Public transportation in Indianapolis is for poor people. (Columbus: insurance, depreciation)

[A2DAC1985]

I know there are going to be a few people on here that will disagree with me and say, "Nuh-uh!"

And some people on here will say, "I'm not poor and I use IndyGo... so it's not for poor people!"


But the point isn't to point out that a few "middle class" to "upper class" people use Indy's transit. The point is that the less comprehensive and frequent and convenient a public transit system is, the more it is for (and viewed as being for) the poor. And Indianapolis has a system that is far from comprehensive, far from frequent, and far from convenient.


I've started a thread about this in another forum. You could read it to get more of my thoughts on this topic:

Public Transportation is for Poor People.


Do you think Indy could ever have a system that wasn't for "the poor"?
What would it take to do that?
Would "non-poor" people ever ride it?

[Coogles]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

Do you think Indy could ever have a system that wasn't for "the poor"?
What would it take to do that?
Would "non-poor" people ever ride it?

Of course they would.

It's a chicken/egg scenario. Why would people who have alternatives ride the bus when it's often late, typically offers no shelters, only runs every 30 minutes, stops service early, and lengthens commute times?

The best reason for me to embrace public transit? To save money.

Parking downtown costs me $120/month. There's probably something cheaper, but this garage is the most convenient, so that's what I've been doing. The monthly bus pass is $60. The $60 difference * 12 months = $720 saved

My round-trip commute is about 13 miles and my car averages ~ 25mpg, so that's .52 gallons per day. Figure 5 days per week, 49 weeks a year for vacation and sick time, that's 245 days. 245 days at .52 gallons per day is 127.4 gallons. At, say, $3.75 per gallon, that's $478 saved.

I needed to account for wear & tear costs, too. Tires, brakes, suspension and steering component wear, added depreciation, etc. AAA estimates $.23 per mile. 13 miles per day for 245 days, at $.23 per mile, comes to $733.

I can also drop to pleasure vehicle insurance on the car and reduce my annual mileage estimate with my insurance company for more savings.

Even before insurance savings, that's a total annual savings of almost $2,000.

[Park Chung Hee]

I consider myself working class/middle class and I rarely use the public transit here because the buses only come once every half hour. If I have to switch buses I may end up waiting for half an hour.

When I am in Chicago I love the public transit, the buses come every 5 minutes, and the el train is really efficient at getting around town. Plus in Chicago traffic and parking are worse, so public transit lets you avoid the hassle of driving and finding an affordable parking spot.

But in Indy I'd say the public transit is inferior, and more for people who can't afford a car. The traffic here isn't terrible, parking is not too expensive/hard in the sense that many destinations have their own free parking lots rather than you paying for street parking.

Could Indy have a system not for the poor? I don't think so myself. I think cities with great public transit systems were cities built before the automobile and developed public transit because the roads were not effective enough to handle the traffic. Indy had 200k people by 1920 or so though but I don't think it is a big enough priority for the city.

It'd be nice if Indy had better public transit, but I don't see it being anywhere as good as Chicago, NY or SF for various reasons.

[grmasterb]

Public transportation in most U.S. cities is for the poor. This is like reporting the pope is Catholic.

[cali3448893]

Originally Posted by grmasterb

Public transportation in most U.S. cities is for the poor. This is like reporting the pope is Catholic.

typical midwest concept.

[pvande55]

Most bus-only systems are geared for the poor. Telltale signs they don't want anyone who pays Federal Income Tax or is registered to vote riding: dilapidated buses, surly drivers, no covered waiting areas, few or no express runs. I don't know how Indianapolis rates, probably ahead of Ft Wayne but behind Columbus I would guess.

[grmasterb]

Originally Posted by cali3448893

typical midwest concept.

Get out more. It's not just the Midwest.

[wh15395]

It's already becoming more attractive to people who aren't poor, so yes, it will eventually be used more frequently by everyone. As the city becomes more densely populated and the transit gets better, more people will use it. I'm guessing there is a large group of people, like myself, who live Downtown and would love to stop paying $125/month for parking when we may not even use our cars too often. I ride IndyGo almost everyday, but can only use it to get so far before the costs outweigh the benefits.

I also agree with grmasterb. Public transit in most cities is used primarily by low-income people, even in New York and Chicago. Yes, those cities have more middle and upper income people using transit, but their systems are still majority low-income.

[DarkWolf]

Look at the Northeastern states , Public transit is approaching record levels. About 35 Million out the 56 Million use Public transit each day in the Northeast , every time a line is restored or upgraded in exurb area that corridor fills up with developments and the business community explodes... It usually takes 10-15 years for a corridor to develop fully.... So if Indianapolis built a Rail network and Transit network that served everyone in the metro the system should get used by 40% of the population in the first few years and then climb as high as 70% by 10 years. You have to start somewhere look at Minneapolis and St. Louis...

[domergurl]

Originally Posted by grmasterb

Get out more. It's not just the Midwest.

no kidding ...