 
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 1906
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2007 - 11:22 am: |    |
So, how is ridership determined? Two fares = 1 ridership unit? If so, if someone bought four fares for some reason or another that day, he would be counted twice.
Or they could just count how many people go through the turnstile... |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3485
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2007 - 11:23 am: | |
One fare = one rider. In other words, a round-trip counts as two rides.
The percentages of workers who commute via transit, however, are based on number of individuals. That data is taken from the Census. |
Parkguy
Member
Username: Parkguy
Post Number: 125
Registered: 04-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, October 18, 2007 - 10:08 pm: | |
Oil futures closed at over $90/bbl today. Get'cher transit options here! |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3486
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:45 am: | |
quote:Oil futures closed at over $90/bbl today. Get'cher transit options here!
Obviously, you are not aware that scientists will magically produce a solution to allow continuation of easy motoring, just as soon as the "free" market demands a solution. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 1930
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 10:53 am: | |
Oil futures closed at over $90/bbl today. Get'cher transit options here!
Sure to further reduce consumer spending in Michigan... |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 672
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 11:06 pm: | |
I will add my comments here, as I have read most of the thread.
About Europe. I think it comes down to the grass is greener on the other side. I have not met one person here in North America who visited Europe and not marvaled at their public transit and saying how they wish we had that kind of system here in North America, so they would not have to drive as much.
I have also met many Europeans who hate the way we live in North America and think it is gross.
Stats can be used to prove whatever you want.
Now onto North America. There is nothing wrong with choices. Toronto for example, provides choices. And where quality public transit is offered, it is funny how transit always wins out.
In the areas of Toronto with the best transit services, car use is low, eventhough most people own cars.
Infact 65% of transit riders in Toronto have a car they can use whenever they want.
What does this show? It shows people have an option, and for some trips they will take transit.
This is the same in many big cities.
I also want to touch on one thing. If the walkable transit lifestyle was not considered great, then tell me why the areas of the city with walkable neighbourhoods and quality transit are the most expensive?
Why are families making over $200,000 a year having bidding wars for homes in the inner city next to the subway and walkable commercial strip. And why do these families have less cars and use them way less then the poorer suburban residents?
Why are streetcar suburbs in major cities, so in demand that they commend the highest prices in a metro area? If people did not want walkable transit cities, then why are these hoods the most famous?
The point I am trying to get at, is we need choices.
And the American way of having to drive to get milk, is causing massive problems, from health, to pollution, etc.
I am sorry, but how people think it is freedom when you need a car to do your basic needs, I just do not get.
I got lots of freedom being able to walk to all my basic needs, within 5-10min, and having a bus and subway near my house going by every 5min or less.
The funny thing I think about is when I am down in the core of the city, and how to be honest liberating it is not to have to worry about the car.
I have walked miles of the city, exploring restaurants, stores, parks, etc, and the best thing was I did not have to go back to the car. I just hopped on the subway and went home.
Cars, walking, and transit can be liberating.
But it is total crap to say needing a car to do everything is liberating and freedom.
People are so lazy it is not funny.
I will close with one other thing. The city of Toronto was making its official plan a couple years ago, and they polled residents in the suburban districts on what they wanted the suburban areas to be like.
And the majority of residents said they wanted the suburban areas to look like the streetcar suburbs, with walkable retail, quality transit, etc.
If your co-worker loves driving for everything that is great. More reasons then not, since he is an immigrant, he is looking at driving as a status symbol.
Drive if you want.
But I so much more enjoy doing things by walking and enjoy the great city that surrounds me. Getting bread can be such a fun thing on a Sat morning, when you are strolling down a busy commercial street, with 5 different bakeries and the smells, sights, and sounds coming out 
We have built a culture that does not treasure the little things in life anymore, like a morning stroll. Its all rush rush rush rush. Gotta drive, because it is 5min faster then walking. Whats the rush for??????? You answer that. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 673
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Friday, October 19, 2007 - 11:15 pm: | |
I want to touch on transit service.
People in Metro Detroit do not understand what quality transit is.
In big cities like NYC, Toronto, etc you do not live by a transit schedule.
Transit service runs so often, that you can do whatever you want and not worry about a schedule. What that means is I can go wherever I want in this city, whenever I want, and have just as much freedom. Does it take me a little longer to go to certain places? Yes. But the trade off I feel is worth it.
Cars are fine, when used in moderation. I have always stood by the premise that most people do not need to drive to work. If we could get more people even to just take transit to work, it would be great.
No one is telling people they have to take transit. Even in Europe, no one is forced. If they wanted to, they would drive.
No one forces people here in Toronto to take transit. Yet when quality transit is provided people flock to it.
Vancouver did something as simple as offer a limited stop bus service along a major street. And guess what? 20% of the people who use to drive in that area, switched to transit. No one told them to. They did it on their own.
Offer good transit, and people will use it for atleast some of their trips. |
Paintnprint
Member
Username: Paintnprint
Post Number: 17
Registered: 04-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 8:37 am: | |
Listers,
I'm an ex-patriot who now lives in Brooklyn.
I have not driven an automobile for the last six years. The last time was when I drove my U-Haul here to unload my life into a small Brooklyn apartment.
The transit system takes care of all of my needs.
No insurance, no repair bills, no tickets, no gas bills, no new tires, no car broken into.
NYC has a model transit system, and it's all I need.
Now, if you want to write about the riff-raff imported, look at Atlanta's MARTA system. Outlying suburbs don't want Atlanta trash coming in and stealing babies at the mall.
And, in some respect, this seems to be the attitude of the Greater-Detroit suburbs.
Lock out the city (Black) dwellers, for fear of crime, and stolen babies.
And yet, many Blacks contribute to society and commerce. White folks would, suburban White folks and middle-class Blacks, don't want to give it a chance.
Living in Brooklyn, a vast, multi-cultural city, I can't understand this.
As Rodney Allen Rippy once remarked,
"Can't we all just get along?"
From the far East, all I can see on this list is hand-wringing, corrupt government, cheap trash on the streets, housing in the crapper, and a city that simply can't get it together.
Why would I want to come back?
Great bands? And Boblo, ooops, that's gone like Sir Graves Ghastly.
Not really enough, cheap housing included in the sum total (teachers chuckle.)
A shell of where I grew up.
Saw that in 1971, and left for good.
Good luck to all of you in Detroit and the Greater-Detroit area.
Detroit lost its industry, and seems unable to find a new one.
Who's running this thing?
Where's the manager?
I wanna bitch-slap somebody, from Brooklyn, if I could identify them.
Regards,
Koko
in Brooklyn |
Paintnprint
Member
Username: Paintnprint
Post Number: 18
Registered: 04-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 8:48 am: | |
....and whoever is running this site, take Old Slumpy off the front-page, as well as the decayed Mishkan Yisroel.
And Alley Culture.
"Look! A city of decay!"
Move there? They display their decay on the front-page.
How about a shot of the Fox Theater, front and inside?
Koko
in Brooklyn
Detroiters, put on your best face and not worst.
Masks of comedy and tragedy?
Put on a happy face or no ex-patriot will ever come back.
Why? |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 675
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 9:35 am: | |
I want to make a comment about the Europe thing again. 53% of people drive. That means half are not driving on a regular basis.
So that does not point anything to most people driving or wanting to.
Just over 50% of people in Toronto and the inner suburbs drive to work, while the rest use other means. Does that mean we are forcing 50% of the pop to not drive? No we are not. It means we have a balanced transport network, as does Europe.
The reason only 1% or something like that of Metro Detroit residents use transit, is because there is hardly any transit to move them. |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 429
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 5:39 pm: | |
I want to know what world-class city doesn't have a major mass transit system. That's what I'd like to see the naysayers come up with... where in the developed world is it truly successful without usable mass transit? |
Jjw
Member
Username: Jjw
Post Number: 481
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 6:09 pm: | |
I don't know if LA is really even considered a world-class city but it sure is recognized around the world. And yes, they have been slowly making inroads into the world of mass transit. But, I think it would qualify for your question digital. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3490
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 6:25 pm: | |
Even Los Angeles has been building rail lines like crazy the past 20 years. Some of their light rail lines are among the busiest light rail lines in the nation. Never mind they also have a decent-size commuter rail system, Metrolink.
In any event, LA provides a hell of a lot more transit service than Detroit does. The MTA Red Line (heavy rail subway) alone carries as many people in one day as the entire DDOT network. Metrolink carries more passengers than SMART.
www.mta.net
www.metrolinktrains.com
(Message edited by DaninDC on October 20, 2007) |
Jjw
Member
Username: Jjw
Post Number: 485
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 6:29 pm: | |
agreed. But I was trying to think of an example for digital and that was the closest I came to. I thought about Houston but I wouldn't consider it to be "world-class". |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 430
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 6:45 pm: | |
That's mind blowing to me, Danindc - I was there for a little bit when they were putting track underground (what a nightmere as far as traffic) and I can't believe (well, I can - I'm saying it in an expressive way) that one line carries more than all of DDOT. Wow - it really puts things in perspective. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 677
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 20, 2007 - 8:52 pm: | |
One could say LA was built by transit. All the famous parts of LA, were built before the auto craze, and were built along the largest streetcar network in the nation.
Many parts of LA are classic streetcar suburbs that were all connected by streetcars to the centre, including Hollywood.
One could say the car was imposed on LA, because what built LA was the streetcar at first.
The sad thing is the decline in many of LA's amazing cultural districts and landmarks since the car craze.
Broadway for example should be a world famous movie palace nightlife centre. Instead historical theatres sit empty.
Houston is a great example of a city that turned its back on mass transit, and now is trying to build it up.
No matter what just as you can't have a city where everyone takes transit(well you can, but you get the point), you can't have a city that just relies on cars.
I don't get why the pro-car people are so upset with the idea of having choices. Does not mean you have to ride it. |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4439
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 7:39 pm: | |
I was doing a little research today, and I came across a very interesting document published by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics entitled "Federal Subsidies to Passenger Transportation." The most recent of which was from 2004.
Here is a little table that shows federal subsidies by mode of transportation. As you can see, the feds actually earn a "profit" of $1.79 per passenger per 1,000 miles from automobiles.
Quote:
The net federal subsidy to highway passenger transportation shows negative values for the entire period, indicating excess user charge payments (e.g., fuel taxes) by highway users over their allocated cost (Figure 1)2. Users of the highway passenger transportation system paid significantly greater amounts of money to the federal government than their allocated costs in 1994-2000. This was a result of the increase in the deficit reduction motor fuel tax rates between October 1993 and September 1997, and the increase in Highway Trust Fund fuel tax rates starting in October 1997.
Read it and weep mass transit freaks. Certainly in terms of federal dollars, this pretty much sinks your entire narrative.
(Message edited by perfectgentleman on October 28, 2007) |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3580
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 10:36 pm: | |
quote:Here is a little table that shows federal subsidies by mode of transportation. As you can see, the feds actually earn a "profit" of $1.79 per passenger per 1,000 miles from automobiles.
If that's true, why is the Highway Trust Fund expected to go bankrupt within six years? |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4444
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 10:59 pm: | |
The fund has been raided to pay for projects unrelated to highways, including mass transit.
Frittering away road money
"On average, transit riders pay about one-fourth of the cost of their travel. If they paid their own way, the highway trust fund wouldn't be running dry. Instead, road users are singled-out to shell out, like New York City's plan to tax drivers $8-a-day to raise billions for transit. Since 1983, motorists have had $101 billion taken from them and given to mass transit, plus billions more to bike paths."
http://www.heritage.org/Press/ Commentary/ed100107b.cfm |
Philbert
Member
Username: Philbert
Post Number: 297
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 11:19 pm: | |
Certainly this road cost doesn't include the lives and money lost in the Middle East for oil |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 711
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 11:39 pm: | |
Perfectgentleman do you have kids?
Not to single you out. But I don't get how some people on here are so anti-transit, and going on about costs, etc.
I ask teh kid question, because if any of your have families, I would like to know how you don't like the idea of knowing there is a transport system in place to get your kid to college, the mall, or where they need to go. How do you all afford cars for them all?
We pay a lot for all these cars. And tolls or whatever from the Federal Transportation Commission or whatever it is, means nothing in total costs. |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4447
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 11:45 pm: | |
Whether we choose to have mass transit or not is for all of us to decide as a country. But there is constant harping on this forum that funding the highway system is being "subsidized" in some way which takes money away from mass transit projects.
I have just proven the opposite is true. I think the dialog needs to be based on facts, not on biased speculation of people who dislike suburban sprawl.
quote:
We pay a lot for all these cars. And tolls or whatever from the Federal Transportation Commission or whatever it is, means nothing in total costs.
That statement alone totally destroys your credibility.
(Message edited by perfectgentleman on October 28, 2007) |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 712
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 11:54 pm: | |
There is more to cost then what you pay in tolls or whatever that federal commission collects.
Your city pays to upkeep roads, your county pays, etc. It is more complexe then you make it out to be. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 4488
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, October 28, 2007 - 11:57 pm: | |
Kids don't go to college unless they're terribly bright. They're adults and old enough to fend for themselves.
And another lefty just couldn't wait to invoke yet another for the children ruse as a poster child. If facts don't work--they rarely do for lefty arguments, they bring out the kids for bait time and time again. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 713
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 12:06 am: | |
You very well know what I mean by kids. And I don't understand how Metro Detroit families with no higher family incomes afford to send all their kids to university with cars.
Mass transit funding would reduce the costs for most Metro families when it comes to transportation. And that means more money in your pockets. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 4489
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 12:43 am: | |
What's the sum total of LRT systems in the US? About 20, not counting a few small streetcar lines?
And not having such a system is not a sensible reason why any such city should have one. That one rationale appears to be the moronic DY justification more so than other reasons.
LRT will work in only a few cities in the US. And they all lose money when all costs are factored into the equation--especially when they get other taxpayers somewhere else to pay for them. I doubt that the general fund of any city actually earned money because of LRT. It surely will not work in places like Detroit, where even bus ridership is very low. It'll just be a waste of money down a rat hole to build and to operate.
And no, Virginia. The saying, "If you build it, they will come." is just idle fiction that radiclibs continually use to justify boondoggles. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 714
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 9:17 am: | |
So what if they lose money? Lots of public services lose money. I do not get this idea that transit has to make a profit.
And second, how do you know it won't work in Detroit? Bus ridership is low in Detroit, because you have a bus system with some of the worse service in the western world. I don't expect bus ridership to be high in Detroit, when you only have four routes that operate seven days a week from day to night outside of city limits. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3582
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 9:19 am: | |
quote:What's the sum total of LRT systems in the US? About 20, not counting a few small streetcar lines?
U.S. Light Rail Systems (existing or under construction)
Boston, Philadelphia, Camden, Jersey City, Newark, Norfolk, Charlotte, Cleveland, Miami, New Orleans, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Denver, Portland, Seattle, Los Angeles, San Diego, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento, Salt Lake
U.S. Heavy Rail Systems
Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Atlanta, Cleveland, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco/Oakland
More prevalent than you think. PG--your obscure graphic doesn't "prove" a damned thing. For starters, there aren't any assumptions stated, so it's impossible to tell what the basis of comparison is.
Again, if government profits off the gas tax, as you think, then why is the Highway Trust Fund about to go bankrupt within a few years?
I'd also like to add that transit projects are not permitted to receive money from the Highway Trust Fund, which is earmarked specifically for highway construction.
Get your shit together and look at facts instead of spewing biased propaganda.
I am curious to know, however, how many employees of Heritage Foundation get off the Metro or commuter train at Union Station every day.... |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4458
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 9:34 am: | |
Miketoronto -
The reason it matters if they lose money or not is that funds are not unlimited. If mass transit cannot be supported by the ridership then the question must be asked is this the best use of public funds, which are usually in short supply?
As far as kids going to college, many of them live on campuses and walk to their classes, they don't need cars or mass transit for the most part. Kids that go to school locally seem to be getting to their classes just fine.
Danindc -
The "obscure graphic" is published by the Dept. of Transportation! They are the authority on the matter and it is one of the only factual references in this entire thread.
You have provided nothing to back up your claims, so that makes your assertions propaganda, not mine. The assumptions are based on the taxes collected from motorists and the cost of maintaining the highway system, not a complicated formula, really.
Here is the link to the source document:
http://www.bts.gov/programs/fe deral_subsidies_to_passenger_t ransportation/pdf/entire.pdf
I have already explained why the fund is running short, it is because politicians have raided it for purposes for which it was never intended, including your beloved mass transit. You can claim that this is not "permitted" but the folks in congress have found a way around that.
Perhaps you should get your shit together and back yourself up with some facts or move on.
Here is a nice quote:
"Between 1990 and 2002, transit received the largest amount of net federal subsidy, increasing from $5.09 billion to $7.31 billion (Figure 1), an increase of 3% per year. Next to passenger rail, transit received the next highest net federal subsidy per thousand passenger-miles for the period, averaging $118.26 in year 2000 chained dollars."
(Message edited by perfectgentleman on October 29, 2007) |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3594
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:20 pm: | |
Sorry, PG. For some reason, I thought that was posted on this thread.
I'll be more than happy to refute once I read the entire report. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1407
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:27 pm: | |
quote:And no, Virginia. The saying, "If you build it, they will come." is just idle fiction that radiclibs continually use to justify boondoggles.
Will you also use this mantra to decry interstate highway expansion? Or new boulevards into corn fields and forests? Certainly if we build this road, no developers will build houses, so there's no point to building it, right? And certainly, none of the cities who have built transit systems in the last 50 years have reaped any benefits in development that is directly tied to the presence of a transit system, right? |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4485
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:35 pm: | |
Highway expansion tends to be a reaction to a previous expansion in development where the existing road has become overcrowded. Rarely are highways built to nowhere to attract development. Proponents of mass transit should follow this model. |
Charlottepaul
Member
Username: Charlottepaul
Post Number: 1895
Registered: 10-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:39 pm: | |
Not necessarily Perfectgentleman. It really is a modern day requirement that light rail/tranist service can't be built until there is proof that there is demand for it. Around the early years of the twentieth century when street cars were present, communities grew up around the lines and stops--not the other way around. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3596
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:40 pm: | |
quote:Highway expansion tends to be a reaction to a previous expansion in development where the existing road has become overcrowded.
And has that ever *solved* traffic congestion? Why or why not?
quote:Rarely are highways built to nowhere to attract development.
You're even blinder and more naive than I thought. |
Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 3301
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:43 pm: | |
I think a rail system up the Woodward corridor that connected downtown, midtown, ferndale, royal oak, and bham would be used heavily (by myself as well). Beyond that, I'm not sure. I would start with that and then see about anything else. Ferndale has stated for some time it would welcome and participate in such a developement. |
Umcs
Member
Username: Umcs
Post Number: 339
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:52 pm: | |
"Rarely are highways built to nowhere to attract development."
Two alphanumeric digits:
M-5 |
Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 3302
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:54 pm: | |
Are you kidding? Did you ever try driving down Haggerty during rush hour before the M-5 extender was built? |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4489
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 2:57 pm: | |
I have no doubt that some development would occur near a rail line if it were built, the question becomes the old cost/benefit analysis right Dan?
M-5 illustrates MY POINT exactly! |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3599
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 3:00 pm: | |
quote:I have no doubt that some development would occur near a rail line if it were built, the question becomes the old cost/benefit analysis right Dan?
That's correct. |
Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman
Post Number: 4491
Registered: 03-2006
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 3:05 pm: | |
quote:That's correct.
OK. So that is all I am saying. I am not actually anti mass transit, if a project makes sense, great, it should be built. The last attempt was the People Mover so as long as we don't repeat that mistake that would be good.
What I do object to is the constant refrain from people on this forum that the evil suburbs are robbing the poor folks of Detroit of their transit opportunities and are also the primary reason for urban decay in Detroit. I think now we can all agree that is nonsense. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 3206
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 3:43 pm: | |
don't think i've ever heard anyone here say that, pg. Transit makes more sense in virtually every way than expanding the freeway system even more. I would go downtown WAY more often if I didn't have parking or traffic to worry about. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 4492
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 4:18 pm: | |
quote:I would go downtown WAY more often if I didn't have parking or traffic to worry about. Whatsamatta? The big city-chauffeured vehicles aren't good enough for you? The vast majority of their routes go through/to downtown. |
Miketoronto
Member
Username: Miketoronto
Post Number: 715
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Monday, October 29, 2007 - 5:37 pm: | |
Perfectgentleman not everything makes money. And transit is a bargin for how many people it can move.
We have more then enough money to fund transit.
I guess we should close down other services that don't make money like police, fire, parks, etc???
And transit has been ripped apart so much in the USA that it is going to take money and years of maybe low ridership before these systems reach their potential. But you have to start rebuilding somewhere. |
|
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.