5 ms·

I will push back there. Automobiles rarely pay the cost for their transportation infrastructure. Some of the roads are good, some are bad, some are congested so

by scoofy 4y ago

I will push back there. Automobiles rarely pay the cost for their transportation infrastructure. Some of the roads are good, some are bad, some are congested some are clear. The populations adjust their life around the infrastructure not the other way around. Since the streets are already free, for public transit to compete in any way, it also ought to be free... we should expect people to adjust to ideal public transit living locations for the exact same reason.

ketzo 4y ago
Well, the streets aren't free, because you need to buy a car to use them. That's a little pedantic, but I think it's super relevant. The problem is that as a passenger/consumer, with a car, it's very easy to decide how much to pay for my own personal level of ride quality. I can spend $2k on an old Camry, or I can spend $200k on a Bentley, but either way, I have almost total control (potholes notwithstanding). It's really not possible to have that kind of personal control when you're looking at public transit.
- llukas 4y ago
  You can spend $200k on Bentley and still have nowhere to park it at your destination.
  - eganist 4y ago
    > You can spend $200k on Bentley and still have nowhere to park it at your destination. If you can't bring yourself to solve your parking situation after spending 200k on a Bentley, you spent too much on the Bentley. To this day, I've never seen a Valet Full sign.
  - kjkjadksj 4y ago
    If you are spending $200k for a Bentley someone else is parking your car at the destination
- robotresearcher 4y ago
  Fare classes exist on trains. Less granular than picking your own car, but still some choice. Some long distance trains you can pay for a private cabin with decent meal service, or just a single seat and access to a vending machine.
  - ketzo 4y ago
    In specifically public transit, though — buses, streetcars, metros — there’s no option to “pay for the better one.
    - robotresearcher 4y ago
      A distinction between trains and public transit is new to me. Wikipedia confirms that distinction is sometimes made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport
      - HWR_14 4y ago
        I didn't find the distinction in the Wikipedia article, but in the US "public transit" is commonly used to refer to local transit options and "trains" usually refer to intercity travel.
        robotresearcher 4y ago
        Right, while in the uk with much higher density of towns and train stations, people also use them for local travel to get into town or one town over. The extreme case is something like a million people use trains to commute into London every day, with another million or so on each of bus and Tube (subway).
        fomine3 4y ago
        TIL interesting. I even thought that airplane is public transport. It seems that there are some opinions. https://www.quora.com/Are-planes-considered-a-form-of-public-transport https://www.quora.com/Are-planes-considered-a-form-of-public...
- throw0101a 4y ago
  > Well, the streets aren't free, because you need to buy a car to use them. I use them just fine on my bicycle.
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    Most Americans would probably not feel safe biking for their commute. Our bike infrastructure is patchy and insufficient to provide sufficient separation and protection from massive speeding tons of steel.
    - scoofy 4y ago
      I mean, that could trivially be changed by waving a magic "this section of the road is for bikes" wand. We feel unsafe on bikes because there are too many streets designed for cars and too few for bikes. Switch out 10% of streets effectively for bikes only and you'll suddenly see people biking.
      - bobthepanda 4y ago
        That’s really far outside of today’s Overton windows though. No political jurisdiction in the US has a reasonable path to get to that end state.
        scoofy 4y ago
        It's literally happening in SF, Minneapolis, Portland, and NYC. Caring about the Overton window is a concern for people who don't actually want to change anything ever.
        bobthepanda 4y ago
        The amount of lane-miles dedicated to bikes in NYC is <1%. At the rate bike lanes are currently built in NYC it would take centuries to reach anywhere in the 10% neighborhood. Cyclists keep getting promised the world around the country. I’ll believe it when I see it.
mistrial9 4y ago
people literally live on the public transportation in cities.. you have to charge something due to irrational humans
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Or you can make rules about living on public transportation and enforce them with responders who will offer them a more comfortable place to sleep.
- scoofy 4y ago
  ...because we let them for some reason, because public transit is for "other people" in america. We don't allow camping on the road, because it's what we expect people to use. Other countries don't allow public transit to be treated like shit because most people use it.
closeparen 4y ago
>The populations adjust their life around the infrastructure not the other way around Public policy should try to make people's lives better, not worse.
- scoofy 4y ago
  Building efficient transit systems and moving away from the most inefficient system, that also happens to kill 100 people every day will make people's lives better.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- TomSwirly 4y ago
  Which is why public transportation needs heavy investment now. It is much better for 80% of the people living today and 100% of the people living 50 years from now who will be dealing with the devastation caused by our CO2 emissions.
  - closeparen 4y ago
    The claim I'm responding to is that, rather than making heavy investments to adapt transit infrastructure to people's lives, people should just adapt their lives around the transit infrastructure we have.
TMWNN 4y ago
>I will push back there. Automobiles rarely pay the cost for their transportation infrastructure. US highways do pay for themselves <https://web.archive.org/web/20170712175437/www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/index.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170712175437/www.rita.dot.gov/...>, and help pay for other modes of transportation. Transit receives the biggest subsidy per passenger-mile, with rail and airlines in between. (For those wishing more detail: From the executive summary <https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/executive_summary.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.d...>: >*Highways* >* Users of the highway passenger transportation system paid significantly greater amounts of money to the federal government than their allocated costs in 1994-2000. <https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/figure_01.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.d...> This was a result of the increase in the deficit reduction motor fuel tax rates between October 1993 and September 1997, and the increase in Highway Trust Fund fuel tax rates starting in October 1997. >* School and transit buses received positive net federal subsidies over the 1990-2002 period, but autos, motorcycles, pickups and vans, and intercity buses paid more than their allocated cost to the federal government. >* On average, highway users paid $1.91 per thousand passenger-miles to the federal government over their highway allocated cost during 1990-2002.)
- scoofy 4y ago
  US highways literally the least of anyone's concern. They are totally sensible even if we had walkable/bikeable cities. The real costs are tied up in surface roads and what lies underneath them. Repaving, sewer, cable, electricity, drainage... all that stuff has to be replaced regularly, and when it does, it's a massive subsidy from the people who don't drive cars on those roads, to the people who live or drive heavy trucks on them.
kortilla 4y ago
The vast vast majority of street damage comes from heavy trucks. Cars and light trucks likely do pay for their road usage (a car causes something like 1/10000th the wear as a tractor trailer).
- scoofy 4y ago
  If there is no per-mile fare, then there is no incentive not to use the road. Using gasoline as a proxy does not charge the people using complex and expensive overpasses more than people using surface streets. There is no incentive to minimize construction and maintenance costs at all. No pay-as-you-go model like busses and trains have.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kortilla 4y ago
    You’ve just described a toll road, which are quite popular for highways in the US East.

by scoofy 4y ago

ketzo 4y ago

Well, the streets aren't free, because you need to buy a car to use them. That's a little pedantic, but I think it's super relevant. The problem is that as a passenger/consumer, with a car, it's very easy to decide how much to pay for my own personal level of ride quality. I can spend $2k on an old Camry, or I can spend $200k on a Bentley, but either way, I have almost total control (potholes notwithstanding). It's really not possible to have that kind of personal control when you're looking at public transit.

llukas 4y ago
You can spend $200k on Bentley and still have nowhere to park it at your destination.
- eganist 4y ago
  > You can spend $200k on Bentley and still have nowhere to park it at your destination. If you can't bring yourself to solve your parking situation after spending 200k on a Bentley, you spent too much on the Bentley. To this day, I've never seen a Valet Full sign.
- kjkjadksj 4y ago
  If you are spending $200k for a Bentley someone else is parking your car at the destination
robotresearcher 4y ago
Fare classes exist on trains. Less granular than picking your own car, but still some choice. Some long distance trains you can pay for a private cabin with decent meal service, or just a single seat and access to a vending machine.
- ketzo 4y ago
  In specifically public transit, though — buses, streetcars, metros — there’s no option to “pay for the better one.
  - robotresearcher 4y ago
    A distinction between trains and public transit is new to me. Wikipedia confirms that distinction is sometimes made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      I didn't find the distinction in the Wikipedia article, but in the US "public transit" is commonly used to refer to local transit options and "trains" usually refer to intercity travel.
      - robotresearcher 4y ago
        Right, while in the uk with much higher density of towns and train stations, people also use them for local travel to get into town or one town over. The extreme case is something like a million people use trains to commute into London every day, with another million or so on each of bus and Tube (subway).
      - fomine3 4y ago
        TIL interesting. I even thought that airplane is public transport. It seems that there are some opinions. https://www.quora.com/Are-planes-considered-a-form-of-public-transport https://www.quora.com/Are-planes-considered-a-form-of-public...
throw0101a 4y ago
> Well, the streets aren't free, because you need to buy a car to use them. I use them just fine on my bicycle.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  Most Americans would probably not feel safe biking for their commute. Our bike infrastructure is patchy and insufficient to provide sufficient separation and protection from massive speeding tons of steel.
  - scoofy 4y ago
    I mean, that could trivially be changed by waving a magic "this section of the road is for bikes" wand. We feel unsafe on bikes because there are too many streets designed for cars and too few for bikes. Switch out 10% of streets effectively for bikes only and you'll suddenly see people biking.
    - bobthepanda 4y ago
      That’s really far outside of today’s Overton windows though. No political jurisdiction in the US has a reasonable path to get to that end state.
      - scoofy 4y ago
        It's literally happening in SF, Minneapolis, Portland, and NYC. Caring about the Overton window is a concern for people who don't actually want to change anything ever.
        bobthepanda 4y ago
        The amount of lane-miles dedicated to bikes in NYC is <1%. At the rate bike lanes are currently built in NYC it would take centuries to reach anywhere in the 10% neighborhood. Cyclists keep getting promised the world around the country. I’ll believe it when I see it.

mistrial9 4y ago

people literally live on the public transportation in cities.. you have to charge something due to irrational humans

pessimizer 4y ago
Or you can make rules about living on public transportation and enforce them with responders who will offer them a more comfortable place to sleep.
scoofy 4y ago
...because we let them for some reason, because public transit is for "other people" in america. We don't allow camping on the road, because it's what we expect people to use. Other countries don't allow public transit to be treated like shit because most people use it.

closeparen 4y ago

>The populations adjust their life around the infrastructure not the other way around Public policy should try to make people's lives better, not worse.

scoofy 4y ago
Building efficient transit systems and moving away from the most inefficient system, that also happens to kill 100 people every day will make people's lives better.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
TomSwirly 4y ago
Which is why public transportation needs heavy investment now. It is much better for 80% of the people living today and 100% of the people living 50 years from now who will be dealing with the devastation caused by our CO2 emissions.
- closeparen 4y ago
  The claim I'm responding to is that, rather than making heavy investments to adapt transit infrastructure to people's lives, people should just adapt their lives around the transit infrastructure we have.

TMWNN 4y ago

>I will push back there. Automobiles rarely pay the cost for their transportation infrastructure. US highways do pay for themselves <https://web.archive.org/web/20170712175437/www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/index.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170712175437/www.rita.dot.gov/...>, and help pay for other modes of transportation. Transit receives the biggest subsidy per passenger-mile, with rail and airlines in between. (For those wishing more detail: From the executive summary <https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/executive_summary.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.d...>: >*Highways* >* Users of the highway passenger transportation system paid significantly greater amounts of money to the federal government than their allocated costs in 1994-2000. <https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/federal_subsidies_to_passenger_transportation/html/figure_01.html https://web.archive.org/web/20170628114204/http://www.rita.d...> This was a result of the increase in the deficit reduction motor fuel tax rates between October 1993 and September 1997, and the increase in Highway Trust Fund fuel tax rates starting in October 1997. >* School and transit buses received positive net federal subsidies over the 1990-2002 period, but autos, motorcycles, pickups and vans, and intercity buses paid more than their allocated cost to the federal government. >* On average, highway users paid $1.91 per thousand passenger-miles to the federal government over their highway allocated cost during 1990-2002.)

scoofy 4y ago
US highways literally the least of anyone's concern. They are totally sensible even if we had walkable/bikeable cities. The real costs are tied up in surface roads and what lies underneath them. Repaving, sewer, cable, electricity, drainage... all that stuff has to be replaced regularly, and when it does, it's a massive subsidy from the people who don't drive cars on those roads, to the people who live or drive heavy trucks on them.

kortilla 4y ago

The vast vast majority of street damage comes from heavy trucks. Cars and light trucks likely do pay for their road usage (a car causes something like 1/10000th the wear as a tractor trailer).

scoofy 4y ago
If there is no per-mile fare, then there is no incentive not to use the road. Using gasoline as a proxy does not charge the people using complex and expensive overpasses more than people using surface streets. There is no incentive to minimize construction and maintenance costs at all. No pay-as-you-go model like busses and trains have.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- kortilla 4y ago
  You’ve just described a toll road, which are quite popular for highways in the US East.