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.
12-15 minutes between trains at rush hour sounds fine to you? Have you seen how crowded trains get at rush hour when the wait time is only 2-4 minutes? If the wait time changes to 12-15 minutes, trains will be too crowded to board.
Do you have any real knowledge about this topic at all? Have you done any research? Math? Is your opinion based on facts?
Its funny how often in America people think they can just take a quick glance at a problem and spit out the "perfect solution" without knowing much about it. A lot of American's believe they are smarter than the people in charge. I've always found that hilarious based on its irony.
A private contractor would be more in tune with the needs of the customers. Trains would be increased to meet demand. Trains would be removed from areas that don't use them and moved to busier parts of the route.
A private contractor would be more in tune with the needs of the customers. Trains would be increased to meet demand. Trains would be removed from areas that don't use them and moved to busier parts of the route.
A private contractor needs to make a profit. Its not that simple to just "increase trains" and "remove trains" from certain areas. Everything private industry does is based on making a profit. I know because I work in the private sector.
There is no way to run metro in a way that keeps it affordable, meets all demands and also makes a profit.
Your proposal makes no sense at all and know nothing about how a large transit system works.
A private contractor needs to make a profit. Its not that simple to just "increase trains" and "remove trains" from certain areas. Everything private industry does is based on making a profit. I know because I work in the private sector.
There is no way to run metro in a way that keeps it affordable, meets all demands and also makes a profit.
Your proposal makes no sense at all and know nothing about how a large transit system works.
Trains are already increased or decreased during peak times. It does not need to be "affordable". I just has to work. Why cater to the lowest common denominator? Let those that can't pay take the bus. How about making people WANT to use the metro? My point is that there are better minds in the private sector than some politically connected government board.
It does not need to be "affordable". I just has to work. Why cater to the lowest common denominator? Let those that can't pay take the bus.
Great. So most of the service and other blue collar job workers in the DC metro area who rely on METRO rail to get to/from work will start crowding buses in order to meet their transportation needs. That'll require more buses on the road to accommodate the increase in riders, which will lead to more traffic congestion.
Trains are already increased or decreased during peak times. It does not need to be "affordable". I just has to work. Why cater to the lowest common denominator? Let those that can't pay take the bus. How about making people WANT to use the metro? My point is that there are better minds in the private sector than some politically connected government board.
Absurd.
You don't seem to understand the purpose of a subway system. And why would people WANT to use Metro if it costs a ridiculous amount of money? The value metro brings is being cheap and fast compared to other options. Raise the price too high and Metro loses all its appeal.
If you don't make Metro affordable it will not be profitable. Not only will poor people not use it.. but no one else will use it either. No one is going to pay $8-10 dollars or more to take a subway in one direction. That is a total rip off. Even if I was rich I wouldn't do it. NO ONE but a very small group of people will use Metro. Which means NO profits. For profits to happen.. Metro needs high ridership. This is simple math. You can only have high ridership by providing affordable service.
Your proposal makes no sense. You should just accept that you're argument holds no water and stop trying to justify something that lacks all logic and common sense.
His proposal sounds like he's only thinking of commuters for the far out suburbs into and out of the city. No thought for those who are in the city.
Which makes his proposal even dumber.
Its well known that Metro accessible DC suburbs are urbanizing. This means more walkable areas with jobs around metro stations. What that also means is more "suburb to suburb" commutes. For instance, someone might commute from their home in Rockville to their job in Bethesda.. or from their home in Ballston to their job in Tysons Corner. The days when everyone lived in the suburbs and worked in the city are over. So banking on suburban commuters would not be a profitable financial model for Metro to follow. No one is paying $8-10 dollars for a subway ride from Ballston to Tysons corner. Total ripoff.
The value metro brings is being cheap and fast compared to other options.
Correct. And this is why, for suburban commuters, Metro has no value.
Hence, the large proportion of suburbanites who don't even consider using Metro. Even when they're relatively near a station. Peak fares end up costing about the same as parking in DC, there's little parking near suburban stations and it's pricey, the time spent on Metro usually exceeds that of driving (even with crummy DC traffic), and Metro reliability and safety are atrocious.
Thus : Metro is indeed in a "death spiral."
It's going to take a dramatic increase in funding; first for safety and reliability, then to decrease transit times, then to make peak fares economically competitive with the cost of driving. Clearly none of this is going to happen. Our abominable traffic will only get worse.
And as a side issue, Maryland is showing their willingness and ability to make a financial commitment to Metro - NONE - by throwing all their funds at a useless Purple Line project. A project they love solely because it includes a huge slurp at the federal funding teat and will add a few thousand temporary construction jobs to their region.
Where's the leadership on transit ? Where's the effort to get cars off the roads ? Neither exist.
WMATA is screwed because of it's 97% Black "employees" once you accept that then we can start fixing this mess.
Its not the black employees. Its the culture of incompetence and indifference that caused most of Metro's problems. If Metro hired 97% white employees who had the same attitude, culture and work ethic the result would be the same.
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.
