Living Car Free - An Inconvenient Journey - Anti-Transit

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/NEWS02/806160332&s=d&page=#pluckcomments

Here's an anti-transit story about an elderly man in Delaware who takes up to four hours to travel about 8 miles! Incredible. The whole article wines about how much better his life would be with a car and the miserable bus transport.

It obvious the writer wanted to disparage motor transport as the solution for the poor. Regardless to what she thinks, the poor will not have a choice as even the middle class will have to seek public transportation alternatives in the not too distant future. The motorcar is rapidly becoming the transport of the rich as it was 100 years ago and the days of inexpensive motoring are coming to an end.

What aren’t discussed are those who do benefit from the bus system. You never hear from satisfied users who are saving thousands of dollars and are car free because of public transport. It's always those stories from people who don't know how to use a bus schedule and spend needless hours waiting at a bus stop that are interviewed. Think about it, what would Mr. Brown do if there were no bus to take him to the clinic? Would he still be alive?

I happen to believe it was the motorcar that put this man in his situation. Years of driving expensive vehicles left him without savings and now he can't even afford a $15.00 dollar cab ride to the doctors. Years of driving and no exercise left him diabetic and disabled, unable to walk several blocks. The article made it appear like the car would be the answer to all his problems but it in fact was the root of his troubles.

What was it my ex-wife's friend used to say..."Wah-F'in-wah!" (censored for the forum).

If the bus service is unreliable/not on schedule, it sounds like there are people ready to deal with that; complaining to friends/family about something they can't control is useless. You have to complain to the right people to begin to see results.

D.S, you're right -- his health issues came about, PARTIALLY at least, by his lifestyle choices.

Watching my dad deteriorate due to his choices made up my mind to do something different; I will NOT let myself go to the point of needing 5 bypasses, then ending up with 20% cardiac function for the last week of my life....

You have to complain to the right people to begin to see results.
or get those people (i.e., the agency administration and governing board members) to ride regularly the system they oversee, if at all.

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/NEWS02/806160332&s=d&page=#pluckcomments

What aren’t discussed are those who do benefit from the bus system. You never hear from satisfied users who are saving thousands of dollars and are car free because of public transport. It's always those stories from people who don't know how to use a bus schedule and spend needless hours waiting at a bus stop that are interviewed. Think about it, what would Mr. Brown do if there were no bus to take him to the clinic? Would he still be alive?



They don't write many news stories about people who are happy with the norm.

I don't think the article is "anti-public transit" at all. I could say many of the the same things about Yolobus out here where I live.

The writer makes a clear point that more routes and more frequent service are necessary if people are ever going to get out of their cars. We should be praising such work rather than condemning it.

Our local bus system was designed as a hub and spoke system with one hub. If you happen to be going to the hub, it's great. If you're going anywhere else, it takes forever. For example, I could bike and ride the bus to where I used to work in 105 minutes, or I could ride my bike straight there in 45 minutes. I have no idea why they didn't choose a more useful design. I'm going to write them them a letter suggesting a more useful system. Their ridership would increase dramatically if it didn't take so long to get anywhere.

or get those people (i.e., the agency administration and governing board members) to ride regularly the system they oversee, if at all.

Wow. That's a stretch. Recall when the new BART President was announced, someone asked how she got to work and she said "I Drive". She's not in a BART friendly area but there was an AC transit route that would be nominally useful. While one could say "Wow, that's just a lot of work to take transit to work", the fact she does not take transit means she does not *really* understand the issues that transit riders face, making her unqualified to be the CEO of a transportation network. I don't necessarily think she's doing a lousy job, but that's my thinking on the subject, while I am being high and mighty today.

^ you would be referring to dorothy (dugger), who is GM btw (a minor correction) ;)

you will also recall that BART's chief spokespoodle lives in piedmont (not more than a few miles from 300 lakeside). guess his mode of transport to work. granted, there are certain job demands that will at times preclude the use of transit (or bicycle), but still. :crash:

fyi, i'm an operator with a small concord-based agency (gee, i wonder which one that could possibly be? :innocent: ) and it really is frustrating that virtually everyone drives a car to work. the administration really has no concept of what the service operated is actually like (e.g., the administrators i have worked with had no idea our fareboxes do not even display the amount deposited; these are the most basic POS you could possibly find, next to setting up a glass jar for fare collection). here's their novel idea to increase ridership: offer free rides on the first day of every month. okay, and what happens after people try this free service and find that the service is, in most cases, infrequent; the buses are filthy (the exteriors are cleaner than the interiors); service ends much too early; the trip takes twice as long as driving (or, in my case, a bicycle is very competitive with a nearby route); and some passengers truly are batsh*t insane. yeah, i think those new riders are going to stick with it because they'll save $3.50 once a month.

it really does seem like most of the people are there to collect a paycheck (or to add something to their public service record). :notamused:

I'm glad I am rich

I've ridden public transit regularly for several years now. I'd have to say that it's extremely inconvenient-- and this in a city (Portland, OR)which deludes itself that it has a great public transit system. The buses NEVER run on time. NEVER. They're always off schedule, always late...unless you're running a little late, in which case the bus got there early, but the next bus breaks down, so you have to wait for the next bus, which is, of course late, and overcrowded because the last bus broke down. And if you ask the driver why the bus didn't show up, s/he gets annoyed. So you call the agency and complain that the bus was late today, just like every other day of the week, and they apologize. Then, the next day, the bus is late. And the next day. and the next. Ad infinitum. Call to complain, and they apologize. But nothing ever changes-- except the fares. Those go up. Same crappy service, new, higher fares.

And the schedules? Buses run every 15 minutes on popular routes-- except they're always late, so it's not 15 minutes. On other routes, it can be every half hour, or every hour. Arrive at a stop and look for a schedule to see when the next bus arrives, and you're out of luck. They haven't bothered to place schedules, 2 years after the schedules were put into effect. Call and complain, and they say they're "working on it." So you stand there and wait, because you don't dare leave, because the bus might arrive any minute now. And sure enough an hour later, there's the bus.

Now the trains, those are lovely. Light rail, street cars, I love those. On time, comfortable, pleasant to ride.

I don't think it's anti-transit to print the truth. I think it's anti-transit to provide crap transit service on the theory that people who ride transit are poor and don't have to be anywhere on time. THAT's anti-transit. Pro-transit is agitating for safe, convenient, affordable, regular, reliable service.

fyi, i'm an operator with a small concord-based agency (gee, i wonder which one that could possibly be? :innocent: ) and it really is frustrating that virtually everyone drives a car to work. the administration really has no concept of what the service operated is actually like (e.g., the administrators i have worked with had no idea our fareboxes do not even display the amount deposited; these are the most basic POS you could possibly find, next to setting up a glass jar for fare collection). here's their novel idea to increase ridership: offer free rides on the first day of every month. okay, and what happens after people try this free service and find that the service is, in most cases, infrequent; the buses are filthy (the exteriors are cleaner than the interiors); service ends much too early; the trip takes twice as long as driving (or, in my case, a bicycle is very competitive with a nearby route); and some passengers truly are batsh*t insane. yeah, i think those new riders are going to stick with it because they'll save $3.50 once a month.

it really does seem like most of the people are there to collect a paycheck (or to add something to their public service record). :notamused:That, in my opinion, is exactly the problem. If the administrators HAD to ride the transit system they administer, would they really continue to run a crappy service? I think not. I think they'd run a top-notch transit service if they were forced to ride it.

I think it's crappy precisely because they DON'T ride, and they think it's good enough for poor trash who can't afford a car (or got busted for DUI), because in their minds, really, why else would anybody choose not to drive?