View Poll Results: Was government takeover of transit a good idea?

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    24 53.33%
  • No

    21 46.67%
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 77

Thread: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

  1. #11
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    I take public transit. Now it is extremely important to me to be able to get from one end of this city to the other. Furthermore, seeing as my job and school are on the other end of the city, it makes financial sense for me to be able to get there. If we have a public transit that is any higher than neccessary, than it makes it impractical for me to get to the other side of town to contribute to the economy. And before you get on me for not working or schooling close to home, there's personal reasons for that which are none of your concern. So its in the best interest for public transit to be cheap, and the government is better for having cheap transit.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    I've lived in cities where public transportation is handled by private organizations and I've found that it's almost always lacking. The oversight is all internal and public feedback on pressing needs is sometimes ignored. On the other hand, I'm in favour of a balance. Since most rails are municipal, state, or even federal property, I'm in favour of private organizations leasing the rails, and the government controls how long they can use them. In such cases that an organization is doing a bad job, it can have its permits revoked and public transportation transferred to government hands.

    I find governments tend to have a bigger vested interest in transportation infrastructure because there is a direct relationship with economic efficiency; that, and the public is entitled to provide feedback on projects which makes planned routes more practical. I've seen private companies create new rail lines in locations that make no sense whatsoever, wasting billions in the process.

  3. #13
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Now what is stopping any private company that wants to from opening up a bus route if they think they can do it better?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  4. #14
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Now what is stopping any private company that wants to from opening up a bus route if they think they can do it better?
    The fact that government competition is far too low below market rates plus road/auto transportation is dominant and subsidized because of government intervention.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  5. #15
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    The fact that government competition is far too low below market rates plus road/auto transportation is dominant and subsidized because of government intervention.
    So what you're saying is that a private bus system would be too expensive compared to the current system. right?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    No.

    Amtrack LOSES $430 for each trip to San Antonio from Los Angeles....it costs half as much as that to fly instead.

    Ergo, Amtrak should not be running trains from LA to San Antonio, it should be paying people fifty bucks to fly. The taxpayer would come out ahead.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by RDS View Post
    Public transportation is an essential service and the private sector will not be as efficient to manage it. There should be some players from both govt and private sectors competing to raise standards.
    If it was so essential, why didn't the federal government do it under Thomas Jefferson?

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by RDS View Post
    80% here rely on public transport. Private sector don't have the means and expertese to build and manage a MRT system and implement ERP system. Bus services were bad some 15 years ago until the govt chipped in with expertise and even bought over one of the bus companies.
    Jeepneys worked quite well in Subic Bay.

    Why couldn't they work in Singapore?

  9. #19
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    If it was so essential, why didn't the federal government do it under Thomas Jefferson?
    What, in the day before automated transportation?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Should the government be in charge of public transportation?

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    I take public transit. Now it is extremely important to me to be able to get from one end of this city to the other. Furthermore, seeing as my job and school are on the other end of the city, it makes financial sense for me to be able to get there. If we have a public transit that is any higher than neccessary, than it makes it impractical for me to get to the other side of town to contribute to the economy. And before you get on me for not working or schooling close to home, there's personal reasons for that which are none of your concern. So its in the best interest for public transit to be cheap, and the government is better for having cheap transit.
    There's absolutely no reason why public transit should be run at a cost to peole who do not actually ride the planes, trains, or automobiles. That means you should be paying 100% of the cost of hauling your butt from one side of town to the other, or, rather, the costs of all ridership should be adjusted so that the net operating expenses are balanced by the transit companies combined revenues from fares, advertising, and other fees.

    The guy driving his car in to work from the 'burbs should in no way be burdened with your lifestyle choices.

    Governments should not own businesses, but if they do, that's how they should be run.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •