3 ms·

More likely you two just don't live in the same city. FWIW, my home city's bus service (Charlotte NC) is exactly like the commenter above describes. There is a

More likely you two just don't live in the same city. FWIW, my home city's bus service (Charlotte NC) is exactly like the commenter above describes. There is a city-wide bus service that runs about every hour or half-hour if you're lucky, but it's terrible (unreliable, slow, poorly maintained) and mostly used by people too poor to own a car or those who can't drive due to disability or DUI. Then there's the nice "commuter" bus for a buck more, which only runs during peak commute times, only picks up from park-and-rides in the suburbs, and is mostly occupied by people who work nice office jobs in the big high-rises downtown. The middle-of-the road workers all pretty much have to drive everywhere.

joe_the_user 8y ago
My suburban city is the same and I drive, walk or bike everywhere. Estimated travel time for going by bus here is .. identical to that of walking, according to Google. But that makes the "transit is for the rich" argument rather, uh, rich. Transit is for the rich ... now. Make a decent bus service and it wouldn't be.
- sudosteph 8y ago
  For sure, but it's a matter of investment priorities too. Operating fleets of buses, especially if you need enough to cover a city that sprawls all over like Charlotte does, is expensive. And it's not like much of that expense will be recouped in fares if we want it to be priced reasonably. Meanwhile car ownership is still relatively affordable - even people working on minimum wage usually have a car. And once people are already paying for that car, they aren't going to want to spend extra money on a bus, no matter how nice they make bus service. The new light rail service though is starting to change things though. I've noticed more young professionals and college students who are open to using the light rail and ride shares for their travels, regardless of whether they already own a car, due to convenience and it's ability to get through traffic faster.

joe_the_user 8y ago

My suburban city is the same and I drive, walk or bike everywhere. Estimated travel time for going by bus here is .. identical to that of walking, according to Google. But that makes the "transit is for the rich" argument rather, uh, rich. Transit is for the rich ... now. Make a decent bus service and it wouldn't be.

sudosteph 8y ago
For sure, but it's a matter of investment priorities too. Operating fleets of buses, especially if you need enough to cover a city that sprawls all over like Charlotte does, is expensive. And it's not like much of that expense will be recouped in fares if we want it to be priced reasonably. Meanwhile car ownership is still relatively affordable - even people working on minimum wage usually have a car. And once people are already paying for that car, they aren't going to want to spend extra money on a bus, no matter how nice they make bus service. The new light rail service though is starting to change things though. I've noticed more young professionals and college students who are open to using the light rail and ride shares for their travels, regardless of whether they already own a car, due to convenience and it's ability to get through traffic faster.