4 ms·

Making transit free really misses the point. The money is much better spent on actually improving the transit options, such as buying more buses to improve freq

Making transit free really misses the point. The money is much better spent on actually improving the transit options, such as buying more buses to improve frequency, building new tram or rail lines, or general maintenance (cleaning) that make using the transit more appealing for all but the most desperate. Look at all the cities in Asia and Europe where normal people use transit. Very few of them are free, though they may be cheaper than in North America. The key is making it convenient and comfortable when compared against other options, especially driving.

heavyset_go 4y ago
You can do both at the same time, as doing both tackles both an overlapping problem and two+ different problems.
- mixmastamyk 4y ago
  One of those options makes it more expensive.
rektide 4y ago
DC area has spent bazonga-bucks OMG amounts of money to keep doing these kinds of expansion projects. The silver line snakes way out through Virginia, for a pretty (very) small fraction of riders every day & a handful of people going to IAD (Dulles) airport. The Purple Line has started snaking around the beltway, at least for the northern MD parts that were still willing to fund & try, but has dragged on, slated originally to open last year & still at least 4 years out & crazy over cost. It seems unlikely to make a sea change difference, but perhaps!! We want to believe, maybe after a lot of time. DC started building a new streetcar network, and seemingly gave up after realizing fixed infrastructure like this was insanely expensive and prone to constant blockage. Most American cities highly subsidize transit. Going to fully subsidized is not really a major hurt. It's a kind of easy action we can just do, for little real pain. Much less pain than many of the expansive would be micro-mega-projects, that probably in most cases will be massive budget items with decades of debt, with only very very very long term development benefits. In DC, few of our transit systems have capacity problems. Our citywide network is quite good, very well connnected whatever direction you want in most places. The proposal that we add more busses, that we build new lines: it feels wildly out of touch, like it's prescribing someone elses solution, that doesn't make sense here. This is a good sensible next step for DC, to make what we have work much better for many, especially those who can most benefit.
senttoschool 4y ago
There seems to be a lot more crazy and mentally ill people in major US cities than major Asian cities. It was extremely rare for me to encounter them in Asia but I encountered so many in the US that I just started driving. It kept my sanity.
jffry 4y ago
Removing fare collection itself improves bus service (less time spent at stops as boarding can happen at all doors) Setting that aside, this legislation also includes $10m/year in funding to further enhance bus service: - Creating new routes - Extending hours (all night service on key routes) - Shortening headways between buses

heavyset_go 4y ago

You can do both at the same time, as doing both tackles both an overlapping problem and two+ different problems.

mixmastamyk 4y ago
One of those options makes it more expensive.

rektide 4y ago

DC area has spent bazonga-bucks OMG amounts of money to keep doing these kinds of expansion projects. The silver line snakes way out through Virginia, for a pretty (very) small fraction of riders every day & a handful of people going to IAD (Dulles) airport. The Purple Line has started snaking around the beltway, at least for the northern MD parts that were still willing to fund & try, but has dragged on, slated originally to open last year & still at least 4 years out & crazy over cost. It seems unlikely to make a sea change difference, but perhaps!! We want to believe, maybe after a lot of time. DC started building a new streetcar network, and seemingly gave up after realizing fixed infrastructure like this was insanely expensive and prone to constant blockage. Most American cities highly subsidize transit. Going to fully subsidized is not really a major hurt. It's a kind of easy action we can just do, for little real pain. Much less pain than many of the expansive would be micro-mega-projects, that probably in most cases will be massive budget items with decades of debt, with only very very very long term development benefits. In DC, few of our transit systems have capacity problems. Our citywide network is quite good, very well connnected whatever direction you want in most places. The proposal that we add more busses, that we build new lines: it feels wildly out of touch, like it's prescribing someone elses solution, that doesn't make sense here. This is a good sensible next step for DC, to make what we have work much better for many, especially those who can most benefit.

senttoschool 4y ago

There seems to be a lot more crazy and mentally ill people in major US cities than major Asian cities. It was extremely rare for me to encounter them in Asia but I encountered so many in the US that I just started driving. It kept my sanity.

jffry 4y ago

Removing fare collection itself improves bus service (less time spent at stops as boarding can happen at all doors) Setting that aside, this legislation also includes $10m/year in funding to further enhance bus service: - Creating new routes - Extending hours (all night service on key routes) - Shortening headways between buses