Public Transportation In Cincinnati (neighborhood, school, maintenance)

[ArtVandalay84]

It has passed two votes already from the people who it is going to service.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

Until you devise a better system that is the way it will stay. You may think you have a better idea, but until the economic justification makes sense to the majority of people it will go nowhere.

Or perhaps this area is to hillbilly and backwards to catch on to how real cities do it.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by ArtVandalay84

It has passed two votes already from the people who it is going to service.

And that is really what matters.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by ArtVandalay84

It has passed two votes already from the people who it is going to service.

Anxious to see how the voting goes at the trolley stops.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

Anxious to see how the voting goes at the trolley stops.

That will be interesting to see. Personally, I think they are sort of stupid for not making a route around UC where there is so much foot traffic.

[ArtVandalay84]

Hopefully the citizens support it and it will be part of the next phase.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by ArtVandalay84

It has passed two votes already from the people who it is going to service.

What are you talking about - the streetcar? I think we all know it is being built. The only question is to what degree, a downtown loop only or up into the Clifton area?

The question being discussed here is commuter rail, light rail, whatever you want to call it from the City out into the suburbs.

The streetcar is the City only. So it makes sense they would spend the money for something they believe will enhance the City. That is the City's decision wholly within the City.

But this commuter rail, to me that is a horse of a different story. Obviously there has to be rails, stations, etc. into the City to serve it. But why should the City be interested in spending any money to serve people who are not City residents? Doesn't make any sense to me. So who will be paying for this? From what I have seen the suburbs could care less. Now if the price of gas skyrockets out of sight that could change, but the fact is it has not - yet.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

But why should the City be interested in spending any money to serve people who are not City residents? Doesn't make any sense to me. So who will be paying for this?

Brill, it's obvious you have never lived in a city that has good transit options. I mean no offense by that either.

A major amenity that attracts people to areas is good transit options. I spent years living w/o a car in NYC. Taking the subway saved me both time and money. Then there is the Long Island Railroad, and Metro North. I reverse commuted on both of these for lengthy periods of time. Again, they saved me time and money. My commute was usually around an hour and a half using the subway to transfer to LIRR or Metro North. Rail made my life easier, saved time and money. I loved it and miss it.

Not to mention you can usually nap on the trains, that was a major plus.

It's not that I am anti-car. Or an environmentalist or idealist. It's just I have lived both car dependent and without a car. Living without a car is the way to go if you can do it. Can you even imagine living w/o a car? I mean it's really hard to do in Cincinnati. Should I move back to NYC at some point, one of the first things I will do is sell my car. You know what's ironic? It may be that I decide to stay in Cincinnati because my son loves SCPA so much and is getting a great education. There are comparable schools in NYC but getting into them makes CPS look like a walk in the park.

Cincinnati had the right idea installing a subway. It's a tragic loss that it was abandoned.

[jmecklenborg]

>ou may think you have a better idea,

I do have a better idea.


>but until the economic justification makes sense to the majority of people it will go nowhere.

Cities where cars are necessary are destroyers of middle class wealth and trap the poor. Car ownership sends much of one's money spent on transportation out of the city to other parts of the US and the world. A city on buses and rails spends less money on transportation overall and circulates much more of its local transportation dollars back through the city's economy.

Kjbrill it is likely that you have owned over 10 cars in your lifetime. We're talking at least $200,000 and probably a figure much higher. Imagine having only spent 15% of that sum and having not just kept the rest, but having invested it. Instead you spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to appear normal, because that's what cars really are -- they aren't machines that give you "freedom", they are status markers.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

>ou may think you have a better idea,

I do have a better idea.


>but until the economic justification makes sense to the majority of people it will go nowhere.

Cities where cars are necessary are destroyers of middle class wealth and trap the poor. Car ownership sends much of one's money spent on transportation out of the city to other parts of the US and the world. A city on buses and rails spends less money on transportation overall and circulates much more of its local transportation dollars back through the city's economy.

Kjbrill it is likely that you have owned over 10 cars in your lifetime. We're talking at least $200,000 and probably a figure much higher. Imagine having only spent 15% of that sum and having not just kept the rest, but having invested it. Instead you spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to appear normal, because that's what cars really are -- they aren't machines that give you "freedom", they are status markers.

The number of cars may be correct. But $200,000 no way. I Have never paid $20,000 for a car in my life. I am too much of a skinflint for that. Also, I have traded exactly one car in on a new one. Several of my cars I have called a tower to drag them down to the junkyard since I was no longer willing to put more money into them or expect anyone else to pay money for something I considered unsafe to drive. We all have our attitudes towards cars. I currently have a 2001 Mercury sedan which has not turned 50,000 miles and a 1999 Dodge Wheelchair Conversion Minivan for my wife which does have 68,000 miles on it, as we bought it used.