Comments on: On What Freaking Basis?

By: Allen

Allen — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 06:26:37 +0000

@GÃ¶sta , if one has to wait 50 years for something to become “efficient and economically viable” then by it’s very nature it is neither. More so, in this case the system is not economically viable even after 50 years of being built. 50 years during which the very powerful local governments have pushed people onto using the metro. 50 years of this and still fares only cover about 1/2 of the metro’s capital and operational costs.

By: me

me — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:20:36 +0000

Interesting point of view – China is building out their light rail system in a big way. (See: http://blog.foolsmountain.com/2010/02/04/high-speed-rails-in-china/). Now, payoff might not be economically feasible compared to European systems using current metrics (as the article points out, the economic savings are higher in Europe due to average cost of labor), but there is the argument that exchange rates and cost of labor in China will change; at the same time, labor is dirt-cheap there right now, so the cost of actually building light rail is at what will probably turn out to be an all-time low.

By: MJ

MJ — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:22:47 +0000

Richard Green also questions the basis for considering Phoenix light rail a “success” here:

http://real-estate-and-urban.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-this-really-success.html

By: Ben

Ben — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:10:23 +0000

Good op-ed on this in today’s WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703389004575033672230734364.html

By: Gary H

Gary H — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:30:20 +0000

America has a wonderful, cost effective, energy saving, well run, and ignored mass transit system. Freight Rail!

Our strategy has been to move goods by rail more than people. For America, that is an excellent strategy. For most of our spread out and highly dynamic cities, buses and cars make the most sense for people. For most of our spread out and highly dynamic country, cars and air travel make the most sense for people.

It is too bad that the left is so in love with the idea of being more like Europe that they never stop a moment to think and be more in love with the reality of America.

By: Sol

Sol — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 16:48:51 +0000

I’d really like to see more model railroad blogging from Coyote…

By: IgotBupkis

IgotBupkis — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:13:03 +0000

. > The problem may be that our country is just too big and openâ€¦. Indeed -- I would agree that they work in a high-density locale such as NYC, and large chunks of Europe, but probably 99% of the USA is not thus encumbered. > There is not some genetic fault in the DNA of choo-choos. Ah, there's the problem. It's actually a genetic fault in the DNA of coo-koos. > Our state budgets cannot afford such a legacy to our future generations. Welcome to the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis. These people seek the destruction of Western Civ. They are evil and culturally suicidal. Do not attribute to stupidity what is inarguably the result of malicious intent. .

By: Doug

Doug — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:52:56 +0000

Of course in 50 years, the budget busting choo choo may have caused us to dramatically increase taxes or cut services (most likely both). The problem is, our current fiscal reality is that passenger service between cities really have to be subsidized at a high rate. Trains running around a city, still have to be subsidized, but perhaps at a smaller extent. Our state budgets cannot afford such a legacy to our future generations.

By: KTWO

KTWO — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:42:41 +0000

re: “….Phoenix represents the apogee of operating examples.”

I was curious enough to check the definition and derivation of “apogee”.

It literally means farthest from Earth. A second usage is highest or culmination.

These systems, as built in the US, usually are farthest from reality. La-LA land.

A sad outcome from a given light rail system is not fated. There is not some genetic fault in the DNA of choo-choos.

So why does it happen?

It happens in the US of today because we do not build transportation systems. Instead we build political creatures which provide graft and self-esteem to politicians, and nearly lifetime employment to planners and builders. And immense profits to the banks and financial firms who deal with the bonds. And often merchants and land speculators.

All phases of the conception, funding, construction, and operations are overlaid by multiple layers of bureaucrats, urban planners, and politicians who have a direct stake in seeing that as much subsidy money as possible pours into their system for as long as possible.

After a few decades the system may have a few riders. Or many riders. That doesn’t matter. It is irrelevant.

There is one certainty: When matters go badly, no one is ever responsible.

Consider for a moment the smoking of a cigarette. Smoke curls upward and away. The smoker has no interest in that. It is not why he smokes.

The riders and revenues are only the smoke from urban transit. Epiphenomena of no concern. The system was not actually built to provide either

By: GÃ¶sta Oscarsson

GÃ¶sta Oscarsson — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:42:14 +0000

What often i forgotten is that it is through the interaction between a mass transit system and the localisation of future housing, jobs and services that you in due time get a system where transport and other investments interact. My case is Stockholm, where a bunch of crazy politicians in 1945 (sic) decided to establish a large subway system for a city with some 700 thousand inhabitants. But the trick was that almost all investments after that were structured by the transport system, which means that the present two million inhabitants use collective transport to a surprisingly high degree. A fringe benefit has been that the central city has an extremely high part of jobs in Stockholm. An obvious result as all parts of the transport system focus on that centre.

So give your investment 50 years and allow future investment to be structured by it, then it will become both efficient and economically viable. Good luck!