6 ms·

That's just the thing though: Western cities are increasingly de-prioritizing cars, and Eastern cities are falling behind. There are parts of Phoenix that are

That's just the thing though: Western cities are increasingly de-prioritizing cars, and Eastern cities are falling behind. There are parts of Phoenix that are more bikable than much of New York. LA, SF, Portland, and Seattle have started pouring money into their new transit systems, while MTA and NJ Transit and Port Authority keep having their budgets cut, leading to reliability so low that it's driving people into cars. The East Coast used to be the star of American transportation, not much anymore.

libraryatnight 8y ago
Phoenix's Light Rail is also a nice improvement - I hope it expands. I know they're trying, some neighborhoods are resisting though - they argue it brings in riff-raff lol
crushcrashcrush 8y ago
Genuine question - what has SF poured money into? What we need here is expanded BART service and electrified Caltrain, unfortunately NIMBYs in Atherton/Palo Alto block that at every move.
- popcorn49 8y ago
  Totally agree. In fact, the BART board recently rejected an extension into Livermore, which would have brought down a lot of car trips from the East Bay Area into San Francisco. And a BART train through the South Bay would be great, as would extension to Santa Cruz, Marin, and Napa.
- joshAg 8y ago
  $3.5 Billion into BART in 2016: https://www.bart.gov/better-bart https://www.bart.gov/better-bart ~$2.0 Billion into caltrain electrification: http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/PCEP+Quarter+4+2016+Report.pdf http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Progra... (page 13)
- vechagup 8y ago
  - $1.5B: https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project - $0.5B: https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/ecc https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/ecc - $3.1B (thus far): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley_BART_extension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley_BART_extension - $2M (each): https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/cars https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/cars - $1.2B: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-Muni-s-new-light-rail-cars-are-different-12750729.php https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-Muni-s-new-light-r... - $1.9B: https://calmod.org/ https://calmod.org/ So stuff happens, and I'm grateful when it does -- the new BART cars are nice -- but generally at a snail's pace. It's hard to tell whether NIMBY obstruction (https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2018/03/01/caltrain-and-atherton-cant-reach-a-deal-on-electrification-poles https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2018/03/01/caltrain-and-ath...) or contractor incompetence and mismanagement (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-subway-stalled-after-contractor-lays-down-12905429.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-subway-stalle...) is more to blame.
maxxxxx 8y ago
"LA, SF, Portland, and Seattle have started pouring money into their new transit systems, " As far as LA goes the results are not exactly convincing. I wonder if 't seven possible to have decent public transportation in an area that's as spread out.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  LA's rail system connects Downtown, Pasadena, Hollywood, Santa Monica, Culver City, and Long Beach. The rail systems under development will add in the airport, the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valleys, and South LA. LA's bus system is the largest in the world on the basis of coverage, and is the most-heavily used bus network in the Western world.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    Maybe it works if you live one of the centres but I have tried several times to use it and each time a 45 minute drive would have been replaced with a 3 hour trip.
hapless 8y ago
The MTA and Port Authority are the best funded systems _in the world_. The problem is that they waste money profligately. What takes other cities millions of dollars and tens of weeks takes New York billions and decades. The reason no one wishes to add billions to the MTA’s already large capital budget is that 99% of the money disappears into a black hole
- onlyrealcuzzo 8y ago
  That's because only 50% of the money goes towards things you expect it to go toward: labor costs, operations, and maintenance. The other 50% goes to unfunded pensions, debt service, and health care (mostly unfunded). http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-spending/ http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-spending/
  - naravara 8y ago
    Man, it's almost like we could suddenly afford to do a lot of big projects if we just nationalized healthcare and pensions so it wouldn't have to be factored into labor costs.
    - setr 8y ago
      The cost still exists — you’re just moving it. Instead of factoring it into the labor cost and being part of the money allocating to the particular job, you’d just see lower allocation, and have the same problem. The only real difference would be that the comparison in funding/cost between equivalent US and EU work would be more fair (also achieved by de-nationalizing healthcare and pensions in the EU). Unless of course you’re also suggesting that nationalization would reduce global costs, but nothing about this particular thread supports/suggests that
      - naravara 8y ago
        >Instead of factoring it into the labor cost and being part of the money allocating to the particular job, you’d just see lower allocation, and have the same problem. Why would you have the same problem? The project gets cheaper because the labor to do it (and administrative overhead to make sure the benefits are given) are cheaper. In a world where dollar values and sticker shock aren't significant determinants of transit policy your point might make sense, but we don't live in that world. Also, transit funds are usually raised locally while nationalized social services are funded nationally. So the costs would actually fall on different entities and a broader tax-base if you did it this way.

libraryatnight 8y ago

Phoenix's Light Rail is also a nice improvement - I hope it expands. I know they're trying, some neighborhoods are resisting though - they argue it brings in riff-raff lol

crushcrashcrush 8y ago

Genuine question - what has SF poured money into? What we need here is expanded BART service and electrified Caltrain, unfortunately NIMBYs in Atherton/Palo Alto block that at every move.

popcorn49 8y ago
Totally agree. In fact, the BART board recently rejected an extension into Livermore, which would have brought down a lot of car trips from the East Bay Area into San Francisco. And a BART train through the South Bay would be great, as would extension to Santa Cruz, Marin, and Napa.
joshAg 8y ago
$3.5 Billion into BART in 2016: https://www.bart.gov/better-bart https://www.bart.gov/better-bart ~$2.0 Billion into caltrain electrification: http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/PCEP+Quarter+4+2016+Report.pdf http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Progra... (page 13)
vechagup 8y ago
- $1.5B: https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project https://www.sfmta.com/projects/central-subway-project - $0.5B: https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/ecc https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/ecc - $3.1B (thus far): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley_BART_extension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley_BART_extension - $2M (each): https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/cars https://www.bart.gov/about/projects/cars - $1.2B: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-Muni-s-new-light-rail-cars-are-different-12750729.php https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-Muni-s-new-light-r... - $1.9B: https://calmod.org/ https://calmod.org/ So stuff happens, and I'm grateful when it does -- the new BART cars are nice -- but generally at a snail's pace. It's hard to tell whether NIMBY obstruction (https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2018/03/01/caltrain-and-atherton-cant-reach-a-deal-on-electrification-poles https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2018/03/01/caltrain-and-ath...) or contractor incompetence and mismanagement (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-subway-stalled-after-contractor-lays-down-12905429.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-subway-stalle...) is more to blame.

maxxxxx 8y ago

"LA, SF, Portland, and Seattle have started pouring money into their new transit systems, " As far as LA goes the results are not exactly convincing. I wonder if 't seven possible to have decent public transportation in an area that's as spread out.

gamblor956 8y ago
LA's rail system connects Downtown, Pasadena, Hollywood, Santa Monica, Culver City, and Long Beach. The rail systems under development will add in the airport, the San Gabriel and San Fernando Valleys, and South LA. LA's bus system is the largest in the world on the basis of coverage, and is the most-heavily used bus network in the Western world.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  Maybe it works if you live one of the centres but I have tried several times to use it and each time a 45 minute drive would have been replaced with a 3 hour trip.

hapless 8y ago

The MTA and Port Authority are the best funded systems _in the world_. The problem is that they waste money profligately. What takes other cities millions of dollars and tens of weeks takes New York billions and decades. The reason no one wishes to add billions to the MTA’s already large capital budget is that 99% of the money disappears into a black hole

onlyrealcuzzo 8y ago
That's because only 50% of the money goes towards things you expect it to go toward: labor costs, operations, and maintenance. The other 50% goes to unfunded pensions, debt service, and health care (mostly unfunded). http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-spending/ http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-spending/
- naravara 8y ago
  Man, it's almost like we could suddenly afford to do a lot of big projects if we just nationalized healthcare and pensions so it wouldn't have to be factored into labor costs.
  - setr 8y ago
    The cost still exists — you’re just moving it. Instead of factoring it into the labor cost and being part of the money allocating to the particular job, you’d just see lower allocation, and have the same problem. The only real difference would be that the comparison in funding/cost between equivalent US and EU work would be more fair (also achieved by de-nationalizing healthcare and pensions in the EU). Unless of course you’re also suggesting that nationalization would reduce global costs, but nothing about this particular thread supports/suggests that
    - naravara 8y ago
      >Instead of factoring it into the labor cost and being part of the money allocating to the particular job, you’d just see lower allocation, and have the same problem. Why would you have the same problem? The project gets cheaper because the labor to do it (and administrative overhead to make sure the benefits are given) are cheaper. In a world where dollar values and sticker shock aren't significant determinants of transit policy your point might make sense, but we don't live in that world. Also, transit funds are usually raised locally while nationalized social services are funded nationally. So the costs would actually fall on different entities and a broader tax-base if you did it this way.