7 ms·

1. The ability to take a taxi or uber home also prevents drunk driving. Responsible drinking or having a designated driver also prevents drunk driving. Even i

by dkopi 11y ago

1. The ability to take a taxi or uber home also prevents drunk driving. Responsible drinking or having a designated driver also prevents drunk driving. Even if you were to insist the government subsidizes "get home late from a bar without driving", Empty night trains are probably one of the least cost effective ways of doing that. Personally, I just walk home from a bar. That prevents drunk driving since I don't need cars, taxis or trains just to get a beer. 2. Density indeed helps increase walk-ability. But it's also about mixed used development. Jane Jacobs talks a lot about this in "The Death and Life of Great American Cities". If zoning laws divide the city into a "business area", a "living area" and "an entertainment area", Density isn't going to save you from having to drive between those areas.

aqme28 11y ago
It's far more expensive to take a taxi/uber or to leave near bars than it is to take public transit home. Those are not realistic options for everyone.
- dkopi 11y ago
  That's because you're comparing only the cost paid directly by the passenger. Not the total cost of operating a train line that gets heavily subsidized by tax payers. Mass transit makes a lot of sense. It can even be profitable when you have a lot of people going in the same direction at the same time. But whenever you're on a really empty bus or train - someone else is footing the bill for your very expensive ride home.
  - lukeschlather 11y ago
    When properly supported mass transit is much cheaper than individual cars. BART is under $5/passenger trip. http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/transit-system-efficiency http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/transit-system-efficiency
  - barney54 11y ago
    Mass transit can make sense, but it isn't profitable. Very few public transit systems in the world are profitable. Bus systems are more likely to be profitable. https://www.quora.com/Which-public-transportation-systems-make-a-profit https://www.quora.com/Which-public-transportation-systems-ma...
    - jahewson 11y ago
      Interestingly this is the exact same argument which was made when most of the San Francisco cable cars were ripped out. But it wasn't true.
    - soyiuz 11y ago
      Nor should they be profitable. Public goods are an expenditure, like clean air or public libraries. We want to spend money on them, that is the point.
    - SilasX 11y ago
      Not profitable by fares charged, sure. Definitely profitable if they were credited with the gain in property taxes/values that their presence facilitates.
  - jahewson 11y ago
    I think you're forgetting the cost of operating a road, and in particular, freeway network, which is entirely paid for by tax payers.
    - bluecalm 11y ago
      You need the road anyway. Keeping it open during the night doesn't add up to the costs. Having an empty train running during the night does.
      - rtpg 11y ago
        You might not need the road anyways. If a major fraction of the population doesn't need to drive, you can make human-sized (instead of car-sized) roads and have higher density and lower upkeep. And you can have trains that come much less often (like, say, once an hour) to collect the stragglers. Less wagons in the trains. Hello, Tokyo has no trains from 1-5AM. So you can simply plan around it (either going home before 1 or knowing you'll be out til 5).
        raverbashing 11y ago
        No, it's not going to go back to human-sized roads There are deliveries to be made, buses to ride (even with a good train infrastructure), people who can't take public transport, etc It's simply naive to think otherwise
        rtpg 11y ago
        Human sized roads can still have cars, just not as many as a 4-lane road Plus if you can shrink parking lots to 1/2 of what they are you'll reclaim so much space downtown
      - snowwrestler 11y ago
        Electric trains are really efficient. I don't have the numbers in front of me but the per-passenger-mile cost is almost certainly lower than Uber.
  - vacri 11y ago
    > Not the total cost of operating a train line that gets heavily subsidized by tax payers. A few extra late-night runs don't particularly move the budget. It's a bit like manufacturing - once you've designed your product and set up the production line, doing a run of 4000 items isn't much different to doing a run of 5000 items.
- FussyZeus 11y ago
  If you cannot afford whatever method is available to get home when hammered, the solution is not drunk driving, the solution is NOT DRINKING. You guys are framing this debate as if going out and getting drunk in a bar is a necessity for life, it isn't.
  - jahewson 11y ago
    Abstinence! Yeah that works really well.
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    Maybe we can compromise with drinking at home? I'd hate to suggest that anyone shouldn't be drinking...
  - cowardlydragon 11y ago
    Sin taxes make the world go round.
  - kalleboo 11y ago
    Hey if you want to explain that to the masses, go ahead. I don't think it will go over very well though.
losteric 11y ago
Not everybody gets drunk within walking distance of their house and many (most?) cities have laws against public intoxication (eg walking drunk). Public transportation is one of those things that people shouldn't have to think about, it should just be available all the time (with varying service intervals). Mixed-use amazing and the US is incredibly backwards in that sense. I think we have a stigma against mixed-use because apartments used to have shitty sound insulation. That's not really a problem anymore...
- jessaustin 11y ago
  Is anyone cited for public intoxication merely drunk while in public, or are they instead drunk while causing a problem in public? I ask because in various cities I've had a fair amount of police contact while intoxicated, and never been cited. Typical exchange: "What are you doing?!" "Goin' 'ome, off'cer!" "You're too drunk to ride your bike. Get off and walk." "Ooookaaayyy..." If being drunk makes one an asshole, then one is in fact an asshole, and one should drink at home. Besides, train stations and bus stops are also public places. How is that supposed to work?
  - zanny 11y ago
    We often get instances of US police using the public intoxication laws as a cart blanche means to arrest people: http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/stroke-victim-and-son-arrested-by-dpd-in-march-file-federal-suit-against-city-of-dallas-7131894 http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/stroke-victim-and-son-arr... This also happens with drunk passengers in cars. Police will order drunk passengers to get out of a car, to then immediately charge them with public intoxication. http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/news/sheriff-s-beat-deputies-stop-car-arrest-passenger-with-syringe/article_a2677e12-f10a-11e5-a54d-c32316f5b17b.html http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/news/sheriff-s-beat-deput... Nebulous laws like public intoxication statutes are rife for abuse by power hungry megalomaniac cops with no accountability or oversight.
    - gst 11y ago
      > Police will order drunk passengers to get out of a car, to then immediately charge them with public intoxication. In some states (e.g., Texas) a car counts as "public place" when it comes to intoxication. The passenger wasn't charged because he left the car, but he already violated the law by being intoxicated inside the car.
soyiuz 11y ago
1. Yes, that was just an example of potential beneficial effects of public transit. My point was that some things in the "public good" just cost money, and should not be expected to monetize themselves. 2. True. Upvote for Jane Jacobs. Properly diverse density.

by dkopi 11y ago

aqme28 11y ago

It's far more expensive to take a taxi/uber or to leave near bars than it is to take public transit home. Those are not realistic options for everyone.

dkopi 11y ago
That's because you're comparing only the cost paid directly by the passenger. Not the total cost of operating a train line that gets heavily subsidized by tax payers. Mass transit makes a lot of sense. It can even be profitable when you have a lot of people going in the same direction at the same time. But whenever you're on a really empty bus or train - someone else is footing the bill for your very expensive ride home.
- lukeschlather 11y ago
  When properly supported mass transit is much cheaper than individual cars. BART is under $5/passenger trip. http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/transit-system-efficiency http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/transit-system-efficiency
- barney54 11y ago
  Mass transit can make sense, but it isn't profitable. Very few public transit systems in the world are profitable. Bus systems are more likely to be profitable. https://www.quora.com/Which-public-transportation-systems-make-a-profit https://www.quora.com/Which-public-transportation-systems-ma...
  - jahewson 11y ago
    Interestingly this is the exact same argument which was made when most of the San Francisco cable cars were ripped out. But it wasn't true.
  - soyiuz 11y ago
    Nor should they be profitable. Public goods are an expenditure, like clean air or public libraries. We want to spend money on them, that is the point.
  - SilasX 11y ago
    Not profitable by fares charged, sure. Definitely profitable if they were credited with the gain in property taxes/values that their presence facilitates.
- jahewson 11y ago
  I think you're forgetting the cost of operating a road, and in particular, freeway network, which is entirely paid for by tax payers.
  - bluecalm 11y ago
    You need the road anyway. Keeping it open during the night doesn't add up to the costs. Having an empty train running during the night does.
    - rtpg 11y ago
      You might not need the road anyways. If a major fraction of the population doesn't need to drive, you can make human-sized (instead of car-sized) roads and have higher density and lower upkeep. And you can have trains that come much less often (like, say, once an hour) to collect the stragglers. Less wagons in the trains. Hello, Tokyo has no trains from 1-5AM. So you can simply plan around it (either going home before 1 or knowing you'll be out til 5).
      - raverbashing 11y ago
        No, it's not going to go back to human-sized roads There are deliveries to be made, buses to ride (even with a good train infrastructure), people who can't take public transport, etc It's simply naive to think otherwise
        rtpg 11y ago
        Human sized roads can still have cars, just not as many as a 4-lane road Plus if you can shrink parking lots to 1/2 of what they are you'll reclaim so much space downtown
    - snowwrestler 11y ago
      Electric trains are really efficient. I don't have the numbers in front of me but the per-passenger-mile cost is almost certainly lower than Uber.
- vacri 11y ago
  > Not the total cost of operating a train line that gets heavily subsidized by tax payers. A few extra late-night runs don't particularly move the budget. It's a bit like manufacturing - once you've designed your product and set up the production line, doing a run of 4000 items isn't much different to doing a run of 5000 items.
FussyZeus 11y ago
If you cannot afford whatever method is available to get home when hammered, the solution is not drunk driving, the solution is NOT DRINKING. You guys are framing this debate as if going out and getting drunk in a bar is a necessity for life, it isn't.
- jahewson 11y ago
  Abstinence! Yeah that works really well.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  Maybe we can compromise with drinking at home? I'd hate to suggest that anyone shouldn't be drinking...
- cowardlydragon 11y ago
  Sin taxes make the world go round.
- kalleboo 11y ago
  Hey if you want to explain that to the masses, go ahead. I don't think it will go over very well though.

losteric 11y ago

Not everybody gets drunk within walking distance of their house and many (most?) cities have laws against public intoxication (eg walking drunk). Public transportation is one of those things that people shouldn't have to think about, it should just be available all the time (with varying service intervals). Mixed-use amazing and the US is incredibly backwards in that sense. I think we have a stigma against mixed-use because apartments used to have shitty sound insulation. That's not really a problem anymore...

jessaustin 11y ago
Is anyone cited for public intoxication merely drunk while in public, or are they instead drunk while causing a problem in public? I ask because in various cities I've had a fair amount of police contact while intoxicated, and never been cited. Typical exchange: "What are you doing?!" "Goin' 'ome, off'cer!" "You're too drunk to ride your bike. Get off and walk." "Ooookaaayyy..." If being drunk makes one an asshole, then one is in fact an asshole, and one should drink at home. Besides, train stations and bus stops are also public places. How is that supposed to work?
- zanny 11y ago
  We often get instances of US police using the public intoxication laws as a cart blanche means to arrest people: http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/stroke-victim-and-son-arrested-by-dpd-in-march-file-federal-suit-against-city-of-dallas-7131894 http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/stroke-victim-and-son-arr... This also happens with drunk passengers in cars. Police will order drunk passengers to get out of a car, to then immediately charge them with public intoxication. http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/news/sheriff-s-beat-deputies-stop-car-arrest-passenger-with-syringe/article_a2677e12-f10a-11e5-a54d-c32316f5b17b.html http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/news/sheriff-s-beat-deput... Nebulous laws like public intoxication statutes are rife for abuse by power hungry megalomaniac cops with no accountability or oversight.
  - gst 11y ago
    > Police will order drunk passengers to get out of a car, to then immediately charge them with public intoxication. In some states (e.g., Texas) a car counts as "public place" when it comes to intoxication. The passenger wasn't charged because he left the car, but he already violated the law by being intoxicated inside the car.

soyiuz 11y ago

1. Yes, that was just an example of potential beneficial effects of public transit. My point was that some things in the "public good" just cost money, and should not be expected to monetize themselves. 2. True. Upvote for Jane Jacobs. Properly diverse density.