Living Car Free - Driven to Despair :PBS=NOW

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/blueprintamerica/reports/driven-to-despair/watch-full-report/103/

I thought this was really good. It deals with people trying to pay for gas.

I think it shows two groups of People.

First the ones who don't want to commute everywhere, locate themselves right next to the stop and shops.

The second ones want to drive everywhere.

We need a leader!

Interesting documentary. You have to feel so sorry for that couple caught out in exurbia... now just about ready to declare bankruptcy. It's also kind of amazing that they couldn't even imagine taking public transportation to work (even if the price of gas was what contributed to their downfall...)

I think we see this all the time. People will tell you that you can't bike to work, you can't take the bus, you can't walk. But the only reason they tell you this is because they have never tried it...

When they actually do, they often discover it is not only not so bad... their quality of life improves.

Of course, production times being what they are, by the time the program comes on, it's temporarily obsolete. $2.99/gal in Richmond this week. Which means a fillup in my scooter is $3.07.

I am heartened by an article in today's Wall Street Journal mentioning that, despite the dropping of gas prices, consumption is not going up.

People will tell you that you can't bike to work, you can't take the bus, you can't walk. But the only reason they tell you this is because they have never tried it...

When they actually do, they often discover it is not only not so bad... their quality of life improves.
And as I've said before, when people see there are others choosing to live car-free or car-light, they're more inclined to try it for themselves.

I am heartened by an article in today's Wall Street Journal mentioning that, despite the dropping of gas prices, consumption is not going up.

I think this week has really hammered home the seriousness of our situation for anyone paying attention.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/blueprintamerica/reports/driven-to-despair/watch-full-report/103/

I thought this was really good. It deals with people trying to pay for gas.

I think it shows two groups of People.

First the ones who don't want to commute everywhere, locate themselves right next to the stop and shops.

The second ones want to drive everywhere.

We need a leader!

That was excellent. Thinks for posting.

Here's a family that's spending $1600.00 a month in gas and is going into bankruptcy but won't even consider thinking of finding a park and ride and taking an express bus! Insanity!

It's pleasing to see how one person (Jane Rifer) could still be car free in Downtown LA. But she does it by living next to a lightrail. I did the same thing and became carfree and without question, was the best I ever did in my life. I even became bike free! LOL!

Do you notice that people are Driven to Despair, but never Pedaled to Despair? ;)

Bunch of dumbasses. "Bus is not my thing. Surrounded by strangers?" Oh how frightful! Stay in your prison home paying 1600/month for gas then. I'm sure it's better than sitting by a stranger.

Ugh. Couldn't watch it. Not because of the content, but because it reminded me of how much I hate television "news". First there was the solid minute of sponsors...had to mute that. Then there was the reporter with the exaggerated intonations (a huge peeve of mine). Had to turn it off after a few seconds of hearing him speak. Was already losing interest due to the knowledge that I could have absorbed the information far more quickly by reading an article on the topic instead of listening to someone rehash it slowly while pausing for dramatic effect.

If there's anything worth hearing in the clip, someone summarize it in the thread.

I thought they did a decent job of comparing and contrasting two different lifestyles.

A family that placed the importance on a big house, big back yard away from it all and a family who went for the smaller house near transit.

Bunch of dumbasses. "Bus is not my thing. Surrounded by strangers?" Oh how frightful! Stay in your prison home paying 1600/month for gas then. I'm sure it's better than sitting by a stranger.

I couldn't believe he said that either! "strangers are scary" lol!!

I guess they never go the store or a movie. Most commuter buses here in Houston are filled with business people who are well dressed, clean, and all look a like. The route buses and the trains have every kind of person on them. I've only had a few altercations on a bus that I took through a "bad part of town" because I didn't want to wait for the "safer" bus route.

-Nate

I am heartened by an article in today's Wall Street Journal mentioning that, despite the dropping of gas prices, consumption is not going up.In this case it is the other way around. The financial crunch is causing people to consume less and that is driving the price down.

This was a very good documentary. Thanks!

People have been warned about the unsustainablity of suburban life but as many American's
do they choose poo-poo what was right in front of them.

Stupid people do as stupid people do then whine when it goes badly.

It was said the people living in "exurbia" average 25% of their income on car expenses/fuel. In these areas it's also not uncommon for people to spend north of 50% of their income on mortgages/home expenses. Wow, not much left for actually living. So much for quality of life. It's not surprising to see that a lot of people with these decision making skills are the same ones who have the nastiest ARMs and are leading the nation in foreclosure. When was this ever considered the "American Dream"? These people have chosen foreclosure and bankruptcy and are not being forced into it.

It was nice to see that they included people who made smart decisions like choosing smaller homes that were near public transportation and other amenities. Not long from now these people will be called visionaries instead of just plain old realistic. If you enjoyed this documentary and want to watch something a bit more in depth watch End of Suburbia or Escape from Suburbia.

The cost of fuel is annoying, but equally disturbing is the time spent on the road. A commute of one hour each way means two hours a day of doing nothing but driving. This is the case for people I know living in the greater Vancouver area. The drive to or from work might not be too long when measured in distance but the highways are badly congested each morning and each evening.

It was nice to see that they included people who made smart decisions like choosing smaller homes that were near public transportation and other amenities. Not long from now these people will be called visionaries instead of just plain old realistic. If you enjoyed this documentary and want to watch something a bit more in depth watch End of Suburbia or Escape from Suburbia.

They didn't mention what the smart "urban" couple were paying for their 2 bedroom condo. I suspect it was pretty pricey... real estate close to the transit lines is going to be hugely expensive. Particularly as any exurb ex-pats make their way back to the city core. I can see exactly where the next housing crisis is about to hit.

They didn't mention what the smart "urban" couple were paying for their 2 bedroom condo. I suspect it was pretty pricey... real estate close to the transit lines is going to be hugely expensive. Particularly as any exurb ex-pats make their way back to the city core. I can see exactly where the next housing crisis is about to hit.

I'm sure it was a lot. They lived in South Pasadena which is a pricey area, add in the fact that it's a hip new condo and I'm sure they overpaid for it. At least that couple was smart and sold off a car, which is probably what the cost of their housing association dues were. :)

it's still less expensive than getting up at 4 o'clock in the morning for a 2 hour commute to the city.........and return...............

Sometimes I think about moving farther out of town for cheaper apartments. But my current location is only three miles from Kroger and a couple miles from campus. It takes me fifteen minutes of riding to get to class, which isn't bad at all. And being able to ride to the grocery store is great. So I think I'll stay. It's funny. My parents thought the apartment was way too far from campus when they first saw it. But it's really quite doable.

I thought it was a great video, and gave the family from exurbia fair treatment. Though their attitude towards public transportation is ridiculous, at least they acknowledge that they are responsible for their own situation, and didn't seem to expect a bail-out. That's more than you can say for a lot of folks. What we're seeing is, finally, the beginning of the end of the disregard for natural limits. It's about damn time.

For those that missed it, you can see the full broadcast on your pc below....


http://www.pbs.org/wnet/blueprintamerica/reports/driven-to-despair/watch-full-report/103/

I just helped my former roommate move into her new place, about 5-6 miles from the center of our downtown. She decided to stay in the same complex, just went to a one bedroom. I decided to move to a new place, 2-3 miles from downtown, 3 miles from school and 7-8 miles to work. I have access to 2 bus lines 500 ft from my doorstep, great bike-able roads and walking distance to a movie theatre, 20-30 restaurants and bars (campus area) and grocery stores. The closest bus line to our old apartment was a mile and a half up the road.

We each have roughly the same rent, my only cost for the move is a dramatic decrease in the size of the apartment. A bit of a sacrifice, having a "bedroom" dominated by my full size bed. I'm happy not having to live in a car dependent area. To each their own, it's all about choice.

Under the deafening loudness of your collective eye rolls, many of you seemed missed where a short while later the couple said that after the reporter has posed the question a week prior, they had given it some thought and a train wouldn't be so bad.

Like the rest of us in this country, they were raised in an era when the privilege and privacy of a personal automobile was cherished above all. It will take time for people to adjust to such a substantial paradigm shift - and I suspect that many never will. Rather than taking advantage of the tremendous opportunity that lays before us to make better use of our land and resources, I fear we are far more likely to come up with a patchwork of solution after solution to keep this country limping along as it is.

I was just discussing this with a co-worker of mine on Friday night. I told him I thought we should have a massive government program to build regional and inter-regional rail systems, as sort of a mini "New Deal", assuming we see a significant climb in the unemployment rate. The system could later be sold off to private companies, if desired, but I think the important thing is to have the government step in and create it, as I have serious doubts that the private markets will step up to the task.

I think we already have sufficient, affordable electric car technology available. I am thinking of the $8K-10k electric vehicles that only go 25mph (per DOT regulations as opposed to capabilities IIRC), however rather than implementing it we are searching for the holy grail that goes 0-60 in 5 seconds and will travel 250 miles on a single charge and are coming out at $30k-40k range. The problem is, if our vehicles are expected to make interstate travel, these are requirements not luxuries. Instead, I think we should look toward having parking garages attached to the train stations, leased by services such as ZippCar, where you can rent a small electric car if you require a car to get around. Of course, I imagine hybrids and other more fuel efficient cars will still be available for longer distance travels.

My co-worker thought it was a good idea, however has emigrated from Sudan and still visits frequently, so coming from a country with so little, he may not be as wrapped up in America's car culture like many others are. It's nice to see I'm not alone in my perspective. Hopefully the idea will travel beyond the air waves of PBS and we'll see some progress after all.

They didn't mention what the smart "urban" couple were paying for their 2 bedroom condo. I suspect it was pretty pricey... real estate close to the transit lines is going to be hugely expensive. Particularly as any exurb ex-pats make their way back to the city core. I can see exactly where the next housing crisis is about to hit.

I think they were saying is people made a choice to stay close to the jobs and transit. Much like the Exodus to a big city going on in Rural America for lack of jobs and transit.
It doesn't cost at lot of money to live next to transit. The next thing is you won't loose money on your investment, because the land will be expensive. Which is what you are paying for.

I thought this was a great clip pointing to a couple of factors

1. People are not saving any money. For the first time since the depression we have -.05 for people's monthly savings. (bad) spending more than they have.
2. Monthly credit card debt per American household is 9,000 dollars. I have no credit, house, car, or student loans.
3. People live so far away from their work they can only drive a motor.
4. They believed in cheap gas for a long term investment.
5. Would re fiance cough *gamble on an ARM or increase hourly wage by 600 dollars a month.

CRASH back to my reality will you people. I think we are in for a culture shock wave.

I believe we are in the middle of a great restructuring of housing and jobs. The couple in the documentary will eventually find their way after they declare bankruptcy and find themselves living in a cheap apartment, a fraction of the size of their home. It's incredible how people extended themselves to the point where an increase of $1.00 dollar a gallon can send them into Chapter 11.

Then again, they were paying more in gas than I was in rent!

Under the deafening loudness of your collective eye rolls, many of you seemed missed where a short while later the couple said that after the reporter has posed the question a week prior, they had given it some thought and a train wouldn't be so bad

I was just discussing this with a co-worker of mine on Friday night. I told him I thought we should have a massive government program to build regional and inter-regional rail systems, as sort of a mini "New Deal", assuming we see a significant climb in the unemployment rate. The system could later be sold off to private companies, if desired, but I think the important thing is to have the government step in and create it, as I have serious doubts that the private markets will step up to the task.

My co-worker thought it was a good idea, however has emigrated from Sudan and still visits frequently, so coming from a country with so little, he may not be as wrapped up in America's car culture like many others are. It's nice to see I'm not alone in my perspective. Hopefully the idea will travel beyond the air waves of PBS and we'll see some progress after all.

#1 - rail lines can't be built to accommodate suburbia. Suburbia was built with the expectation that everyone would drive everywhere, and there isn't any good way to "shoe-horn" in tracks. And where would the train go? Especially when everyone in suburbia seems to work somewhere other than the downtown.

#2 - A government program to build railroads?! There are more rail lines than what you think, which, yes, could be upgraded & made (again) into passenger lines as well as freight. Plus, do you really think that this government doesn't spend enough money already, what's our current National Debt? 8 trillion or something??

#1 - rail lines can't be built to accommodate suburbia. Suburbia was built with the expectation that everyone would drive everywhere, and there isn't any good way to "shoe-horn" in tracks. And where would the train go? Especially when everyone in suburbia seems to work somewhere other than the downtown.

#2 - A government program to build railroads?! There are more rail lines than what you think, which, yes, could be upgraded & made (again) into passenger lines as well as freight. Plus, do you really think that this government doesn't spend enough money already, what's our current National Debt? 8 trillion or something??

#1 Build it and they will come?:innocent: Suburbia has it's own set of issues. The only solution short of abandonment will be infill. Buses, trolleys are all viable...if the population density is high enough. In some cases even a Doodlebug rail car would work. BUT people will have to get over the door to door on demand convenience they have with their cars. Will they give it up? Eventually; they will either have to or live in their cars because it will be their single biggest expense. I am still seeing subdivision being built miles from anywhere...so apparently it hasn't sunk in yet.

#2 Yes the rail lines are there, but in serious need of equipment and upgrades. Currently the two biggest issues facing Amtrak, other than lack of money, is the age and lack of equipment and having to share tracks with freight. I ride Amtrak a fair bit (made their "Select" level earlier this year) Some of the equipment is in pretty poor shape. From what I have read the lead time is 2-3 years on a new rail car or engine. So no quick solution there...

Aaron:)

#1 - rail lines can't be built to accommodate suburbia. Suburbia was built with the expectation that everyone would drive everywhere, and there isn't any good way to "shoe-horn" in tracks. And where would the train go? Especially when everyone in suburbia seems to work somewhere other than the downtown.

#2 - A government program to build railroads?! There are more rail lines than what you think, which, yes, could be upgraded & made (again) into passenger lines as well as freight. Plus, do you really think that this government doesn't spend enough money already, what's our current National Debt? 8 trillion or something??


#1 - I suggested regional and inter-regional rail systems, designed to supplement and/or replace highways and airports, not a comprehensive inner-city system for getting people around town. Individual cities will have to design their own mass transit based on what makes sense for their land use - present and future.

#2 Yes, a government program to build railroads. A few months ago, I was planning a bike tour for this winter, and looked into going by rail rather than flying, at least one way. It's very difficult, and very slow - not accounting for the infamous delays via Amtrak. I would venture that for many in America, it's not a practical mode of travel at the moment.

Would you rather Americans be slaves to the car, begging for table scraps from OPEC so we can crawl along under the burden of falling oil supplies, celebrating the virtues of having a "small" government? Although it does not seem to be common recently, it was not long ago when spending programs were accompanied with measures to pay for them. Such a program does not have to be simply tossed on top of our mountain of debt for future generations to worry about paying off, we can settle that now.

Additionally, I am fully aware of the size of the national debt, which has now famously exceeded 10 trillion, requiring the dollar sign be dropped from national debt clock at Times Square to make room for the additional digit not required to display it.

Did anyone notice the "car wash" design of the suburban houses in that video? Most if not all had large multi-car garages built prominently to the front of the people's living space. Houses in the early 20th century might feature a small detached garage behind the house. Those built in the 1950s to 1970s often didn't include attached garages. Our society's present insistence on bedrooms for cars says something about our changing values.

#1 - I suggested regional and inter-regional rail systems, designed to supplement and/or replace highways and airports, not a comprehensive inner-city system for getting people around town. Individual cities will have to design their own mass transit based on what makes sense for their land use - present and future.

#2 Yes, a government program to build railroads. A few months ago, I was planning a bike tour for this winter, and looked into going by rail rather than flying, at least one way. It's very difficult, and very slow - not accounting for the infamous delays via Amtrak. I would venture that for many in America, it's not a practical mode of travel at the moment.

#1 Yup, differently-scaled rail systems work quite well. By our standards, many parts of Europe are "suburbia", with small towns separated not much farther apart than our suburbs are from our big cities. There, you'll find smaller rail systems that only operate within the city, then larger, full-size trains that link nearly every town, and express lines that link the major urban centers. Many of them are even electric and powered by overhead lines, so you can travel for many, many miles without even riding with a combustion engine.

#2 I think that a government program is the only way it'll get done. And, yup, Amtrak's coverage sucks for a lot of the US; people up here in the Northeast don't realize how nice we've got it. For argument's sake, I once checked ticket prices and travel times for going from my hometown of Omaha to visit relatives in North Dakota. It would be far, far cheaper and faster to just drive it than to take Amtrak's route that went all the way to the West Coast and back. :twitchy:

Did anyone notice the "car wash" design of the suburban houses in that video? Most if not all had large multi-car garages built prominently to the front of the people's living space. Houses in the early 20th century might feature a small detached garage behind the house. Those built in the 1950s to 1970s often didn't include attached garages. Our society's present insistence on bedrooms for cars says something about our changing values.


Here in my local area, I've noticed that the majority of garages are no longer the bedrooms of the cars, but are now storage units for one's belongings, and their cars parked outside. I'm still amazed on how earlier generations managed to survive with their cars parked in the garage. ;)

#1 - I suggested regional and inter-regional rail systems, designed to supplement and/or replace highways and airports, not a comprehensive inner-city system for getting people around town. Individual cities will have to design their own mass transit based on what makes sense for their land use - present and future.

#2 Yes, a government program to build railroads. A few months ago, I was planning a bike tour for this winter, and looked into going by rail rather than flying, at least one way. It's very difficult, and very slow - not accounting for the infamous delays via Amtrak. I would venture that for many in America, it's not a practical mode of travel at the moment.

Would you rather Americans be slaves to the car, begging for table scraps from OPEC so we can crawl along under the burden of falling oil supplies, celebrating the virtues of having a "small" government? Although it does not seem to be common recently, it was not long ago when spending programs were accompanied with measures to pay for them. Such a program does not have to be simply tossed on top of our mountain of debt for future generations to worry about paying off, we can settle that now.

Additionally, I am fully aware of the size of the national debt, which has now famously exceeded 10 trillion, requiring the dollar sign be dropped from national debt clock at Times Square to make room for the additional digit not required to display it.

So well said. Imagine if we would have spent our money wisely in the past 8-12 years; we would now have the beginning of a rail infrastructure and one of our many problems on the way to being solved.

As a result, metropolitan and city rail agencies will have to help fund such "highway replacemnt" rail solutions, in addition to ETC (electronic toll collection). But, alas, riding such transit is a far, low, priority for most americans.

They didn't mention what the smart "urban" couple were paying for their 2 bedroom condo. I suspect it was pretty pricey... real estate close to the transit lines is going to be hugely expensive. Particularly as any exurb ex-pats make their way back to the city core. I can see exactly where the next housing crisis is about to hit.

Good question. I think the implication was that a 2-bedroom attached condo in the urban area is priced comparably with a 5-bedroom detached exurban home with yard (otherwise the juxtaposition was misleading). So the respective home prices could be very similar but they embody very different trade-offs.

Ugh. Couldn't watch it. Not because of the content, but because it reminded me of how much I hate television "news". First there was the solid minute of sponsors...had to mute that. Then there was the reporter with the exaggerated intonations (a huge peeve of mine). Had to turn it off after a few seconds of hearing him speak. Was already losing interest due to the knowledge that I could have absorbed the information far more quickly by reading an article on the topic instead of listening to someone rehash it slowly while pausing for dramatic effect.

If there's anything worth hearing in the clip, someone summarize it in the thread.



As a point of clarification, everybody had to pay for their programming and PBS is no different, but there are fewer 'commercials'.

I work at a PBS affiliate and our 1 hour shows have 56 minutes and 46 seconds of programming and 3 minutes and 14 seconds of 'Underwriting or Funding Credits'. A thirty minute show it 26 minutes and 46 seconds of programming.

When you look at other networks, a one hour show seems to be twenty minutes of programming, twenty minutes of commercials, and twenty minutes of promos.

I think we offer much better value for the money.

As for print media, newspapers across the nation are cutting staff and face a bleak future. I got two magazines in the mail yesterday and spent twenty minutes taking out the cards stapled to the inside. Articles are sometimes difficult to read because the ads are placed throughout the piece like obstacles that you have to read 'around'.

Sorry for the preaching but I think PBS is the best option on television, and I think this story points out how important it is for people to think about the 'total' cost of their home and not just the cost of the house.

#1 - I suggested regional and inter-regional rail systems, designed to supplement and/or replace highways and airports, not a comprehensive inner-city system for getting people around town. Individual cities will have to design their own mass transit based on what makes sense for their land use - present and future.

#2 Yes, a government program to build railroads. A few months ago, I was planning a bike tour for this winter, and looked into going by rail rather than flying, at least one way. It's very difficult, and very slow - not accounting for the infamous delays via Amtrak. I would venture that for many in America, it's not a practical mode of travel at the moment.

Would you rather Americans be slaves to the car, begging for table scraps from OPEC so we can crawl along under the burden of falling oil supplies, celebrating the virtues of having a "small" government? Although it does not seem to be common recently, it was not long ago when spending programs were accompanied with measures to pay for them. Such a program does not have to be simply tossed on top of our mountain of debt for future generations to worry about paying off, we can settle that now.

Additionally, I am fully aware of the size of the national debt, which has now famously exceeded 10 trillion, requiring the dollar sign be dropped from national debt clock at Times Square to make room for the additional digit not required to display it.

While I agree with what you are saying, for travel to and from suburbs like the one mentioned in the clip, a more informal network could evolve which needed very little in the way of additional funds and would be nearly as effective.

If you ever visit Mexico, you'll see a system of inter-urban transit called the "collectivo". Basically this is a van system situated at several points in a community that picks up passengers and leaves for a number of destinations as soon as the van is full. The van stops at central locations only, so you might have to mix it with local bus (or it could even bring you to a rail station...)

A system like that could provide a lot of immediate relief for the commuters in this clip.

If you ever visit Mexico, you'll see a system of inter-urban transit called the "collectivo". Basically this is a van system situated at several points in a community that picks up passengers and leaves for a number of destinations as soon as the van is full. The van stops at central locations only, so you might have to mix it with local bus (or it could even bring you to a rail station...)

A system like that could provide a lot of immediate relief for the commuters in this clip.
Para-transit
They call it Orbit http://www.tempe.gov/tim/bus/Orbit.htm here in Tempe AZ it is free and goes into the communities, you can flag a ride or visit a stop. It will connect with you the rest of the transit a few blocks from you door if not less.
Phoenix Has four routes
Glendale has GUS
Scottsdale has the trolley bus

#1 - rail lines can't be built to accommodate suburbia. Suburbia was built with the expectation that everyone would drive everywhere, and there isn't any good way to "shoe-horn" in tracks.
You don't put trains through the suburbs. You punch straighter and more direct roads through the suburbs and run buses up an down them on frequent service that channel to the train station.

#2 - A government program to build railroads?!..do you really think that this government doesn't spend enough money already??
Mass transit has thus far shown an indirect return rate of $3 for every $1 invested. Government spending isn't always bad.
Plus, all of those systems have to be coordinated on the metro level anyways; privatization has been shown to be an utter disaster in transit systems, and solutions for the various market problems that still render the solution a "market" solution have far more overhead and administrative costs involved in negotiating byzantine contract negotiations alone than would be required to just run the damned system.

Bunch of dumbasses. "Bus is not my thing. Surrounded by strangers?" Oh how frightful! Stay in your prison home paying 1600/month for gas then. I'm sure it's better than sitting by a stranger.

They are obviously not thinking this through.. If they commute the same way to work daily, the strangers may become friends. How's that for a concept!

I had a hard time wrapping my brain around the monthly gas figure for that family: $1600.00! That's an incredible amount of money to pay to drive to work.

I thought the saddest part was the way the exurbia families no longer could afford a vacation or an evening at the movies. I wonder if the wife worked? Or was she was at home with the children? I can see that being very lonely at times if you are the only adult at home for the majority of the day. As well as being the main parent to the 3 boys, I can see the pressure of caring, disciplining, and worrying being greater.

I lived for a time far from where I worked and I took two inter-city buses, the subway and a bus to get to work. I think it took 2 hours, may 2 and 1/2 if there was a delay, but that seemed preferable to driving the 1 1/2 in a car by myself. At least I brought a book (managed to get through a book nearly every other day) to wile away the commute. Shopping wasn't fun in that small town as there was only 1 badly run grocery store and a few high priced convenience stores, so I ended up doing much of my grocery shopping near my work.

When I moved back to the city, I nearly kissed the pavement I was so glad to be back in a reasonable commuting distance! I don't know how the home owning costs compared between the far away from humanity town I lived in versus the city, but rental wise the city was same cost. Transportation wise I paid far less to live in the city than in exurbia, and I didn't have to trek meat 2 hours on a bus.

I hope the exurbia folks find a way to solve their transportation woes. It sounded like they were getting deeper and deeper into financial trouble!

#2 - A government program to build railroads?! There are more rail lines than what you think, which, yes, could be upgraded & made (again) into passenger lines as well as freight. Plus, do you really think that this government doesn't spend enough money already, what's our current National Debt? 8 trillion or something??

Gradually re-engineering America to operate on mass transit will provide huge economic benefits. People are blind to the cost of cars. Massive taxes already support the car culture. The gas tax, for example funds something like 60-80% of the cost of roads, with the rest coming from other revenues. Rail lines could be built right down the middle of existing freeways, displacing 2 or 3 car lanes. The cost of building and maintaining the rails isn't any more than the cost of maintaining those paved lanes. Buses, carpooling, walking and biking would bring people to the train station. In many cases, the travel would be as fast as or faster than using a private car because the train wouldn't be subject to gridlock. People would be healthier and more productive, not just because some walked or biked to the station, but because they wouldn't have the stress of 2 hours of rush hour driving every day. Imagine - no road rage! They could work or relax on the train as they chose. The number of automobile deaths and the strain they put on the economy and the emotional health of the nation would be cut 5 or 10 fold. Families that trimmed their own vehicle fleet from two SUVs to one city hybrid would save something like $10,000+ per year. Even if the amount they now pay in gas taxes was replaced with a similar amount in transit fare and public transit-dedicated taxes, they would be be much better off financially than they are now.

If I were the mayor or city planner of an existing suburb, I would be lobbying hard to be the first to receive upgraded bus and rail service, in order not to be left behind as a slum as suburbanites gradually shift their mentality as the family in the video did.

It would be great to have more mass transit for more people. One thing I noticed on the inter city buses and trains the seats are waaaaay more comfortable than on the city buses and subway. I'd consider that a big plus on its own when considering whether or not I'd drive into a city to work versus the train. Throw in cheap or free (!) wifi along the corridor and I'd be a happy traveller.

It would be great to have more mass transit for more people. One thing I noticed on the inter city buses and trains the seats are waaaaay more comfortable than on the city buses and subway. I'd consider that a big plus on its own when considering whether or not I'd drive into a city to work versus the train. Throw in cheap or free (!) wifi along the corridor and I'd be a happy traveller.

The seats are more more comfortable on the long distance buses because those buses tend to serve business commuters who can handle the awesome responsibility of cloth seats. City bus seats are plastic and vinyl to deal with strung out junkies pissing themselves in the back seats, and stupid taggers carving illegible things into the frames.

I had a hard time wrapping my brain around the monthly gas figure for that family: $1600.00! That's an incredible amount of money to pay to drive to work.

That sounded like a lot of money to me too, especially if he's driving a fuel efficient vehicle. I wonder if the cost also includes the vehicle payments, regular maintenance, licensing and insurance. Then it would start to make more sense

That sounded like a lot of money to me too, especially if he's driving a fuel efficient vehicle. I wonder if the cost also includes the vehicle payments, regular maintenance, licensing and insurance. Then it would start to make more sense


The report said that their total monthly vehicle expense was sixteen hundred dollars, I'd say that you are correct. At forty four miles to the gallon that was reported that the hybrid gets, seventy two miles each way of the commute, hypothetically do that thirty days each month, that comes to roughly forty three hundred miles a month or just under a hundred gallons of gasoline, and at four dollars a gallon, that equates to four hundred dollars.

privatization has been shown to be an utter disaster in transit systems, and solutions for the various market problems that still render the solution a "market" solution have far more overhead and administrative costs involved in negotiating byzantine contract negotiations alone than would be required to just run the damned system.

Do you or anyone else have any examples of how privatization is bad for mass transit? I am in favor of the market. Have it been tried before to have "the market" rule mass transit? What was the result?

Daniel

Do you or anyone else have any examples of how privatization is bad for mass transit? I am in favor of the market. Have it been tried before to have "the market" rule mass transit? What was the result?

Daniel

Mostly the result is not having transit, because it is rarely profitable without public money.

A great show and the timing with the economy is good. The only problem I saw was I wish that they had had someone to counter the anti-rail engineer on cost. There is more to cost benefit analysis than simply the cost of building a rail line. Higher property values, reduced traffic on neighboring roads, and air quality are just a few of the benefits left out of his argument.

I mussed more on this episode of NOW here: http://austinbikeblog.org/?p=1089

Do you or anyone else have any examples of how privatization is bad for mass transit? I am in favor of the market. Have it been tried before to have "the market" rule mass transit? What was the result?

Daniel

The only way transit used to be privatized was when it was a tool for developers to sell land. The street car system mentioned in the NOW episode was owned and subsidized by people developing land along the lines. So, even when private, they were not self sustaining lines.

I do think it's interesting that many demand rail be self sufficient but no one demands that of roads.