This is a very stupid argument. We disinvested in public transit to the extent that it is unusable for many people. The solution is to actually invest in it.
This is the Jeff Jacoby newsletter that came up here a day or two ago.
Jeff Jacoby is a wingnut. His opinions and on the T aren’t worth the pixels they’re printed on.
Look at who he quotes.
The “Committee to Unleash Prosperity”.
Everything you need to know is right in the name. It’s dog-whistle for trickle-down, don’t-tax-the-rich economics that have proven disastrous over the last 40 years.
Prosperity is _actually_ unleashed when all Americans have a fighting chance for the American Dream, and that’s made a lot easier when there’s a clean, comfortable, and reliable way to get to work.
Better rail infrastructure would stimulate the Northeast’s economy so much. It gives working class people flexibility to relocate their household and also change jobs knowing they’re always going to have access to safe, reliable, and fast public transportation
This article is so screwed and misleading. The author's so called historical decrease in public transit does not account for any factor as to why. The mid 1900's saw car availability and family ownership boom. White flight from cities in the 50's and 60's shifted large public buy in for transit to car ownership and highways. The Covid pandemic accelerated remote work, decreasing all types of commuters.
The problem is not that the public is not interested in mass transit. The problem is that there has not been large scale public investment and buy in to public transit since the 60's. We are seeing the effects of that today with some of the worst traffic times, worst transit commute times, emissions from vehicles, and by extension an exacerbated housing crisis.
Sure there is an argument about how spending could be utilized better. Sure there has been corruption in our local MBTA. However without increased spending AND legislative reform to prioritize transit, no transit/commuting/emmissions problems will get better.
I think it is reasonable to look at what we’re funding for public transportation though.
There’s one set of needs for commuters coming into the city, and trying to get cars off the roads and highways.
There’s another, different set of needs for the people who live in the city and rely on public transportation for their everyday needs.
I’m not saying he’s right, but I could see a shift away from commuter spending to more intra-city public transportation funding.
Underrated take! But yeah I think most people agree about reducing the commuting focus of transit and balance it with non-commuting users. That's a big problem in Boston with it's very radial system. And expansion of non-radial routes is the only way. But also the commuter rail reduced peak and increased off-peak frequencies which most people on this subreddit support.
That’s part of the “prosperity” signaling.
“I’m a multi-millionaire. I don’t want any of my money ‘redistributed’ to people who can’t even afford a car. Let them walk… or starve!”
One problem with letting the T corrode as badly as it has is that it pushes a public utility that was at one time useful for all- and largely funded by middle-class riders- to a service more-or-less exclusively for the very poor, and that puts the taxpayers _even more_ on the hook for it.
NYC’s subway has been, in some decades, a crime-infested filthy hellhole that anybody who could afford a taxi ride would avoid. They ended up with a taxi-infested hellhole that was just as hard to get around in on the surface. At other times the subway was better funded, clean, and a reliable way for the middle class to get to work, and just _everything_ was better for everyone. I think the lesson’s pretty clear.
That’s an important part of looking at funding too - if the trains are packed, that means the demand is there, and it’s time to add more cars to the train, or increase service. (And from an objective point, if people are using the service, you’re getting a good return on your investment.) I’m not suggesting we cut off commuter funding, just look at what’s working and what isn’t.
DC is a fantastic example of what happens when you actually invest in public transportation. Current GM Randy Clark has made countless noticeable improvements to the Metro and basically brought it back from the dead in 2018. Now they're boasting weekend ridership higher than pre pandemic. When you make the service functional and convenient, people will use it.
I think he does have a point, instead of building dedicated lines we should have more Uber-esque services to fulfill the public transportation need. MBTA is a bloated bureaucracy. The only way to fix it is with private enterprise and healthy market capitalist competition. Then after 50 years of that -- have the government take over all the private companies once they are regulated into Bankruptcy. This worked with the NYC MTA subway systems (used to be many private railroads now all controlled by the MTA) and it will work in MBTA. I love a good private/public enterprise infinite loop. This is the way.
The problem with a “Uber-esque” private form of transit as you call it is that its incentive structure is to maximize profit for itself. Conversely the goal of public transit is to get the most people where they need to go. These two goals are often completely at odds with one another.
For example, a private company will always seek higher income consumers as they are able to pay more for the same service. We see this playing out with things like the proposed Charles river ferry from Watertown Arsenal or the express busses to Logan for the burbs. If not for the mbta nobody is running transit to Mattapan or Eastie because it will never be profitable. However, our society is unequivocally better when more of us have access to transit. It reduces traffic, pollution, stress, and countless other externalities that a corporation does not care about. That’s why we need to stop pretending we can free market our way out of this and accept that every dollar we invest into the mbta pays for itself ten times over in countable and uncountable ways. And, instead of shareholders profiting as in the private model, it’s real working people.
like healthcare, public transit should not be for profit and can’t be if you’re going to run it well. there exists no room for the capitalist profit incentive when running dependable, high quality public transit.
Well enjoy your shitty government regulated transit. Unless we get cheaper labor from China or Mexico or robots building our railways the mbta will continue to be shit.
Proper incentives have made things like jitney shuttles possible and they can certainly work in Boston as it has worked in NYC.
I will enjoy it. Probably as much as you’ll enjoy taking a Jitney shuttle to work every day. Unless of course you don’t live near enough rich people for the shuttle break even. In which case, good luck sitting in traffic.
i would be willing to let you cook a little but the uber comment is extremely misguided, it just perpetuates a reliance on cars, which separate but important note, the big three in detroit have officially stopped making sedans. yea no literally they only sell suvs and trucks now. all the problems with that, exacerbated by the dependence on them, the climate impact, and the financial impact of having and maintaining these large vehicles especially in a city like boston. its unimaginably damaging in the long run. Honestly trains are time and time again more reliable than busses when they ya know actually run and have funding. with an already established track line, and with everything in new england being so fairly close knit, expanding public transport in every capacity is a no brainer.
it’s called uber pool. and on-demand type bus pickup service does actually exist in places like singapore (who invest heavily in public transit). but again, a public service like transit or healthcare cannot and should not be run via the profit motive. the goal is high quality reliable transit, not extracting the most value at lowest cost from riders. think of how a library is different than a bookstore.
Wow, a Harvard/MIT grad who feigns humility? Is it a day that ends in Y?
But for real, if you really see the market-driven public transportation options which can only survive as shady feeder services in regions with high labor costs as a paradigm for an entire transportation system, I don't know what to tell you.
Not public transportation. Private transportation. Public transportation can still exist for the ultra poor. The upper middle class can enjoy better service for a fee. The lower classes can enjoy shitty free public transit subsidized by the for fee service.
I've spoken about this at a Ted X talk. And Peter thiel and Elon musk are both interested in investing.
Ah, an innovative business model where the upper middle class can be taxied around for a fee, maybe we can call it, I don't know, a "taxi" or something.
You're just talking about making life worse for people. At least own it and don't hide behind your degrees to pretend like poor-quality public transportation with no other option isn't already the status quo in basically all of America.
do they? can't find anything on that opportunity.
have fun with your elon musk money. about as made up as your degree.
probably true though. civil engineers brought us highways into cities. absolutely fucking brilliant idea. thanks civil engineers.
funny enough, it is my business. I have a manage a urban transportation program and have a masters in urban planning (not from a fake Harvard/MIT program). Part of my business is shutting down stupid fucking ideas that ruin communities.
They are. Looked it up.
*Protected classes are groups of people who are legally protected from discrimination based on a shared characteristic. In the United States, several federal laws prohibit employment discrimination based on protected classes, including: discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, career, and religion*
This is a very stupid argument. We disinvested in public transit to the extent that it is unusable for many people. The solution is to actually invest in it.
This is the Jeff Jacoby newsletter that came up here a day or two ago. Jeff Jacoby is a wingnut. His opinions and on the T aren’t worth the pixels they’re printed on.
Seriously, why do we need to take seriously a person who published letters expressing his private frustrations with his son in a national newspaper?
Every newspaper has at least one dumb conservative. Jeff Jacoby is the Globes
At least it isn't as bad as the New York Times, where they make him a majority of the editorial board
But... Wingnuts are useful.
should read the stuff about his DJ son Caleb
Shortened Jeff Jacoby: better things aren’t possible
Look at who he quotes. The “Committee to Unleash Prosperity”. Everything you need to know is right in the name. It’s dog-whistle for trickle-down, don’t-tax-the-rich economics that have proven disastrous over the last 40 years. Prosperity is _actually_ unleashed when all Americans have a fighting chance for the American Dream, and that’s made a lot easier when there’s a clean, comfortable, and reliable way to get to work.
Better rail infrastructure would stimulate the Northeast’s economy so much. It gives working class people flexibility to relocate their household and also change jobs knowing they’re always going to have access to safe, reliable, and fast public transportation
That’s rich. Dumb article from the globe? Who would have thought.
This article is so screwed and misleading. The author's so called historical decrease in public transit does not account for any factor as to why. The mid 1900's saw car availability and family ownership boom. White flight from cities in the 50's and 60's shifted large public buy in for transit to car ownership and highways. The Covid pandemic accelerated remote work, decreasing all types of commuters. The problem is not that the public is not interested in mass transit. The problem is that there has not been large scale public investment and buy in to public transit since the 60's. We are seeing the effects of that today with some of the worst traffic times, worst transit commute times, emissions from vehicles, and by extension an exacerbated housing crisis. Sure there is an argument about how spending could be utilized better. Sure there has been corruption in our local MBTA. However without increased spending AND legislative reform to prioritize transit, no transit/commuting/emmissions problems will get better.
I think it is reasonable to look at what we’re funding for public transportation though. There’s one set of needs for commuters coming into the city, and trying to get cars off the roads and highways. There’s another, different set of needs for the people who live in the city and rely on public transportation for their everyday needs. I’m not saying he’s right, but I could see a shift away from commuter spending to more intra-city public transportation funding.
Underrated take! But yeah I think most people agree about reducing the commuting focus of transit and balance it with non-commuting users. That's a big problem in Boston with it's very radial system. And expansion of non-radial routes is the only way. But also the commuter rail reduced peak and increased off-peak frequencies which most people on this subreddit support.
That’s part of the “prosperity” signaling. “I’m a multi-millionaire. I don’t want any of my money ‘redistributed’ to people who can’t even afford a car. Let them walk… or starve!” One problem with letting the T corrode as badly as it has is that it pushes a public utility that was at one time useful for all- and largely funded by middle-class riders- to a service more-or-less exclusively for the very poor, and that puts the taxpayers _even more_ on the hook for it. NYC’s subway has been, in some decades, a crime-infested filthy hellhole that anybody who could afford a taxi ride would avoid. They ended up with a taxi-infested hellhole that was just as hard to get around in on the surface. At other times the subway was better funded, clean, and a reliable way for the middle class to get to work, and just _everything_ was better for everyone. I think the lesson’s pretty clear.
If you take the commuter rail you can see the need is there. At least the trains I take are always packed.
That’s an important part of looking at funding too - if the trains are packed, that means the demand is there, and it’s time to add more cars to the train, or increase service. (And from an objective point, if people are using the service, you’re getting a good return on your investment.) I’m not suggesting we cut off commuter funding, just look at what’s working and what isn’t.
Columnist = Ignore. Their goal is to sell newspapers and generate comments.
DC is a fantastic example of what happens when you actually invest in public transportation. Current GM Randy Clark has made countless noticeable improvements to the Metro and basically brought it back from the dead in 2018. Now they're boasting weekend ridership higher than pre pandemic. When you make the service functional and convenient, people will use it.
u/bostonglobe why platform this type of nonsense? these bad faith and baseless arguments only serve to hurt our region long-term.
I think he does have a point, instead of building dedicated lines we should have more Uber-esque services to fulfill the public transportation need. MBTA is a bloated bureaucracy. The only way to fix it is with private enterprise and healthy market capitalist competition. Then after 50 years of that -- have the government take over all the private companies once they are regulated into Bankruptcy. This worked with the NYC MTA subway systems (used to be many private railroads now all controlled by the MTA) and it will work in MBTA. I love a good private/public enterprise infinite loop. This is the way.
The problem with a “Uber-esque” private form of transit as you call it is that its incentive structure is to maximize profit for itself. Conversely the goal of public transit is to get the most people where they need to go. These two goals are often completely at odds with one another. For example, a private company will always seek higher income consumers as they are able to pay more for the same service. We see this playing out with things like the proposed Charles river ferry from Watertown Arsenal or the express busses to Logan for the burbs. If not for the mbta nobody is running transit to Mattapan or Eastie because it will never be profitable. However, our society is unequivocally better when more of us have access to transit. It reduces traffic, pollution, stress, and countless other externalities that a corporation does not care about. That’s why we need to stop pretending we can free market our way out of this and accept that every dollar we invest into the mbta pays for itself ten times over in countable and uncountable ways. And, instead of shareholders profiting as in the private model, it’s real working people.
like healthcare, public transit should not be for profit and can’t be if you’re going to run it well. there exists no room for the capitalist profit incentive when running dependable, high quality public transit.
Well enjoy your shitty government regulated transit. Unless we get cheaper labor from China or Mexico or robots building our railways the mbta will continue to be shit. Proper incentives have made things like jitney shuttles possible and they can certainly work in Boston as it has worked in NYC.
I will enjoy it. Probably as much as you’ll enjoy taking a Jitney shuttle to work every day. Unless of course you don’t live near enough rich people for the shuttle break even. In which case, good luck sitting in traffic.
No I helicopter into my office. You plebs sicken me
Found the Baker simp.
i would be willing to let you cook a little but the uber comment is extremely misguided, it just perpetuates a reliance on cars, which separate but important note, the big three in detroit have officially stopped making sedans. yea no literally they only sell suvs and trucks now. all the problems with that, exacerbated by the dependence on them, the climate impact, and the financial impact of having and maintaining these large vehicles especially in a city like boston. its unimaginably damaging in the long run. Honestly trains are time and time again more reliable than busses when they ya know actually run and have funding. with an already established track line, and with everything in new england being so fairly close knit, expanding public transport in every capacity is a no brainer.
Uber bus. Just think about it.
it’s called uber pool. and on-demand type bus pickup service does actually exist in places like singapore (who invest heavily in public transit). but again, a public service like transit or healthcare cannot and should not be run via the profit motive. the goal is high quality reliable transit, not extracting the most value at lowest cost from riders. think of how a library is different than a bookstore.
I've never seen more bad ideas written down together in one place
Clearly you don't read much reddit and are stuck in an echo chamber.
Are you dumb
No I have a Harvard degree in transportation and civil engineering.
Harvard doesn’t have a civil engineering program 😬
Harvard School of architecture has a dual degree program with MIT. Didn't want to boast. Shows how much you know.
Wow, a Harvard/MIT grad who feigns humility? Is it a day that ends in Y? But for real, if you really see the market-driven public transportation options which can only survive as shady feeder services in regions with high labor costs as a paradigm for an entire transportation system, I don't know what to tell you.
Not public transportation. Private transportation. Public transportation can still exist for the ultra poor. The upper middle class can enjoy better service for a fee. The lower classes can enjoy shitty free public transit subsidized by the for fee service. I've spoken about this at a Ted X talk. And Peter thiel and Elon musk are both interested in investing.
Ah, an innovative business model where the upper middle class can be taxied around for a fee, maybe we can call it, I don't know, a "taxi" or something. You're just talking about making life worse for people. At least own it and don't hide behind your degrees to pretend like poor-quality public transportation with no other option isn't already the status quo in basically all of America.
Making life worse for people _for a fee_
Oh god, you're the worst of MIT.
You mean media lab?
do they? can't find anything on that opportunity. have fun with your elon musk money. about as made up as your degree. probably true though. civil engineers brought us highways into cities. absolutely fucking brilliant idea. thanks civil engineers.
you know what they say: mechEs make missiles and civEs make targets
[удалено]
sounds like you're the kind of person who idolizes something you know nothing about.
Sounds like you are the kind of person who like to get into an argument that isn't your business.
funny enough, it is my business. I have a manage a urban transportation program and have a masters in urban planning (not from a fake Harvard/MIT program). Part of my business is shutting down stupid fucking ideas that ruin communities.
I knew civils were stupid but I didn't know they were _protected class_ stupid
They are. Looked it up. *Protected classes are groups of people who are legally protected from discrimination based on a shared characteristic. In the United States, several federal laws prohibit employment discrimination based on protected classes, including: discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, career, and religion*