I've ridden TriMet daily in the past, SoundTransit daily, and the L in Chicago daily. (Now I bike.) Maybe one trip in 20 or 30 there'd be unpleasantness.
Not overwhelmingly a shit experience. Mostly fine.
(Also FYI 80% of the US lives in cities. And 82 million of us--a fourth of us--live in the top 10 metropolitan areas alone.)
Public transport in the US is an overwhelmingly shit experience not because of the geography of the country, but because it all got sold out to lobbyists who wanted to sell as many cars as they could. Shit public transport = more cars.
It's overwhelmingly shit because urban planning favoured cookie-cutter suburbs far out of town, with no local amenities and no convenient transport connections in any reasonable walking distance. They never had to be designed that way.
Add to that the whole nuclear family rhetoric - a husband, a wife, some kids, a couple of cars...
People won't pay out of pocket to upgrade infrastructure and provide these services knowing how much they've been gutted over the past hundred years, so it really requires a government who is willing to invest in it and support it and begin to change the perception of public transport. That will probably come at a loss but an arguable purpose of a government is to provide such services that a corporate entity won't, without profit motive, because it is still ultimately in service of its people.
This isn't the only topic where people in the US are convinced they're in a unique situation that nobody else in the world has ever encountered and then solved, and I'm sure that it almost always boils down to some element of corporate lobbying that rejects any attempt to make life easy for citizens.
That's such a boring scapegoat. Rail was a plenty powerful industry at the time who afforded themselves plenty of lobbyists. Personal vehicles were a literal revolution. What always seems left out is that people overwhelmingly wanted this state of affairs and largely still do. People here are acting like people would love public transportation if only their minds hadn't been corrupted by the bad people.
> It's overwhelmingly shit because urban planning favoured cookie-cutter suburbs.
But now that we're here what do you propose we do? Going back in time for a do over isn't exactly a solution.
> People won't pay out of pocket to upgrade infrastructure.
* People who own cars don't use public transportation and have little desire to start.
* The overwhelming majority of people own cars.
* Public transportation comprehensive enough to replace cars is ludicrously expensive.
* People who don't use a thing don't want to pay for a thing.
=> It's not exactly a leap in logic that people wouldn't vote for it.
I think you've got a better chance of creating programs that just outright buy cars for the poor.
If a group can look at evidence of successful public transport (and other things) and still decide that can never work for them, for various nonsensical reasons (big country, x million people, the guiding hand of the free market, whatever), then they can at least be honest with themselves and say what their problem really is.
Source: here now
Why? Cities are built at human scale (i.e., vertical)