[04-Bravo]

When I was stationed in West Berlin, I used public transportation all of the time when I was off duty. The buses and subways were cheap, convenient, safe, and clean.

I don’t use public transportation here because it is expensive, inconvenient, sometimes dangerous, and usually filthy.

[FourPeas]

I used public transportation for several years and learned several very valuable life lessons in the process. As long as it pays for itself and is one of several equal options (i.e. no government-sponsored incentives), I have absolutely no problem with it.

[GSWarrior]

One problem with public transportation is that the users have no sense of ownership or responsibility. Passengers and operaters have no incentive to keep the buses tidy or to clean up the often unpleasant things that get left behind.

Public transit is in a sense public building on wheels, i.e, a magnet for taggers.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

Mass transit is not cost effective......When I see city buses running at 11 p.m. all summer long with no more than three people on board each night?.....POLLLEEEZZZZ!

[april15Bendovr]

Why Democrats are blue areas and why Republicans are Red areas on the map.
Posted on November 6, 2004 11:21:07 AM EST by april15Bendovr

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1272763/posts

[mission9]

The largest revenue source for any operation is the best customer. In the case of transit systems, this would be the Federal Government. Typically less than 25% of the money comes from the rider. These contributes to poor rider service. The purpose of transit is income transfer, and political patronage. They just happen to have buses, as an excuse to look busy. If the program should ever come close to breaking even, the managers will do WHATEVER, and I mean WHATEVER it takes to lose money.

[JimSEA]

I have no problem with mass transit where it works and makes sense. Tokyo and even New York would not work without mass transit. Forcing me into funding unworkable systems like the one in Portland, OR or forcing me out of my car by government policy or edict is what I oppose.

[discostu]

My problem with mass transit has always been the vast quantities of my money they want for it, and the negligible positive effect it has on my life. I don’t ride it because it sucks, most folks who can afford to not ride don’t because it sucks, so the effect on traffic is zero, and meanwhile we still sink tons of tax dollars into it.

[Trod Upon]

Dirty, inconvenient, slow, noisy, limiting, ultimately no cheaper than private transport, DIRTY—what’s not to love?

[ExCTCitizen]

I do not like subsidizing anything, but I like Mass transit - if it works. In the Northeast, I took Metro-North to NYC, because it was cheap (parking in NYC is more than taking the train). Here in Florida, they were pushing a HIGH SPEED RAIL that would lose money -- It would not go 200 MPH, because it would make stops in downtown Tampa (5 miles from the Airport, where it would start), Plant City (15 miles), Lakeland (25 miles), Haines City/ Disney World (37 miles), Kissimmee (55), Downtown Orlando (60 miles) and then Orlando International (70 miles). Tampa has a nice train station, but Amtrak only stops twice a day.

What is needed is a regional trains from Tampa to Atlanta.

[GonzoGOP]

No I have a problem with my tax money paying for something that is not under the constitutional authority of the US Government. If a private company wants to operate a public transport system more power to them.

Of course I also have no problem with taxes on tires, gas and tolls supporting the highway systems. Driving would be a lot more expensive, but it would be paid for by those that do the driving in direct proportion to how much they drive. If drivers had to pay the full cost of driving privately owned public transport systems would be more viable.

Basically I want as little government involvement in how we move about as is absolutely necessary.

[TalonDJ]

Most of us conservatives, deep down inside, at least in some subconscious way, feel that mass public transportation is just a little bit communist.

Because it IS communist. I am all in favor of mass transit but I am totally against public transit.

[MNJohnnie]

Why Conservatives Don't Like Public Transportation

Because it is a massively expensive Government boondoggle that accomplishes none of the things it claims to do while creating yet another constant drain on the taxpayer's checkbook

[DCBryan1]

I object to mass transit mostly for one reason:

MUSLIMS

Exhibit A:

Exhibit B:

Exhibit C:

Exhibit D:

Exhibit E:

Exhibit F:

[Atlas Sneezed]

I’m perfectly fine with mass transit that is privately owned, and operates in a free market without subsidy. There are plenty of places where this is the case, and it used to be common in US cities.

I’m also tolerant of government-run transportation systems (including highways) as long as the full cost is paid for by the users or clear beneficiaries. (And that doesn’t mean that drivers who enjoy slight congestion reduction should be forced to pay an unlimited subsidy of public transit users).

[Arrowhead1952]

With the wide open spaces and abundant road system we enjoy in America, conservatives would never dream of trying to force everyone to use an archaic, 19th century technology like trains

And Willie Green is still deeply saddened.

[TexasRepublic]

I don’t ride city buses because of the feral thugs that infest them. It isn’t safe.

[blkmontecarlo]

I pay for fast track so I can take the carpool lanes and not have to even drive with the masses on the fwy. Is that bad?

[grey_whiskers]

This is why.

Cheers!

[Melas]

Nothing to do with politics. A person’s perception of public transportation has everything to do with residence, and residence during upbringing.

Conservatives brought up in New York city are likely to value public transportation. The automobile is a very clumsy, expensive and inefficient way to navigate the city.

A conservative from a rural area, where public transportation would be clumsy, expensive, and inefficient is going to have the opposite view.