• Forums
  • Non-Ski Gabber
  • Why is the United State's Public Transportation so inefficient? Answers inside!

Member of the Month

partyandBS
December, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Why is the United State's Public Transportation so inefficient? Answers inside!

profile picture
SkierX
Posts: 16253 - Karma: 538
Looking at other areas of the world, one can easily see a difference between the culture of the car in places such as Europe. In those regions of the world, public transportation runs paramount. This is oftentimes blamed on the price of fuel in europe, and it may be a strong contributing factor that helps push Europeans to favor public transportation whereever they can. However, there is a lot to be said about the efficiency and extensivity of their public transit infrastructure.

One may wonder how/why such a system is very juvenile and underdeveloped in America. The answer? Early 1900's General Motors.

Utilizing a front company by the name of National City Lines, General Motors, Firestone Tires and Standard Oil (which would later become Exxon-Mobil) was founded in 1936. They purchased public transportation lines and effectively ran the public transportation into the ground. They raised rates to unafforable levels, and allowed infrastructure to decay and even ripped up transit lines. By 1956, over 100 rail systems in 45 cities had been purchased and destroyed.

General Motors and the other companies in on this scheme were investigated, and found guilty of criminal conspiracy to monopolize ground transportation. They were fined a mere $5,000. To replace all the lines they destroyed now would cost close to $300 Billion.

Sources-
http://www.culturechange.org/issue10/taken-for-a-ride.htm
http://rexweyler.com/2010/05/20/cars-corporations-and-society/

And this is one of the MAJOR reasons why America is so incredibly dependent on cars.
Jun 16 2010 11:37AM
0 0
profile picture
*simba*
Posts: 9125 - Karma: 511
Click for larger image
Jun 16 2010 11:44AM
0 0
profile picture
jason...
Posts: 9006 - Karma: 780
I originally read the title as "... so EFFICIENT" and was about to come in here and bitch about it. But yes the US's public transport system sucks. Canada's sucks, well Vancouver's is alright but not great. Germany specifically has probably the best public transit system in the world.
Jun 16 2010 11:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Delphi
Posts: 3748 - Karma: 36
The majority of public transportation is run by the government and it takes massive losses every year...just like the USPS. Are you seriously asking why it is so shitty? MBTA sucks huge balls. (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority)
Jun 16 2010 11:54AM
0 0
profile picture
Mooserz
Posts: 2945 - Karma: 32
define sucks. cause 30% hike aside. Im perfectly happy with my MTA's service
Jun 16 2010 12:01PM
0 0
profile picture
futurespin
Posts: 2178 - Karma: 168
Click for larger image
Jun 16 2010 12:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Funnel
Posts: 7817 - Karma: 1,537
Interesting. Just another reason for me to despise GM.
Jun 16 2010 10:16PM
0 0
profile picture
.Ben
Posts: 454 - Karma: 14
well another reason why I need to leave this country as soon as I get the chance.  not that this happened recently but its just another reason why Europe is so much more appealing to me.
Jun 16 2010 10:22PM
0 0
profile picture
skier_boy26
Posts: 11295 - Karma: 502
haha you're one of those people. After reading some of your other less inspired comments I'm not surprised.

Yea, higher taxes and higher unemployment is worth the trains.
Jun 16 2010 10:29PM
0 0
profile picture
BigJew
Posts: 6974 - Karma: 79
How about our population density? We have half as many people per square mile as most European countries. The costs here to run a decent public transportation system are astronomically more than they are in Europe (or any more densely populated country).
Jun 16 2010 10:29PM
0 0
profile picture
charmander
Posts: 10636 - Karma: 373
who gives a shit?

when i wanna go do something i want to walk out and get in my truck and drive there, why the hell would i walk 10 minutes to a bus stop and wait for a bus before letting them take me to a predetermined destination?
Jun 16 2010 10:31PM
0 0
profile picture
jester8589
Posts: 346 - Karma: 15
yeah i was thinking this as well. public transportation in america just doesnt make as much sense as in densely populated places like europe. although with people of the new generation moving from rural areas into more urban areas it could pick up in the future. but the infrastructure will be too far behind unfortunately.
Jun 16 2010 10:38PM
0 0
profile picture
General_Ripper
Posts: 3327 - Karma: 189

pretty much /thread

Jun 16 2010 11:07PM
0 0
profile picture
NilsJ
Posts: 102 - Karma: 15
I love having a car, but if it was possible and convenient, I'd totally take a train to work everyday, and use my car for weekends and stuff.
Jun 17 2010 12:14AM
0 0
profile picture
ATLskier
Posts: 8203 - Karma: 406
Trading compact cities and towns to broad Suburbs with less density

Trading grided street networks for highways, large collector roads, smaller local streets and cul de sacs

Trading connected neighborhoods for disconnectivity

Trading mix of uses to separation of uses and separation of everything from everything else


THIS IS THE MAIN REASON WE HAVE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS

You can take away the theory of national city lines and everything like that, and you still get what we have. Sure it might have been an effect of their actions, but it would have all happened anyways. People wanted to move away from the city.

If neighborhoods remained compact, mixed use, higher density, walkable and connected, we would not have a problem with transportation. Maybe the infrastructure wouldn't be in place, but it would work if you did put it in.

I live in the least dense city in the US, if not the world: Atlanta. They can built all of the subway, light rail, commuter rail, Bus rapid transit they want, but nothing will work because there is no density to support transit.

btw. Atlanta will spend around $300 billion dollars over the next 20 years just so our current traffic (ranked in top 5 in the country, soon to be top 2) will not get worse.


I can go on forever. Maybe I should make a mega post about it.
Jun 17 2010 12:41AM
0 0
profile picture
ATLskier
Posts: 8203 - Karma: 406
The hong kong transit authority, MTR, is privatized (yes even in china). It makes a lot of money. They make money off of real estate and projects near rail stations, much like what used to happen with old trolley lines and railway lines. Sorry MBTA is sick. It actually goes places, unlike MARTA in atlanta.

A lot of things get tied up in government bueracracy. Marta can only spend 50% of its funding on capital improvements and 50% on standard operations... Its almost impossible to change.
All transportation funds in the state of georgia have to go to building bridges or highways. Nothing can go to mass transit options unless a 2/3 majority changes the state constitution (something that is impossible with the good old boys down south).


Oh the other reason we have so many cars....

FREE PARKING

look at the book, the high cost of free parking
Jun 17 2010 12:53AM
0 0
profile picture
ATLskier
Posts: 8203 - Karma: 406
well, the truth is you shouldnt have to drive there. You should have the option to take a 5 min or less walk on streets that are walkable and pleasant to walk on.

You shouldnt have to take a car to go every single place.
Jun 17 2010 12:57AM
0 0
profile picture
[^~^]
Posts: 23 - Karma: 10
everything in the united states is monopolized, everything in the entire world is. hello reality.
Jun 17 2010 1:01AM
0 0
profile picture
Rachy
Posts: 4355 - Karma: 2,761
I read all about this last year. CRAZINESS!

I was watching the movie Changling (angelina jolie) and kept seeing all the red trains and was so confused cause it was supposed to be LA. Then I looked it up and it turns out that Los Angeles used to have one of the best public transit systems in the world until Firestone bought it, let it fall apart, and tore it up.


I can't imagine what it would be like if it were still around. There used to be a train from the Union Station to Santa Monica.... I live a a few blocks from Union station.... oh how amazing that would have been.
Jun 17 2010 1:04AM
0 0
profile picture
andrew.ski
Posts: 368 - Karma: 69
rebuttal:

Click for larger image

/thread

Jun 17 2010 1:12AM
0 0
profile picture
EastCoast315
Posts: 3136 - Karma: 137
Transportation of people is inefficient here, but transport of goods isn't AS bad. Mainly just because of intermodal freight, where a shipping container can go from sea to tractor trailer to rail, coast to coast, in just a few days.

Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Click for larger image
Jun 17 2010 7:38AM
0 0
profile picture
XtRemE11
Posts: 5680 - Karma: 246
prepare to be disappointed.
Jun 17 2010 7:43AM
0 0
profile picture
49566738265
Posts: 0 - Karma: 7,704
I'm sure that the size of Canada and the US has a lot to do with it as well. Most of our cities are spread out and it would take twice as long to get across town by bus/train than car in many places.
Jun 17 2010 8:09AM
0 0
profile picture
Goku
Posts: 8119 - Karma: 4,223
Ford did the same in Detroit, he bought and dismantled every trolley system in michigan
Jun 17 2010 8:10AM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Coming from someone from outside the States, I think that population density is not the only key factor here. In Finland, be it in the capital or in Buttfuckville up North, public transportation times are related to possible passenger amounts, but I've never had any bad experiences of anything running more than 5 minutes late if there is no bigger reason behind it all (car crash, engine failure etc.).
Jun 17 2010 9:52AM
0 0
profile picture
ATLskier
Posts: 8203 - Karma: 406
In sweden they utilize small compact town/villages/centers outside main cities that connect to the main city with rail lines. The small cities are walkable and dense, but still out in the open in nature. People still have cars and use them, but trains are more convenient.
Jun 18 2010 12:54AM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Sure they do, but I thought we were talking about public transport inside a town, not across cities. Of course it's the same in Finland, but train travel across cities, while reliable and moderately fast, is very expensive without some kind of discount such as a student discount. Same with buses.

I'll throw some prices in here:

A 30-day ticket multiregional for Helsinki, which covers nearby regions: 84 e (104 dollars). Price for gas at the moment: ~1,40e/litre (1,74 dollars). Train ride for 250 km and takes 3 hours: 32 e (39 dollars).

People have been saying that while it also means getting stuck in traffic, driving to your work is actually cheaper at the moment than using public utilities. Of course, there's way more pollution when people aren't carpooling - not a Finnish tradition.
Jun 18 2010 3:53AM
0 0
profile picture
EastCoast315
Posts: 3136 - Karma: 137
It really depends on the circumstances. If you go to work earlier/later than most people, you'd be hard pressed to find a carpool.
And where did you get 84e from? Besides, the cost of living is really high up there, people don't mind paying that
Jun 18 2010 7:37AM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51954 - Karma: 166,131
Click for larger image
Jun 18 2010 8:00AM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Well, I got the 84 euros from multiplying 42 euros by two, as in I pay half the price for the ticket with a student discount. And the driving alone to work, there have been many studies and monitoring exams that show that about 91% of people who work from 8-16 drive alone.
Jun 18 2010 8:56AM
0 0
profile picture
sim
Posts: 1399 - Karma: -6
ATLSkier pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one.


Jun 18 2010 12:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Flo_Rida_2016
Posts: 2804 - Karma: -5
I chuckle when kids think they've got a broad question, that has massive think tanks devoted to answering these questions, answered when they incidentally come across (not to be confused with targeted research) an interesting, perhaps trivial, fact.









this is me chuckling.
Jun 18 2010 12:55PM
0 0
profile picture
ATLskier
Posts: 8203 - Karma: 406
I was actually referring to suburbs and smaller centers around stockholm that are connected by trains, not just trains between cities, which will not work in the US anytime soon until we have a population to support it.
Jun 18 2010 12:59PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)