4 ms·
To serve much better for 99.9% commuters or serve poorly for 100% commuters, isn't that a easier decision?
by taobility 8y ago
To serve much better for 99.9% commuters or serve poorly for 100% commuters, isn't that a easier decision?
- natestemen 8y agoi dont think it's really that simple. even it was i don't think the decision is that easy anyway. it's important to think about who your decisions affect, even if they may be a minority (which is bigger than 0.1%). why is it okay to put more burden on the people who already have the most burden as it is?
- taobility 8y agoNYC is the only city which has such requirement and have to provide subway to support them? How many other cities provide same 24/7 subway transit? why the other cities don't provide such service? The other cities don't have people work so late? How does those people commute?
- xxpor 8y agoThis is why other cities have shitty transit. Commutes can't be looked at as the only purpose of a transit system. Especially in NY, it's the PRIMARY mode of transportation for a lot of people. Making it shitty outside of commute hours is not an option.
- taobility 8y ago"This is why other cities have shitty transit."?? If NYC continue with current shitty schedule, the subway would be worse and worse, which means less and less commuters will rely on it, and eventually it will be closed as worthless. Will you be happier? As at that time, nobody will benefit. Be more practical, gentleman! We are living in 2018, there is lot of proving that we should optimize a system by reducing the bottleneck. For those 0.1% commuters, they don't nee the whole subway system to support them, they can take bus/shuttle or even uber, which will save millions of dollars for the whole system, and also improve the rush hour transit much much better.