Thanks for the jokes bud. Hilarious that there are serious people who say mostly the stuff you are saying (but actually believe it!)
Yes, it is. It's a part of how urbanists hide the true cost of that "transit freedom".
Divide the yearly budget of the MTA ($21.3 billion) by the number of rides (1.28 billion).
> Hilarious that there are serious people who say mostly the stuff you are saying (but actually believe it!)
Perhaps you should do a bit of self-reflection instead of just parroting things you've heard?
What about the wars we fight for oil? Tack that onto the cost of cars. Subsidies for parking? Same thing. I could go on and on, but you'll just be embarrassed more.
lol. Can't believe you are serious. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is only surpassed by your confidence.
We absolutely should. And hey, somebody did just that: https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/state-infrastructur... - in my state the drivers pay for 95% of road upkeep via direct user fees.
And I'm totally on-board with having drivers pay 100% of road maintenance. As long as transit riders pay 100% of fares.
> What about the wars we fight for oil?
The US is a net energy exporter. And of course, for urban planning purposes, we can just assume that all future cars will be EVs.
> lol. Can't believe you are serious. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is only surpassed by your confidence.
Can I send you a mirror?