Improved public transit in L.A.? (Los Angeles, Santa Monica: 2015, live in, store)

[$musicman$]

Originally Posted by David Aguilar

Folks, it looks like this thread is getting back on track, but can we refrain from the personal attacks (even the thinly veiled ones), please? We can disagree and still be nice about it.

Can you explain what was wrong with the post you deleted?

That's one way to assure it doesn't happen again.

[Count David]

Originally Posted by $musicman$

Can you explain what was wrong with the post you deleted?

That's one way to assure it doesn't happen again.

From the TOS:

"Be civil, no personal attacks, flaming, or insults. We may attack ideas (politely) but we do not attack the speaker of the idea. Be careful with your words, there is a point where being direct crosses a line into blunt, in-your-face hostility. Please, report bad posts instead of engaging in flame wars on the boards. Insulting another member or a moderator will not be tolerated anywhere on this website.

https://www.city-data.com/forumtos.html

As an additional note, the OP of the thread did not ask for or about the immigration status (there is a forum specifically designated for debates on illegal immigration) of LA's transit ridership, so it would be best if we all stray away from further comments/discussion about that.

[guydude]

Originally Posted by $musicman$

Car pool lanes are ALMOST as dopey as building trains that nobody rides in.

Yeah, I know, 350,000 people a day. More the San Francisco. More then Vancouver. And on a system that covers 1/8th of the city. That's nobody!

[7elephant7]

Calling cars the symbol of freedom is a little misleading. Of course, it's great to drive a car and go wherever you want whenever you want. But it should be, in my opinion, used only for fun; to go around, travel, go to the beach, etc., and NOT for the regular commutes to work. It's not the symbol of freedom, it's the quintessential symbol of individualist capitalism. Think about it: a huge car (we're talking about LA, where people like to buy extremely big cars), 4 wheels, a powerful engine, space for 4 or 6 people (even a lot more, considering all the Angelinos who use minivans and such).. and it only takes YOU to work, with the rest of the car empty. It's completely unefficient!

As I say, I agree that it gives you a sense of freedom, but it should only be used for fun. It should be considered a luxury product, and not a basic product of our life.

Now, of course, if you live in a city where other means of going to work (i.e. public transit) just don't work as you expect them to work, then you have no other choice than to ride your big car. So the solution is indeed to expand the public transit system; make it better, cover more areas. It's a long term project, you can't expect to build a rail line and exceed maximum capacity within the first couple of years. But it will in the future in a city like this one.

[BRinSM]

no matter where you are in the world, people commute using the 'path of least resistance'. in LA, this path is via the personal autmobile since public transit is inefficient for most and parking is free more often than not. forcing people into using certain modes of transit is not the right answer IMHO, we're not in China. however, providing additional options is good and the city seems to be doing this with the current expansion of the rail system.

[7elephant7]

What does China has to do with a discussion on LA public transport? No one is speaking about forcing anyway..

[greggd1]

Originally Posted by BRinSM

no matter where you are in the world, people commute using the 'path of least resistance'. in LA, this path is via the personal autmobile since public transit is inefficient for most and parking is free more often than not. forcing people into using certain modes of transit is not the right answer IMHO, we're not in China. however, providing additional options is good and the city seems to be doing this with the current expansion of the rail system.

I agree with you that we need more public transportion.

Right now we reward the person who lives across town and drives to and from work. We are all spending billions to provide them with bigger roads, more lanes, wider bridges etc to shave a few minutes off of their chosen commute. Thus encouraging people to live farther and farther from the city and continue their long commutes...sprawl.

We punish those who live close to work destinations and along commuter routes, both highway & rouge neighborhood cut-throughs with all the increased traffic, money is spent on pavement rather than trains. Rail Lines benefit everyone in the City, both commuters and non-commuters.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by $musicman$

Obviously, one should choose a home that is compatible with one's workplace, geographically.

..and if you're the smaller government person you say you are..you should relish the thought of making decisions like this on your own.

..and your absolute biggest enemy..should be bloated government boondoggles..like trains that are cost prohibitive.

What. We've barely invested anything in trains. Compared to the rest of the budget, we've basically put in a pittance compared to nearly any other item.

I think it's fine if you want LA to be an exemplar of small government (ridiculous, because in order to have kept subsidizing the fuel for our cars we had to have huge government in order to ensure access to oil supplies abroad). I'm perfectly fine because I no longer live there. When gas hits ten a gallon, please keep on trucking.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by BRinSM

no matter where you are in the world, people commute using the 'path of least resistance'. in LA, this path is via the personal autmobile since public transit is inefficient for most and parking is free more often than not. forcing people into using certain modes of transit is not the right answer IMHO, we're not in China. however, providing additional options is good and the city seems to be doing this with the current expansion of the rail system.

Except major cities in China generally have far more options in terms of modes of transportation.

[mtkomori]

The best of luck to the EXPO line. Is this a regular train or a subway? FYI light rail transit will start six years from now here in Kitchener-Waterloo. At the moment we only have a bus system which they are striving to improve so it can link to the light rail transit route. On another note, yes it is very expensive building and maintaining roads. I don't have the exact figures, but if you add up the cost associated with building and maintenance, it would probably exceed the cost of building rail. Especially here in Canada where we have close to several months of winter. The costs of snow clearing and maintenance (because the salt used to melt the snow/ice damages the roads) must be astronomical. Even if you don't have severe weather like this in L.A., maintaining all those freeways must be costly!And in terms of creating jobs, the rail system seems to be a great way for doing this. Once a train system is up and running, many businesses will be attracted to the area surrounding the station where many will come to take the trains and hence become potential cutomers. I've seen posts of people saying trains are more convenient than buses. Given how many people trains can carry, this is quite true. It looks like an improved and more extensive rail system is much in need in L.A.