Thread: Scranton, PA insolvent, minimum wage for all Gov't Employees

Originally Posted by Parihaka

The buses.

I fail to see your logic in my city.

If I take a bus, it would take me ~20-25 minutes from where I live to my work. On Sundays when the traffic is very reduced, I need around 10 minutes for the same route. In working days it is 15 minutes.That makes a guestimate that the bus is 50% slower. Taking length of ~4 cars that would make the impact of 1 bus = 8 cars. Now what's with the other 30 cars?

I prefer the bus as both stops (home/work) are damn close to where I live, so I don't waste time in parking, nor do I care about the other drivers. I prefer the car if I have some other things to finish before or after working hours.

As for not subsided public transport we have private operators who drive for a cheaper price then subsided city owned company.

If I'd have to go anywhere outside of the city, I'd prefer my car for various reasons, but mainly flexibility.

Originally Posted by Doktor

I fail to see your logic in my city.

Every city is different so city on city comparisons aren't valid but one rule applied in virtually every case and reiterated here by Asty is that bus users can't afford their own transport. Therefore removal of the buses during peak times won't put a passenger equivalent number of cars on the road, nor apparently anything like it. Private transport will speed up because they won't be stoping behind buses picking up passengers, bus only lanes will become available, etc etc.

Originally Posted by Doktor

Half the buses filled over here would be 40-50 people. Now imagine 40-50 more cars for each bus. Which one causes more traffic disturbances?

Those 40 or 50 cars won't be on the same road at the same time during the day.

Assuming the bus runs every 15 minutes. Spread the average of 40 to 50 over that time span = 3 additional cars per minute passing by.

Now, those 45 people aren't going to the same place at the same time. They only do so because the bus follows a scheduled route.

A bus is inefficient in another way. What if I can't get to where I want to go in a single route and will need to transition to a different bus? I need to schedule more time. I will need to push everything back to allow for traffic congestion forcing me to miss a transit. It's great for people with lots of time on their hands. It's not good for normal working people.

Here's another example of "control" that I don't like. A car will allow me to run my errands on my schedule, accomodating only the businesses I visit. A mass transit system forces me to not only to take into account of the businesses I want to visit, but also the schedule of the transport. That leaves less time for my personal life.

All in all, public transportation is a form of control. We should have as little of it as possible. Airlines are great because they aren't controled by the government (in the US), also the speed more than makes up for the scheduling inefficiency. An inflexible mass transit like the train will only encourage businesses and communities to exist along its routes.

Everything in this world has a cost. The trick is to minimize the cost while maximizing utility. Public transit doesn't do that. The invisible cost is huge.

Originally Posted by Doktor

I fail to see your logic in my city.

If I take a bus, it would take me ~20-25 minutes from where I live to my work. On Sundays when the traffic is very reduced, I need around 10 minutes for the same route. In working days it is 15 minutes.That makes a guestimate that the bus is 50% slower. Taking length of ~4 cars that would make the impact of 1 bus = 8 cars. Now what's with the other 30 cars?

I prefer the bus as both stops (home/work) are damn close to where I live, so I don't waste time in parking, nor do I care about the other drivers. I prefer the car if I have some other things to finish before or after working hours.

As for not subsided public transport we have private operators who drive for a cheaper price then subsided city owned company.

If I'd have to go anywhere outside of the city, I'd prefer my car for various reasons, but mainly flexibility.

Aha! You do like flexibility.

What if some politician suggests using minimal tax dollars to link the 2 largest cities in Macedonia via high speed rail? Sounds good? Then the public finds out that the cost will be at least 4 times as the original estimate, with less than half the revenue projection expected from riders, and the high speed is reduced to above average speed. All of which will happen during a budget crunch across the country with cities going bankrupt left and right. That's socialist California right now.

Originally Posted by gunnut

Everything in this world has a cost. The trick is to minimize the cost while maximizing utility. Public transit doesn't do that. The invisible cost is huge.

But what about cities that "grow up" with and around trolleys and trains and subways and the like? Aren't they pretty much amortized and a plus?

-dale

Originally Posted by dalem

But what about cities that "grow up" with and around trolleys and trains and subways and the like? Aren't they pretty much amortized and a plus?

-dale

Maybe subways and elevated trains, they move passengers out of the traffic stream.

Originally Posted by zraver

Maybe subways and elevated trains, they move passengers out of the traffic stream.

Yep. If I'm going to have to pay for other peoples transport it might as well be for something that keeps them out of my way.

Gunnut,

You can't avoid the traffic peaks in the opening or closing hours, when people are going to work or back home. They do it at the same time.

The buses are scheduled on less time interval then your 15 minutes, aaand they are by definition always half filled. Meaning they are like 80% filled during those hours. And 20% filled when there is no rush. More or less like private cars.
Between two stops there are always 40-50 people inside, some get in, some get out. So, between two stops (~1 mile distance) you get 40 cars for every bus. At the end of the line the bus will transport ~200 people, to various locations, not 50.

If you want to talk about government control, think about big cities, not public transportation, unless you imply that people while riding on public transportation will read government controlled newspapers and "approved books".

On subsided train, the thing is (at least here) it does totally the opposite then what it is built for. In few decades economic centers will grow along the line, where people will settle and wont need the train anymore. Then you get these big cities and circle is complete

We also have a different situation where with your average paycheck you can buy more then 1000 gallons of petrol, where an average Macedonian can hardly buy 300 liters (75 gallons) of the same.
Do Joe or Jane commute 300 miles to work and back every day.

The petrol is overtaxed here with the explanation that the government is keeping the balance of payment since we import 100% of fossil fuels.

The United States minimum wage of the Mayor can not be reduced or increased under the city charter. The most the Mayor can do is to donate compensation back to the city. He will be paid and he will be subject to PA taxes on the salary he is entitled to receive.