Do you support public transportation systems?
but only fixed rail types. buses suck
I think it'll get interesting once cars become autonomous. Instead of a big slow bus there will be a bunch of little pods zipping around.
Not really. We're so spread out that it isn't practical here. In my town it is really a service for poor people and really... It's mostly old people who can't drive that use it since they started with door to door service.
I support the development of public transportation infrastructure.
But I do not support as in use public transportation systems.
Only the ones that pay for themselves.
I see a bus everyday that goes from Farmington, CT to Hartford, CT with only one person on it.
Haha maybe that's a training bus?
We just don't have them where I live. The closest thing is a small bus that will come pick you up when you call them & take you to one of a set list of places. Then pick you up at a certain time to take you home. It's $5 per one way trip.
I had to vote no. But if i lived in an area where there was that availability, the it would be yes.
Totally. I've used public transportation in every city in which I've lived, and I can't imagine how people who don't have cars - OR who choose not to use their cars for some purposes - would get around without it, or what the streets would be like
if they all managed to acquire cars.
I've never used one.
Why wouldn't I??
Some people don't for one reason or another
Why would you!
I don't understand... It's incredibly convenient. Particularly for those unable to drive, who need to travel long distances, that live in an urban setting, and for those who cannot afford a means of transportation such as a car.
I don't drive, I am frequently in the city (Atlantic City, Philly, and NYC), and I can't afford a car let alone gas. If I can't get a ride and it's not walking distance, I need to rely on public transportation such as the train or metro.
Some people might have to ...(gasp)...sit next to a stranger!!!!
Yes. Big time.
Absolutely!!! As an urban planner, I would love nothing more than to see all our major cities connected by high-speed rail and all cities in each state connected by commuter rail. People deserve options other than car ownership!
I would love that! I'm forever mad that if I want/need to go to New York and don't have someone to go with, I still need to get a ride to the station an hour away that will get me there or go from Atlantic City to Philly to NYC. No direct line!
I just wanna say matt, youre a much more tolerable, unbiased version of veritas which is why i love you. Keep up the good work.
Yes. The buses in Vail are the best public transportation I've seen.
Only if run by the private sector.
Absolutely. Wish we had a better one in LA.
We had one then it was replaced by cars.
We still have one; I'm saying I wish we had a better one. Like say one that serviced the west side in a remotely convenient manner.
And no, the new commuter rail out to Culver isn't that big of a help when it takes twenty minutes to drive to Culver anyway...
I don't have experience with it outside of the city, but LA is probably one of the easiest public transportation systems I've ever used. (Comparing it to Philadelphia, New York, DC, Montreal, London, and Paris.)
KAnne, you must have stayed downtown/Pasadena/someplace close to one of those? West LA has horrible public transportation. I love London's system. Easiest public transportation experience I've ever had, and I visit there pretty much every year.
Paris's wasn't too bad when we were there, but we were admittedly staying in the heart of the city. Same thing for NY and Boston. SF's is pretty good too.
Chicago's is O.K. Not amazing, but I know a lot of people who've made it work. But yeah - every city I have visited that bothers attempting public transit does it better than LA, at least the part I live in (my postal address is Los Angeles proper).
I've probably used Boston public transportation, but I don't remember. But yes, I generally stay in the heart of any city. But I've probably never been west enough to experience that without just renting a car.
The Tube is my favorite. I have an Oyster card. I'm pretty biased when it comes to London, though haha
I have an Oyster card too! ;) I even registered it on the off-chance it got lost and now I get random emails about tube strikes hahaha. Didn't use Boston's that much but it was useful for getting around the city and out to a couple suburbs.
It is such a bummer about the west side. That's close to the beaches!! A big part of it is that Beverly Hills won't cooperate with LA city council to extend the subway out to the west. So annoying!!
I support them, but I also support privatizing the systems that are in place now. At least in Massachusetts, the MBTA (subway, busses, trains) is terribly run. A private company could run in much more efficiently in my opinion.
One of the problems with privatization is the profit motive. What motivation does a business have to ensure that all people have access to such a system? Just like public education, libraries, police, fire, etc. everyone pays in, everyone benefits.
Privatization of public transit systems is what killed public transit systems in most of the USA. Trams and light rail lines were bought out by automotive companies (and related businesses) then shut down to drive up demand for cars. Yay!
What exactly does "support" mean? Like paying to use them? I rely on the MTA when I'm traveling in the city. Despite its flaws, it's a great system. Driving in manhattan is still daunting to me on the other hand.
As in you approve of the concept
When they provide a clear benefit, yes. As implemented in most of the US, no. In fact, it's fair to categorize our interstate highways and personal vehicles as our public transportation system, since they are more efficient than alternatives.
Are private vehicles actually more efficient than alternatives? Or is there proliferation a result of some combination of individual heuristics and entrenched interests preventing anything else from being implemented?
Even in most US cities, yes, but away from cities definitely yes. For public transportation to even come close it needs to have a high ridership which happens only in very densely populated areas.
Fair enough. Where it does/can exist, though, public transportation often is hindered for the reasons I mentioned.
I think where it exists AND is self-sustaining, it is well supported and isn't hindered. Where I see it struggling is where it doesn't pay it's own way, or where it doesn't really meet the needs of those it serves. We could use commuter rail here.
Right, that's my point. It's thwarted by a combination of irrational heuristics compounded by pervasive marketing and lobbying by the auto industry. And sometimes snooty jerks in Beverly Hills who won't let you build a subway under their streets!!!
Do any public transportation system support themselves without subsidies?
Technically, nothing in the United States supports itself without subsidies, since government-backed currency is itself a form of subsidy.
I'm forced to support them.
I meant more along the lines of supporting the concept
On local levels.