"Let's rebuild 2 tunnels. And maybe build 2 more." (Before they collapse and destroy the economy.) - Boring. Not sexy. No photo-ops.
And that's the problem with humans. :(
"Let's rebuild 2 tunnels. And maybe build 2 more." (Before they collapse and destroy the economy.) - Boring. Not sexy. No photo-ops.
And that's the problem with humans. :(
There are of course many reasons for this, but I assure you not all human societies are clearly hostile to public infrastructure spending and anything that isn't private and for-profit.
In the years I lived in London I observed the Tube going from constant outages and weekend shutdowns, to later trains, more frequent trains, and new infrastructure projects like Crossrail. DLR, a conductorless system I rode daily,was only a few decades old.
As a NYer I'm deeply embarrassed by having seen first hand over 20 years the slow decline of the transportation system here. It's embarrassing when family and friends visit from overseas and display disgust and shock. NY comes off as wealthy and clean in popular media there, but the reality is closer to a Third World one.
First Corzine proposed it (the second or so in as many decades), then Christie replaces him and uses its cancellation for political gain (a fact with such frustration that I can't express it politely), then the project comes alive again at higher cost and with Obama Federal funding promises overturned by Trump.
Whoever said that decentralized control of infrastructure in a short-term-minded political environment was a good idea needs to wake up and visit countries in Europe or Asia with vastly superior infrastructure and ponder the idea that 18th century ideas could perhaps be wrong in 2018.
The only city that's truly expanding their rail in a significant way is Seattle. With the ST3 project and the Redmond Transit corridor, hopefully they'll see some relief from the insane housing prices. But they needed that expansion two decades ago.
Don't even get me started on Caltrain.
Everybody is going crazy over self driving vehicles, but if we do get them, they won't be a reality for at least 10 ~ 15 years. It's a more difficult problem than people think, and all that money could be put into fixing and expanding our crumbling rail.
I don't understand why America hates rail so much.
Because in America, transit is welfare for poor people, and acts like it. Busses in small cities in Germany coordinate schedules to optimize transfers. Busses in secondary US cities just don’t shown up sometimes because the driver decided to clock out early. There is no accountability, due to the potent combination of the fact that the primary constituency is politically marginalized to begin with and also are not paying the taxes that fund the systems.
If US transit wasn’t so unbelievably shitty and inefficient, there might be some stomach in funding it.
Why not assume the obvious? The user experiences how crappy it is and sees how much it costs. He therefore balks at funding more expensive crappiness.
I'm not sure if you're starting to make a market-based Rational-Man-type argument, but I'll cut you off and say: you don't have a choice BUT take public transportation, unless you can afford to take a helicopter and live and work right near helipads. Even an Uber/taxi can be an impossible nightmare time-wise during rush-hour.
Most people who commute in on the NJT/Amtrak (the topic of the parent submission) don't have the choice to take a car or walk.
The NY Metropolitan area is not the rest of the United States. The population density is like nothing else.
It's not a suggestion, it's an historical fact. I'll cite no less an authority than George Will, who in one of his more unfortunate descents into conspiratorial hackery essentially equates support for public transportation with communism:
> "The real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism. To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make."
Other conservative powers oppose public transport only to protect their own money. A good example is the Koch family, who vigorously fight any technology or activity that might threaten their fossil-fuel-fueled wealth, including public transport of all kinds. Rent-seeking may constitute a "rational" motivation on the part of the rent seeker, but many conservatives appear to align themselves with Koch-branded positions for purely ideological (and I would argue irrational) reasons.
Self-driving cars are eventually just another form of public transit anyways, so maybe that'll be the winning approach.
I don't really trust our government and loathe giving them more power. On the flip-side I hate the waste we produce in the name of freedom.
NYer as well, for long time, and while it's (public transport) in decline for sure, I think your timeline is off. I'd say it's only been in aggressive decline for the past few years, and gradual decline for last 10. Before that was getting better every year. Unlimited Metrocard made riding the subway safe at all hours as marginal cost for riders became zero, more riders = more safety.
"Lead us not into Penn Station..."
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CJP5ZEFTL...