Hacker News Reader

Comment by darquomiahw | Hacker News Reader

Why would anyone take a Waymo when you can ride the Trimet MAX for $2.50?

I rode the MAX when living there for a few years. I vividly recall screaming drugged out homeless riders being a regular feature. The last time I rode, a year ago, there was someone in the throes of the fent-bends in my section, who smelled like he was dying (he well may have been).

These incidents haven't made me fear, because I am a relatively big and tall male, but they _definitely_ will for others. And even then, they aren't pleasant.

You simply don't run into those things often on trains/subways in Europe (I lived in Spain for a year and traveled extensively in Europe during that time, and on other europe trips prior). So fix those issues, and then I am sure people will want to ride the rails.

The NYT reported recently that the rollout of more impermeable ticket gates have noticeably reduced the proportion of unstable people on the subway.

Not everyone who fare evades is unstable, obviously, but the article suggested that a high proportion of the unstable were fare evaders, so their reduction was an unexpected corollary benefit of the new gates. (I assume this would conceptually clash with the effort to make public transport free.)

Curious to hear from anyone with recent NY subway experience with thoughts to share on this.

Any form of station-side ticket gate would be a complete and utter non-starter for the MAX - half of the stations are practically rural.

I'm a MAX apologist, but you're right. It sucks. I live on the yellow line, and I estimate that there's a visibly (or audibly, or orfactorily) unstable person on the train 50% of the time. I'll ride the train by myself sometimes, but always avoid it with friends or family because it's gotten embarrassing at this point.

Those are separate problems

The solution is to get MORE people onto the trains, not fewer.

Has it been shown that screaming drugged out homeless riders avoid the presence of crowds? Is there any physical mechanism where having more people on the trains leads to Daniel-Penny-like suppression of drugged out homeless riders? Or does "getting more people onto the trains" just mean removing their options until they are forced to ignore the drugged out homeless riders?

As a solution, "get MORE people onto the trains" seems less optimal than "get fewer drugged out homeless riders onto the trains".

Why are you advocating people murder mentally ill people? Daniel Penny is a murderer and violent criminal piece of shit. Why are you advocating for violence? You are a sick person. Please stop commenting.

> As a solution, "get MORE people onto the trains" seems less optimal than "get fewer drugged out homeless riders onto the trains".

You dont have to do one thing. It’s not an either or. You’re statements are coming off as mentally ill and illogical. Should we send Daniel Penny after you?

Safety in numbers. There's a reason there's not an issue during the day and during heavy commute hours.

I'm saying it _is_ and _was_ an issue during the day and heavy commute hours, those were the only hours I rode it! Other places in the world with nice train systems do not burden their riders with "safety in numbers", the places are just plain safer, period. And a great place to start is Don't let people smoke fentanyl on the train :) (And make sure everyone has affordable housing and healthcare, ofc)

There absolutely are serious issues at all times, regardless of how busy the trains are. I'm sorry, but as someone who actually lives in Portland I'm telling you that mentally ill drug users do not give a crap about how many people there are in the train car. After the third time I had to move my kids to different cars or even exit the train entirely due to open drug use and dangerous behavior, I swore off public transit for good.

That's what I was asking -- why do you believe this? What is your mechanism for safety in numbers? If it's "criminals fear being observed", that doesn't hold now that catch-and-release is standard practice. If it's "criminals fear being outnumbered", that doesn't hold when the crowd will be prosecuted if they attack. The only mechanism left for safety in numbers is hoping that criminals feel shy.

This seems intuitive to me because I would never risk fighting someone in the street over some crime, so I don't see why having me around would deter them at all. The same goes for maybe 90% of the people I know. We're weak and docile, even in numbers.

The MAX is nice, and cheap. But it doesn’t run everywhere. I would take the MAX over Waymo, but Waymo over the bus.

Because MAX is on rails it can and does come to a complete halt for indefinite periods of time whenever some jackass in an Escalade parks it on the track. I know this firsthand and I only lived in Portland for one month.

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Portland streetcar? Max does not have nearly the same issues.

MAX has dedicated right-of-way outside the city centers, but in the cities it shares city streets. Tourists drive / stop-at-lights in the dedicated lanes a lot.

Streetcar is more susceptible to being stopped because someone parked over the white line, but with 20 minute headways it takes longer to cause a problem.

Being slow and inconvenient would be the main reasons. Less exposure to communicable diseases and other unpleasantness are secondary reasons.

How would you know what diseases the previous passenger had?

I got strep from a dude coughing on MAX without a mask. Of course the one day I forget mine.

Correction: it's $2.80, capped at $5.60 for a day-pass. (Still $100 for a monthly pass, though.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com