11 ms·

As a long time NYC resident who moved out during Covid but commute to work in the city. I definitely noticed less traffic on the streets and less noise. I see

• IG_Semmelweiss 1y ago
  >>> I'm curious, do other larger cities where commercial is concentrated into one area not have a private mini-bus(es)? It turns out, there are some private buses. Take for example, Santiago, Chile. It succeeded in terms of profits and customer satisfaction. The problem is they do not survive. There comes a time when they don't pay sufficient "political capital" and get taken over (nationalized) by local politicians. The result of the private bus system nationalization by socialists is macabre, at least this the Santiago case. First, the newly minted public bus service went from $60M USD profits, to massive $600M in losses [1] overnight. That is a negative 10x return. And service declined as well. [1] But that in itself is not a new story. Now, fast forward ~12 years. The system bleeds so much money that the govt is forced to increase bus fares. The increase in fares activates the biggest riots the country has seen in decades [2] Out of the riots, one young protester rises to the top. He comes with ideas of a new constitution. He is a young socialist leader. A certain Gabriel Boric [3], who had ran and won for president of University of Chile Student Federation against the leader of the Communist Party of Chile [4] So now we come full-circle: A working private bus service was replaced by socialist politicians into a public bus system that hemorrhaged 10x more money than it earned previously in actual profits. The public bus funding crisis and subsequent fare hikes led to massive riots, which were a direct on-ramp for a socialist to ascend to power as president of Chile. In short, successful private local bus enterprise was replaced with a socialist bus system, which then proceeded to implode. This implosion of a socialist idea led to the spread of even more socialism, but now at a national level. This chain of events from beginning to end, only took 20 years. [1] https://www.econtalk.org/munger-on-the-political-economy-of-public-transportation/ https://www.econtalk.org/munger-on-the-political-economy-of-... [2] https://www.scmp.com/news/world/americas/article/3033688/chaos-santiago-chileans-riot-over-hikes-public-transport-fares https://www.scmp.com/news/world/americas/article/3033688/cha... [3] https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-03-12/gabriel-boric-president-of-chile-the-left-in-latin-america-has-had-a-tendency-not-to-take-responsibility-for-its-own-mistakes.html https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-03-12/gabriel-... [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_boric#Role_in_the_Estallido_social https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_boric#Role_in_the_Esta...
  • deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  • mmooss 1y ago
    Lots of places in the world run public bus systems - it seems by far the most common to me. It's hardly a thing of 'socialism' (always a bad word on HN).
    • vladvasiliu 1y ago
      I don't know about Chile, but I think the issue isn't so much the system being public, as in run by some form of government. Rather, the issue is in how "socialists" tend to run systems: everything is great until they run out of other people's money. Now, I'm not in the "free market will solve all our woes" camp, either, especially when it comes to what we call "public service" in France. Over here, transit systems are facing a push from the EU bureaucrats for "opening up to competition". I'm bracing for the shit to hit the proverbial fan. Sure, our national rail company is world-famous for being on strike all day every day and twice on Sunday. But, when they do run, they work fairly well and serve most of the country, including random, middle-of-nowhere towns. New companies coming in for the competition only serve the most profitable routes. Of course, I don't know all the laws, but I haven't heard of any obligation for new companies to serve the less profitable routes. So, the SNCF will have less money from the profitable routes to subsidize these lines. This means that either service will degrade, or the State will have to increase funding [0]. Now, I'm generally fine with paying (reasonable) taxes and whatnot, but I'm less fine with having to pay more taxes just so that some random foreign company can make money. So, what will become of these people? When, at the same time, there's a push to restrict private vehicle ownership, and, especially, to limit access to town centers for older cars? Think these people can afford brand spanking new electric cars? Think again. --- [0] I think the EU doesn't allow States to directly subsidize the rail company, it would be some form of unfair competition or similar. But the State is allowed to spend on social programs, so there could be some kind of program to help with transit, which, in the end, is the same thing: the people will have to subsidize service for less profitable routes because a chunk of the income from profitable ones has moved to a private company which doesn't care.
• Saigonautica 1y ago
  In Ho Chi Minh City (and probably Vietnam in general but not 100% sure). Our commercial district is very concentrated. The busses in general are some form of public-private partnership. Several private bus companies operate the city busses. There are some annoying edge cases. For example, pre-purchased tickets are a mess -- better pay cash. If another operator takes over your route, even temporarily, your tickets can't be used. Mostly it seems to work though, I take the bus fairly regularly and it's quite nice. It's clean, has OK air conditioning, and arrives frequently enough that I don't have to check the schedule. There's someone to help elderly people and children on and off the bus. Elderly people ride free, reduced price for students, etc. It's pleasant. Some of these busses are mini-versions for less popular routes. I think I've even seen a couple of other vehicle types, like some form of van (rarely). One or twice a sort of truck with benches.
  • Hnrobert42 1y ago
    How has the new metro line worked out? I was there all the time it was getting built, but I left before it finished.
    • Saigonautica 1y ago
      Oh, it's quite OK! I haven't used it myself, but my wife has. We don't often head out the way it goes. It's really great for tourists though, it does a good job of connecting one of the major tourist areas (Thao Dien) to the city center. I'm hoping that later extensions will do more to alleviate traffic, e.g. head out towards Nha Be or something. Although I hope to move to a quieter city long before any of that.
• crusty 1y ago
  >>> I'm curious, do other larger cities where commercial is concentrated into one area not have a private mini-bus(es)? Hong Kong has public and private mini busses. They are distinguished by the color of their roofs, green or red.
• mmooss 1y ago
  The parent is almost perfectly timed with Uber's announcement. Suddenly it's a hot topic, though without mentioning Uber.
• chupasaurus 1y ago
  In Moscow there are 2,5 cases of commercial buses: routes that differ from city-owned ones (both local and between parts) and downtown-to-satellite-city_name where there is no other public transport. Both mini and normal buses are being used, as you might guess they are still operating because they fill the niche and are faster than public buses because those have stops each 2-3 minutes. Subway there is far more preferred if it's even remotely an option, due to congestion and reliability.
• stuaxo 1y ago
  I don't think London has private mini buses like that, just a huge amount of buses. They are operated by companies for TFL (though they are all red, you can read the company name). I'm not sure at what point that arrangement happened, somewhere between the outright privatisations of the 80s, or the stealth ones of the black years, which used PFI.
  • alex_duf 1y ago
    I think citymapper ran an experimental private bus line because they had identified a gap. But their article doesn't have a date, and I seem to remember this was years ago, so not sure where it's at. https://citymapper.com/news/1800/introducing-the-citymapper-smartbus https://citymapper.com/news/1800/introducing-the-citymapper-...
    • koyote 1y ago
      2017 according to their facebook post about it. I vaguely remember hearing about it but never tried it out. Not sure when it was canned. The software part sounds very interesting but could also be sold to existing transit companies and government agencies to improve their network.
  • laurencerowe 1y ago
    The existence of private minibuses is a clear indication that the transit authority has failed. The experience of bus deregulation in Britain outside of London tended to go one of two ways. In most of the country it simply created a private monopoly while in a few cities like Manchester there were routes so popular (busiest bus route in Europe!) that multiple companies competed for custom and the city council had to employ stewards to ensure fair play. This level of success was really an admission of failure. Anywhere else would have built a subway or at least a tram. (Metrolink is great it just doesn't even attempt to serve the busiest transit corridor in the city.) London was of course treated differently. While the operators were privatised they remained regulated by government. Public transport in London is simply too important to the UK to be allowed to fail as it was in other parts of the country. Anyway it's good to see central government allow Greater Manchester to regulate its buses again. After smashing it up local transport in 1986 the Tories finally relented in 2023 and allowed Greater Manchester control. Quite what Labour were doing for local transport outside of London between 1997 and 2010 is open to question. But it certainly resulted in renaissance of London public transport.
• PaulRobinson 1y ago
  A lot of the UK did this in the 1980s and it’s turned into such a disaster, most mayors and local authorities are trying to move to the London model: companies can bid a flat rate to deliver a bus service (effectively, they commit to providing drivers to deliver the timetable). TfL collects all fares. They also - I think - supply most of the buses to ensure they are of a certain standard, but the companies need to lease them, and maintain them. This means you get private companies trying to lower costs and so costs are privatised, but the profits (if any) are socialised into a public authority. This then allows TfL to offer system-wide passes making bus travel over all 43 boroughs cost effective.
  • Thlom 1y ago
    I don't know about London, but many places systems like this results in terrible working conditions for drivers. Pay is lousy, shift arrangements are in some cases insane, like work from 5:30-10:00 and then 14:00-17:00. Minimal time in between routes to go to the toilet and so on.
    • Y_Y 1y ago
      How else are you going to lower costs?
    • Xss3 1y ago
      Workers, especially drivers, have rights in the UK.
    • maeil 1y ago
      Yep, it does! However the net benefit to society at large - and being public transit, to the less privileged in particular - is still gigantic compared to any of the alternatives, and this is blatantly obvious if you've been in multiple countries/locations that use this system, as well as ones that don't use it. The job is generally still better than driving for e.g. Amazon, as well as honestly a whole load of 3D jobs[1] that we rather forget exist and people carry out every day, including in "wealthy" countries. Perfect is the enemy of good. This is the #1 thing other progressives need to learn. Everything is a tradeoff. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty,_dangerous_and_demeaning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty,_dangerous_and_demeaning
• virtualritz 1y ago
  It's curious but unsurprising that privatization of public transport is considered an answer to congestion when existence of good (or great) public transport is the working answer one can find in many places around the world. When I visited NYC two years ago, I was blown away by how unbelievably bad public transport infrastructure is. The most flabbergasting thing was the absence of Metro ring lines around the center. The fact these have not been built, in 2025, when Metro transport networks in most cities are now over a century old, is telling. IMHO the real problem is cars. The US still can't imagine itself without cars. I live in Berlin center. The only reason for me to own a car is prestige. So I don't. During rush hour any destination I go to, even outer city, would take me the same time by public transport as by car. At least. During non-peak hours going by car can be from 25-40% faster than by public transport if you trust Google Maps & co. But these estimates only consider travel time. When you add finding a place to park at the destination (and walking to the destination as the place may not be right in front) this shrinks to either negative numbers or max. savings of maybe 25%. My average travel time is around 30mins by public transport. This includes walking to and from the station. Why would I own a car to save maybe, on a lucky day, 5mins? At the same time bike infrastructure is being improved. Lots of side streets have been declared bike streets, cars may only enter if they have business there (you live there or deliver something). The city has enforced this with blocking off intersections on such streets with permanent structures that let only bicycles pass. Big streets have bike lanes that are often separated by a curb or bollards from car traffic. This makes it also less nice to drive a car. You can't use Waze any more to guide you through side streets to avoid congestion because these streets can't be passed through any more by car, only on foot or by bike. Which means the chance of being stuck in traffic increases. When at the same time you have options to be there just as fast with public transport and almost as fast but more healthy and with less likeliness of being ran over by a car, by bike. These ideas are not new. And there are many more things other cities do to reduce car traffic/need for cars. If you think of private mini busses, the best examples IMHO is actually ridepooling, e.g. Volkswagen's Moia in Hamburg and Hannover.
  • Thorrez 1y ago
    >IMHO the real problem is cars. The US still can't imagine itself without cars. All of the US except NYC. In NYC 45.6% of households own a car. In Berlin it's 49%. https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/u-s-cities-with-the-highest-and-lowest-vehicle-ownership/ https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/u-s-cities-with-th... https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/en/car-free-berlin-li.113268 https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/en/car-free-berlin-li.113268
• socalgal2 1y ago
  In Japan there are almost only private buses. many are run by and around the private train companies as a way to get their trains to be more useful to more people like when a 25 minute walk from the closest station is a 10 minute bus ride and the busses come often enough to be convenient
  • Vinnl 1y ago
    That's interesting - the main Dutch train company provides dirt cheap bike rentals for the same reason. (For arrivals only; people can use their own bikes to get to the station.)
  • franciscop 1y ago
    The train companies in Japan, while private in name, can only be described as hybrid. They have massive gvmt concessions for land to build their malls and make profit. The gvmt also has a lot of direct and indirect influence on them (and the other way around). In fact I'm literally now in one cafe in one of those malls, I haven't used the train today but still a part of my money goes to the train company thanks to these concessions. I'm not complaining BTW, love the train system here, it's only when someone tries to describe them as either a purely "private" or "public" company it's never so straightforward IMHO, so wanted to clarify.
    • m4rtink 1y ago
      Yeah, the big JR (Japanese Railways) companies that were created when the JNR (Japanese National Railways) state owned company was privatized really do seem to operate in some form of hybrid way - not really either private or public/state owned. But its also important to note there are other still big but much more private players like Kintetsu, Hankyu, Keio or Tobu that also follow the same playbook - having not just rail lines but also malls, hotels and other businesses, like: * cableways (like the Kintetsu Beppu Ropeway) * zoos (Tobu Zoo) * theaters (Takarazuka Revue - all-female musical theatre troupe based in Takarazuka - a division of the Hankyu Railway company - all members of the troupe are employed by Hankyu) And you can see this replicated on the smallest level - when we went to Izumo, we found out the Ichibata company does not just run the line to the Izumu shrine, but also owns a hotel next to the Izumo station, runs local buses and even runs the gift shop in the Izumo museum. :) I think this can to a degree explain why public transport is so well connected with other services in Japan & why the stations are clean and convenient - it has a direct benefit for all the many side businesses the public transit companies have.
• schwartzworld 1y ago
  Growing up in Jersey we called them jitneys. And no, they don’t have them in other cities.
  • aynyc 1y ago
    Yes, the jitneys. There is the Hampton Jitneys which transport folks from NYC to the Hamptons during summer months. Those jersey buses are better than NJ Transit.
  • inferiorhuman 1y ago
    Jitneys could be found all over the country but they've largely fallen out of favor.
  • blamazon 1y ago
    There is in Atlanta. An informal system of cash only mini buses without fixed routes and a focus on Spanish language.
• inferiorhuman 1y ago
  Last I checked, which was admittedly, a few years ago there were jitneys in San Francisco.
• ajuc 1y ago
  After communism fell in Poland there was a period of privatization of public transport. It was reverted in last 2 decades in most big cities because it usually had worse quality standards (only competed on price), only served the few most profitable routes, and was uncooperative regarding the schedule (for example city buses were speeding to get to the bus stops before the time to get more passengers ahead of competition). So in theory there was a schedule with buses from lines 1,2,3 interleaving every 5 minutes - but in practice line 1 was going slower and line 3 was going faster and all buses were there at the same time and then you had to wait for 15 minutes for the next round :/ The worst part was that people outside the most profitable routes had no access to public transport - because public transport had to be subsidized more because the profitable routes were taken over by private buses. Basically it was a mistake, don't do it.
• dfxm12 1y ago
  What are the brands/types of busses you're talking about? In my city, Greyhound, Chinatown busses, etc., handle city-to-city connections, but they don't connect the residential areas to the city center. It's not lucrative enough (one reason being car use is so heavily subsidized). This is one of the reasons the concept of public transit exists. Like delivering mail to Americans who live in remote areas, we spread out the costs because the benefits are necessary to a thriving society.
  • dublinben 1y ago
    These minibusses or dollar vans don't have strong brands that you would recognize. They often operate in a legal grey area, so they're deliberately anonymous looking if you aren't in the know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_vans_in_the_New_York_metropolitan_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_vans_in_the_New_York_me...
    • PaulHoule 1y ago
      I volunteered to do some work in a rural village in the Dominican Republic years ago and got instructions to take several forms of public transportation from the airport to downtown Santo Domingo and then the town of Ocoa and finally either walk up the hill to El Limon or ride on a motorcycle with somebody. I saw motorcycle taxis and minibuses that run between cities and have the cobrador hanging out the side to rustle up passengers and where you might sit next to somebody holding a chicken. I rode in a "public car" which was painted red and drove in a circle and got out at a place that I thought was a bus station until I realized the tickets on the wall had the names of US college football teams and it was really a sportsbook. In the developing world it is common to see many forms of less formal transit. Maybe standards aren't that high and maybe I'd feel different if I'd missed the last bus to Ocoa, but it struck me as an economical, fast and efficient system.
      • AntiEgo 1y ago
        This is my experience travelling as well--Latin America has public transit that is an order of magnitude better than anything I've used in Canada or USA. The success in s.a. highlights how much of a problem cars are causing in n.a. cities. Even if a well financed public or private bus service wanted to run frequent lines at rush hour, those buses would be stuck in slow car traffic. In nordic countries, the bus and trams have dedicated lanes, and mass transit is generally faster than cars.