4 ms·

Since Dallas has a completely different population density and size than NYC, you're making an apples-to-oranges comparison. Do you have data that using the MTA

by martey 8y ago

Since Dallas has a completely different population density and size than NYC, you're making an apples-to-oranges comparison. Do you have data that using the MTA costs more than having a car in NYC?

yostrovs 8y ago
One can never perfectly compare two cities, can they? And I can't compare cost of car ownership in NYC with and without existence of a government subsidized subway. But if you measure dollar spent per passenger mile traveled, the MTA is incredibly expensive.
- martey 8y ago
  Yes, but you can compare the cost of car ownership in NYC versus the cost of relying on the subway. I think the fact that New Yorkers think the L line closure is so momentous belies the idea that they would prefer to eliminate their "government subsidized" subway and all buy cars. > But if you measure dollar spent per passenger mile traveled, the MTA is incredibly expensive. Incredibly expensive compared to what? The article explicitly claims that public transportation like the MTA is the most effective way to transport large numbers of people around a dense city. I haven't seen anything in your multiple comments that suggests differently, other than a throwaway reference to Dallas (a city whose metropolitan area has a third of the population in a larger land area) and repeated suggestions that the subway is somehow bad because it is publicly funded. I would love to see actual data that private transportation (whether Uber, Lyfts, taxis, shuttles, charter buses, etc.) are more effective or efficient that their public counterparts. I don't think that your complaints about the MTA are properly engaging with the article's thesis.
  - yostrovs 8y ago
    You're beating the wrong horse. I'm not arguing against public transport per se, but against the idea that the MTA resembles any kind of efficiency. Compare to Hong Kong, Singapore, Santiago, Chile, or really almost any other subway on Earth. The waste is incredible.

by martey 8y ago

Since Dallas has a completely different population density and size than NYC, you're making an apples-to-oranges comparison. Do you have data that using the MTA costs more than having a car in NYC?

yostrovs 8y ago

One can never perfectly compare two cities, can they? And I can't compare cost of car ownership in NYC with and without existence of a government subsidized subway. But if you measure dollar spent per passenger mile traveled, the MTA is incredibly expensive.

martey 8y ago
Yes, but you can compare the cost of car ownership in NYC versus the cost of relying on the subway. I think the fact that New Yorkers think the L line closure is so momentous belies the idea that they would prefer to eliminate their "government subsidized" subway and all buy cars. > But if you measure dollar spent per passenger mile traveled, the MTA is incredibly expensive. Incredibly expensive compared to what? The article explicitly claims that public transportation like the MTA is the most effective way to transport large numbers of people around a dense city. I haven't seen anything in your multiple comments that suggests differently, other than a throwaway reference to Dallas (a city whose metropolitan area has a third of the population in a larger land area) and repeated suggestions that the subway is somehow bad because it is publicly funded. I would love to see actual data that private transportation (whether Uber, Lyfts, taxis, shuttles, charter buses, etc.) are more effective or efficient that their public counterparts. I don't think that your complaints about the MTA are properly engaging with the article's thesis.
- yostrovs 8y ago
  You're beating the wrong horse. I'm not arguing against public transport per se, but against the idea that the MTA resembles any kind of efficiency. Compare to Hong Kong, Singapore, Santiago, Chile, or really almost any other subway on Earth. The waste is incredible.