How socialistic should our public transportation system be?

[takebackourtemple]

   Public funding of a public transportation system has its pros and cons. The pros are that traffic congestion is reduced and when run properly, less gas is spent, which results in less funding to the Muslim Nazi terrorists. Of course in modern day, these systems are run poorly by affirmative action morons, the public has to fund a good portion of the system through taxes. In the Baltimore/DC area crime goes up whenever a subway or light rail is brought to an area and the people who benefit from the system are usually not decent human beings.
   New York's public transportation system is the best in the world, but at what cost? Should people who don't want to be packed in a sardine can subway car with a bunch of third world beasts have to pay huge tolls and gas prices to subsidize this decaying public transportation system? Are $9 round trip tolls moral to charge motorists who want to travel from Queens to the Bronx or from Brooklyn to Staten Island when the city has a problem of too much traffic going through Manhattan? Wouldn't the city want to encourage people to take these alternate and direct routes when travelling between boroughs? Should these motorists have to subsidize the subway system through their tolls because they are somewhat wealthier?
   My view is that a public transporation system is only good when it is run well and represents the tax payers that fund it. Any thoughts about the case of New York and the rest of the country.

[cjd]

For most cases I don't like paying for something I don't use however public transportation systems are very important to modern population centers. Try to picture the 5 boroughs of NYC without its public transportation. Long Island without the railroad. Public transportation is worth every prudent penny we spend on it. The evil comes in when money is wasted and no benefit is derived to the system. For the most part ridership should pay its way however I don't see a problem when tax payers pick up some of the tab. Public transportation benefits all by moving  money spending people to places of business as well as making  it possible for people to get to work each day. Cars and trucks could never be able to do the job the numbers needed would be to great. Public transportation is  a great way to move large numbers of people cheaply, quickly, and in an environmentally friendly way.

[Rhuan]

I think that public transport should be entirely paid for through tax.

I may be biased as I have at least 19 bus journeys each weak.

[fake plastic trees]

I think that public transport should be entirely paid for through tax.

I may be biased as I have at least 19 bus journeys each weak.

no, as then people would overuse them, and then taxes go up... viscious circle

[Rhuan]

Who cares if taxes go up?

[fake plastic trees]

Who cares if taxes go up?

me, i don't want to be paying for your bus journies...

use a car or walk!

[Rhuan]

I think cars should be banned.

[fake plastic trees]

I think cars should be banned.

why?

they are a marvel of technology and give people freedom

[Rhuan]

They pollute the atmosphere horribly in comparison to alternatives.

[fake plastic trees]

They pollute the atmosphere horribly in comparison to alternatives.

they are infinitely more conveniant than alternatives... they go where you want them to go for a start

[cjd]

I think cars should be banned.

Whoa when I say whoa. Them are fighting words varmint.( Only kidding)  Honestly public transportation is great if it is located in a large city. Things aren't to spread out and its is convenient to use. In the subburbs things are spread out and it would not be a convenient option . Ridership would be to low to make running trains or buses on a regular schedule impractical. Besides it would take just to long to get anywhere. For me a car is indispensable and I believe most American  people except city dwellers would feel the same way.

[takebackourtemple]

   Busses also pollute. In creating this topic I was hoping to discuss a better balance as opposed to whether people should drive or whether public transportation should exist. There are obviously too many cars in our cities and obviously our public transportation systems are poorly run. Here are two questions to think about.

   1. Should public transportation be publicly or privately run? The Jamaican van services(though illegal) were profitable until the city implemented the free metrocard transfers. The Chinatown bus companies make a profit without tax payer funding while providing cheaper fares and better service than Greyhound which does the exact opposite.
   2. Should public transportation be funded by whites for only blacks to use. In most parts of the country, public transportation is lacking in predominantly whites areas. The beneficiaries end up being all black and the lowest class ones who do not pay taxes. If service is extended into a good(independent of race) neighborhood, that bad people move in and the neighborhood then becomes bad. Any service that does not benefit blacks then becomes a civil rights issue. Public transportation is not the same as it was before Martin Luther King and Rosa parks ruined it.

[cjd]

The City of New York does a decent job with the bus and train system. Public transportation needs to be subsidized to a certain point because if it wasn't the fares would be so high most people could not afford to use it. I have no objection seeing taxpayer money being used for mass transit as long as the money isn't wasted.

[takebackourtemple]

The City of New York does a decent job with the bus and train system. Public transportation needs to be subsidized to a certain point because if it wasn't the fares would be so high most people could not afford to use it. I have no objection seeing taxpayer money being used for mass transit as long as the money isn't wasted.

   Once again my question is "how much" and not if. I'm not suggesting that we get rid of tax based funding.
   New York City has traditionally had a good pubic transportation system. It was good when they first built it, but now it takes thirty years to build a station. The simplest work requires political squabbling, tons of environmental studies and usually ends up in failure. Look at the East Side Expansion project that failed. Look at the second avenue subway plans. Your subways are always packed and the trains are filled with homeless bums in most cars. Many of the conductors speak poor English and the intercoms are usually broken. Don't get me wrong, New York probably still has the best public transportation system in the country, but it is not what it used to be and with morons running it, the system is constantly getting worse.
   I have no objection to a public transportation system being funded by tax payers, but I do object to the balance that currently exists. I do believe that taxation without representation should not exist. I'm not asking for perfection, but do not feel that one group of people should have to fund another in gross quantity.
   Perhaps the City of New York could make additional funds by charging more for value added services such as first/business class on crowded subway trains(thought that would become a civil rights issue). Perhaps they could kick the homeless bums off of the trains and out of the city(once again a civil rights issue). Perhaps they could get rid of their affirmative action and hire employees based upon competency(Is this a civil rights issue?).

[cjd]

I see your point and agree with you 100%. Changes such as you suggested in your posts would be next to impossible to do. Between the PC crowd and the environmentalist and the unions getting any sort of reforms would be a miracle. I don't know what the dollar amount  is  or how much it could be cut but unfortunately tax payers are stuck subsidizing the system.

[Rhuan]

   Busses also pollute.

A bus carrying ten people does not cause as much polution as ten cars each carrying one person.

[fake plastic trees]

   Busses also pollute.

A bus carrying ten people does not case as much polution as ten cars each carrying one person.

Where I live, if there were to be very regular public transport, there would be not that many people using it, so the buses would pollute the atmosphere considerably more than if people used cars.

[takebackourtemple]

   Busses also pollute.

A bus carrying ten people does not cause as much polution as ten cars each carrying one person.

   Given identical routes, I would have to guess that ten passengers are slightly higher than the break even point in terms of raw fuel consumption. Of course all factors change that balance. A bus that stops every two blocks to exchange passengers and then has to stop at every light and also has to make constant deviations in route is a lot less efficient than one that gets on the highway and travels directly from point a to b.
   I agree that bus transportation is important, but only where it serves the best purpose.

[ScotcH]

Socialism is for Godless COMMIES... and of course Retards !!

[Vito]

If I were the mayor of New York, one of the first things I would push for is converting all trains and buses to hybrid technology.

[kellymaureen]

Our public transport system is horrible, you have to walk for blocks and wait up to an hour and then walk blocks to your destination, not worth taking at all.  Hardly anyone does.