3 ms·

Agreed. And I think it's worse than that. In the US, public transit's objective is not to transport large numbers of people quickly. Public transit advocates i

Agreed. And I think it's worse than that. In the US, public transit's objective is not to transport large numbers of people quickly. Public transit advocates in the US have a few objectives (in the POSIWID sense): 1. Job creation for construction workers 2. Job protection for train operators 3. Shelter for those who have no warm place to shelter You can tell this is the case by the following actions by transit advocates: 1. i. Efforts to increase funding for the same outcomes as before i. Success metrics described are usually in terms of jobs created and small businesses contracted 2. Active opposition to Skytrain-style automated trains 3. Efforts to make public transit free I think these objectives are transparent to most observers, most of whom do not share those objectives. Therefore, transit will face headwinds for the moment.

jcranmer 3y ago
I've seen literally none of those arguments advanced by any of the transit advocates I follow, and I've only seen the argument for free public transit secondhand (i.e., the advocates I follow are discussing the argument and decide against it). Most of the transit advocacy I see is based on the fact that US public transit systems need to, in general, be more rationale, and focus on supporting things like high-frequency all-day travel (and rush-hour-peak-direction-only transit is effectively a farce of transit), or more coherent bus routes or better integration between different systems to alleviate capacity bottlenecks (hi NYC Penn Station). And an awful lot of the-system-is-rotten-and-people-need-to-be-canned (I mean, when you have a front-row seat to the WMATA meltdown, it's hard not to have that sentiment).
- renewiltord 3y ago
  Thank you. Perhaps things are different on the East Coast. I will amend my beliefs to Washington and California then.

jcranmer 3y ago

I've seen literally none of those arguments advanced by any of the transit advocates I follow, and I've only seen the argument for free public transit secondhand (i.e., the advocates I follow are discussing the argument and decide against it). Most of the transit advocacy I see is based on the fact that US public transit systems need to, in general, be more rationale, and focus on supporting things like high-frequency all-day travel (and rush-hour-peak-direction-only transit is effectively a farce of transit), or more coherent bus routes or better integration between different systems to alleviate capacity bottlenecks (hi NYC Penn Station). And an awful lot of the-system-is-rotten-and-people-need-to-be-canned (I mean, when you have a front-row seat to the WMATA meltdown, it's hard not to have that sentiment).

renewiltord 3y ago
Thank you. Perhaps things are different on the East Coast. I will amend my beliefs to Washington and California then.