Re: Transit

[george conklin]

I guess you've all probably read this.

> >

[george conklin]

Yes, I noticed the following when I read the earlier today:

"It has, for instance, reached agreements with the local public school district, colleges and private businesses to help subsidize its operations."

So, more people agreed to subsidize the operation, not that it 'turned a profit.'

[george conklin]

Naw, it's just like lots of employee benefits where the employee pays part and the employer pays part: health insurance, 401(k), etc.

It makes sense for the colleges to pay to keep beneficial bus routes rather than run their own busses. Rochester is a pretty big college town (for part of it, at least).

Using your definition, your college should be shut down, too, because it doesn't make a profit and relies on public subsidies.

If it can get a private (or at least semi-public) organization to foot part of they bill, good for them because in the poor parts of Rochester, they rely on public transport for almost all of their transportation needs.

[george conklin]

Are you implying that your college is a jail? You're just keeping kids off the street for 4 years?

Anyway, I think you completely missed the point of the article. The point is that Rochester faces the same struggles as other transit systems, and it the face of declining public subsidies it marketed itself to the (semi-)private section and they found it a valuable enough service to pay for it. That's a good thing. They are selling their product on the open market and people are willing to pay for it. Good for them.

For the colleges it's probably a simple economic equation. Either pay for more parking lots plus create their own transportation system for may the bus system. It must have been cheaper to pay for the service than to replicate it themselves.

[Amy Blankenship]

I've always thought that it's a supreme irony of college life that if you've _already_ paid to be there, you get to pay more to park there. However, if you _haven't_ paid to be there, you get to park free. Neat, huh? :-)

[Amy Blankenship]

So you don't want government to subsidize your job?

[george conklin]

>>>>>>> Yes, I noticed the following when I read the earlier today:

You equate education in importance with transit schemes, when people are very willing to drive themselves at their own expense. You have to force people to take transit.

[Kris Krieger]

Pat wrote in news:d350f52b-a8fd-416d-990c- [e-mail]:

No, but it's interesting, thanks for the link!

Sometimes my mind turns to trying to think how suburban areas could better- utilize public transportation, such as a system of feeders (trollies, maybe?) that could go from suburban neighborhoods (with frequent stops so all are within reasonable walking distance) to central transport areas. Of course, our *current* infrastructure is going to hell in a handbasket, and new infrastructure would add to those costs... :(

[Kris Krieger]

Pat wrote in news:7828f5ab-7c1e-4f42-94d4- [e-mail]:

@l43g2000hsh.googlegroups.com..

And really, is it any different from newspapers and magazines being "subsidized" by selling ad space? Maybe the transit system sells ad space to businesses - and maybe businesses figure it's to their benfit if their employees can get to work reliably and on time, *and* not all stressed out from driiving and having ot look for a parking space.

Hey Pat, stop confusing the issue with facts!

[george conklin]

At least in Rochester, no one is forcing anyone to do anything.

In terms of % of total market, transit is so small a percentage all public policy is how to figure out how to force people onto it, and that includes findings more and more sources of gifts.

[Amy Blankenship]

>>>>>>>> Yes, I noticed the following when I read the earlier today:

People are willing to educate themselves at their own expense, as well, or there wouldn't be any private schools. You were complaining about people who disapprove of subsidies for things they don't like, yet approve of it for things they want. I think the fact that you disapprove of subsidies for transit, yet make your living from other subsidies, puts you squarely in the group you're complaining about. I don't think that the fact that _you_ can't see the logic in this assertion makes me illogical.

[Kris Krieger]

"george conklin" wrote in news:AOidnU7dppIJZVLVnZ2dnUVZ [e-mail]:

Willing to drive themselves, or forced because that is their only accessible means of transportation?

That sword cuts both ways.

A lot of people *hate* driving, because there are so many a-holes on the road and that makes it very stressful; OTOH, people I've known who could access public transport can actually *use* their commuting time to read, work through problems, do email via a laptop, and do other things that are much more productive (or simply more relaxing) than struggling with speeders, reckless drivers, road-ragers, and Mad Max Wannabes.

And if you live in Boston (as did my sister), it's idiotic to tryu to have a car, ebcasue teh transport *is* good, and the city is old and simply was not set up to accomidate mobs of sutomobiles, not even small ones (never mind behemoths).

Well, when you have to walk 5 miles just to get to a bus stop, then yeah, public transport *won't* become a larger percentage of travel. It's not a matter of "gifts" or "forcing", as much as it's a matter of accessibility and routing.

I say routing because currently, at least where I've lived, even if one can get to a bus stop, that bus snakes all over creation before actually heading anywhere - which is why I was thinking of "feeders"that could be small neighborhood "trolleys" (or maybe solar-recharged electric vans could work out) that go from suburban neighborhoods, to pickup points from which the bus (or whatever) could go directly downtown, or directly to one of the smaller, more localized city-centers.

OTOH, you seem to be most interested in finding excuses to not bother even

*thinking* about anything other than cars, cars, and more cars. So who is actually forcing whom to do what?

[Warm Worm]

I admit to wondering if they might be a little young.

[Warm Worm]

How about coming over to alt.architecture once and awhile? Seems I only get to see you when Pat crossposts. ;)

[Warm Worm]

Vulcans don't laugh. ;)

[george conklin]

Like in NYC and London, where the mayors are doing their best to charge everyone to drive a few blocks, so jealous are they of their transit systems. And Bloomberg? Yes. He has his Suburbans drive him to a transit stop so he can be seen by the press emerging. So wonderful you arguments.

People drive right by bus stops in their cars, which is what annoys people like you.

[george conklin]

The point of the article is quite clear. Transit has to find many more groups to throw money at them in order to survive. Riders are irrelevant to the financial picture. Our local TTA gets 11% from the riders. That is close to nothing, yet it does not get anywhere near as many riders as they think they ought to have, based on some philosophy or other.

[george conklin]

Architechs love Smart Growth because they see it as a way to increase their fees.

[Warm Worm]

Is this like a 3-second sound-bite?

[Warm Worm]

Cars annoy people like me.