3 ms·

> Tokyo's transit system is run by multiple companies. There are at least 10 different train companies many of which also run bus services. I find this interes

> Tokyo's transit system is run by multiple companies. There are at least 10 different train companies many of which also run bus services. I find this interesting because it's a stark contrast to NYC. NYC is of the only cities in the country where PT is so pervasive that most people can get around on PT alone, but they tried that same exact model back in the day, and it failed miserably leading to the creation of the MTA.

rayiner 8y ago
The special thing about Tokyo's rail system is not that it's private, but that the railroads are the primary landowners around the rail stations, which was never true in New York. Rail infrastructure benefits both the passengers who ride it, and the businesses whose workers and customers ride to their premises on the infrastructure. Traditionally, rail systems can only recover from the passengers. That leaves a large positive externality accruing to the businesses, which the rail operator cannot recover. The Japanese model solves that problem by allowing the rail operator to capture value from both ends of the transaction. It charges fees to passengers, but also charges rent to all the businesses built near rail lines.
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > The special thing about Tokyo's rail system is not that it's private, but that the railroads are the primary landowners around the rail stations, which was never true in New York. They also don't have the TWU, whose unchecked corruption would be capable of destroying the public transit system of any city in any country, given the opportunity.
osdiab 8y ago
I'm not knowledgable about this, but does New York MTA own/commercialize the land above their stations or just the tracks/right of way? I always felt like in NYC it was really odd how the stations are usually really tiny and don't really have any stores or vendors except those tiny convenience stores on the platforms, and a few really crappy looking shops sprinkled in big stations like Times Square. Stands in stark contrast to the ones in Tokyo where I'm living now, where the station malls are amongst the nicest and the vendors within the fare gates are plentiful, name-brand businesses (think stuff like Muji and Kinokuniya) and quality restaurants. Is the Port Authority owned Oculus at WTC an exception to the rule, or am I misinterpreting how the MTA works? If my understanding is correct that MTA doesn't own that land, then imagine how fast and efficiently they would have built the 2nd Av subway if they also knew they could funnel millions of people to whatever revenue machines they built on every station along the way.
- rayiner 8y ago
  The MTA generally doesn't own the land above the tracks, and your last paragraph succinctly explains the differences in financial incentives to build rail between New York and Tokyo.
bobthepanda 8y ago
NYC's system was (partially) developed by two private companies. It was quite successful for a while, although they did make the choice not to also be property developers, which is how Tokyo's companies make an income. Then a populist decided that he should build a municipal subway system to drive the other two out of business so that the city could buy them out, and the rest is history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Subway_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Subway_System
cimmanom 8y ago
To be fair, it failed in part because fares were frozen without being subsidized. Of course, the fare freeze happened for a good reason: a city where people can't afford to get around is a city whose economy can't operate. (Let that be a warning to today's MTA leaders.) But if you freeze fares without subsidy during a period of inflation, the operators can't afford to operate, and the system fails.

rayiner 8y ago

The special thing about Tokyo's rail system is not that it's private, but that the railroads are the primary landowners around the rail stations, which was never true in New York. Rail infrastructure benefits both the passengers who ride it, and the businesses whose workers and customers ride to their premises on the infrastructure. Traditionally, rail systems can only recover from the passengers. That leaves a large positive externality accruing to the businesses, which the rail operator cannot recover. The Japanese model solves that problem by allowing the rail operator to capture value from both ends of the transaction. It charges fees to passengers, but also charges rent to all the businesses built near rail lines.

chimeracoder 8y ago
> The special thing about Tokyo's rail system is not that it's private, but that the railroads are the primary landowners around the rail stations, which was never true in New York. They also don't have the TWU, whose unchecked corruption would be capable of destroying the public transit system of any city in any country, given the opportunity.

osdiab 8y ago

I'm not knowledgable about this, but does New York MTA own/commercialize the land above their stations or just the tracks/right of way? I always felt like in NYC it was really odd how the stations are usually really tiny and don't really have any stores or vendors except those tiny convenience stores on the platforms, and a few really crappy looking shops sprinkled in big stations like Times Square. Stands in stark contrast to the ones in Tokyo where I'm living now, where the station malls are amongst the nicest and the vendors within the fare gates are plentiful, name-brand businesses (think stuff like Muji and Kinokuniya) and quality restaurants. Is the Port Authority owned Oculus at WTC an exception to the rule, or am I misinterpreting how the MTA works? If my understanding is correct that MTA doesn't own that land, then imagine how fast and efficiently they would have built the 2nd Av subway if they also knew they could funnel millions of people to whatever revenue machines they built on every station along the way.

rayiner 8y ago
The MTA generally doesn't own the land above the tracks, and your last paragraph succinctly explains the differences in financial incentives to build rail between New York and Tokyo.

bobthepanda 8y ago

NYC's system was (partially) developed by two private companies. It was quite successful for a while, although they did make the choice not to also be property developers, which is how Tokyo's companies make an income. Then a populist decided that he should build a municipal subway system to drive the other two out of business so that the city could buy them out, and the rest is history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Subway_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Subway_System

cimmanom 8y ago

To be fair, it failed in part because fares were frozen without being subsidized. Of course, the fare freeze happened for a good reason: a city where people can't afford to get around is a city whose economy can't operate. (Let that be a warning to today's MTA leaders.) But if you freeze fares without subsidy during a period of inflation, the operators can't afford to operate, and the system fails.