather not have 20 roads right next to each other or a mile wide swath of utilities just because of "competition". Think things through before saying stuff like your post
You are surely lack of imagination. If there's money to be made, we will find a way. Maybe we could have individual helicopters that cost $20,000 if not for the government monopoly.
The point is because the government cornered the market, there's no money to be made for private companies - there's no innovation. Nobody can compete with the "free roads" or the government that holds people at gunpoint.
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.
