4 ms·

I agree with your insights. >>But the flip side of high-speed rail is that it's simply not cost-competitive over the distances we're dealing with, especially o

I agree with your insights. >>But the flip side of high-speed rail is that it's simply not cost-competitive over the distances we're dealing with, especially once you factor the cost of deploying it, which is spectacular. Just look at the problems California had with secure rights of way. The longer we wait, the more expensive it will become. I say we should act now and swift. Instead of bailing out failing financial systems, we should have solely put that money to our infrastructure. That would have put deserving people to real work. Imagine how much harder it will become in another 20 years, and this is the future of America we are talking about. Also, I believe cities ordinances should start outlawing the development of the traditional suburb. It should not be legal for these developers to build suburbs with out having a library, hospital, and school in walking distance. Having grown up in a suburb, and traveled the world a bit, I want nothing to do with suburbs. The reason why many in our government likes suburbs is because it encourages consumerism. Some have even argued that the reason why we solely have an almost auto based public transit system is because of auto lobbyist in congress during the 20th century. Although of course there have been many other social economic factors as well, such as 'white flight', as you touched upon.

tptacek 15y ago
City ordinances can't outlaw the development of suburbs. Counties can, but it'd be suicidal, because the people it would push out of the county are the wealthiest and most important part of the tax base. Cities can tax suburbs by imposing commuter costs, but that tactic is in tension with the city's need to keep businesses, which will move out of the city if it penalizes the workforce. I think parking is generally too cheap, and tolls are generally to low. But apart from that, I think the "white flight" stag hunt will eventually be counteracted by a "suburban decay" stag hunt that'll contract populations back into the cities. The only thing I can see that would prevent that would be cost-effective personal transportation (say, hydrogen fuel cell), which would be a vindication of the suburbs.

tptacek 15y ago

City ordinances can't outlaw the development of suburbs. Counties can, but it'd be suicidal, because the people it would push out of the county are the wealthiest and most important part of the tax base. Cities can tax suburbs by imposing commuter costs, but that tactic is in tension with the city's need to keep businesses, which will move out of the city if it penalizes the workforce. I think parking is generally too cheap, and tolls are generally to low. But apart from that, I think the "white flight" stag hunt will eventually be counteracted by a "suburban decay" stag hunt that'll contract populations back into the cities. The only thing I can see that would prevent that would be cost-effective personal transportation (say, hydrogen fuel cell), which would be a vindication of the suburbs.