Skip to comments.National poll shows support for more money for public transit
Posted on 03/30/2010 11:07:32 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
A majority of Americans supports increased spending on public transit and a slim majority is willing to pay higher taxes for it, according to a poll released today.
Some 51 percent expressed support for a "small" tax increase to pay for better public transit, while 46 percent were opposed.
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
Just turn in your keys, Lee You don't need to be free
here is an idea. Let the people who ride the bus pay for the bus. All of it, 100% of the actual cost.
article says it is the result of a “national sample of 800 people”....no doubt all of them standing in the rain at bus stops in front of the Welfare Office.
800 is a small sample, doesn’t sound like a scientific poll
I am guessing they mainly polled people who live in big cities like Boston, NYC, San Francisco, etc.
“and a slim majority is willing to pay higher taxes for it”....
Sure!....As long as it’s cost effective, right? We are talking about fricking government you idiots!!!!
The only person here at FR that would have been positive on a poll like this is Willie Green.
Those who drive private cars already pay the state for the privilege (licensing, tags, mandatory insurance, and gas taxes).
Let “public transportation” be funded from the consumers who use it.
I’ve asked in the past, if every passenger’s ride is going to be heavily subsidized by taxpayers, just make the systems free.
I’m told that too many people would ride then. Which shows that full ridership/reduced private transit is not the goal.
It’s Pennsylvannia...libtard Rendell country....says enough for me....
Public transit is one of the few “public” ventures I agree with. More people ride the bus, the fewer driving. Less traffic. I also am glad it helps some of those who would otherwise not be able to get jobs on the other side of town. (Disclosure: I live in Los Angeles and for the past six months, I’ve been riding the bus. Car got too expensive.)
I didn’t say it shouldn’t exist. I just think the users should pay for it.
my 40K sized university town here in TN recently got a bus service. we got it through stimulus funds. the justification? College kids were having to walk a MILE to retail stores... The poor who don’t have cars need it (never mind that there is already a free ferry service for the poor and elderly). Of course, the grant only covered the buses. We the local taxpayers get to pay for the upkeep, employees, etc... so now we have these bright green shiny buses driving around.....empty. Haven’t yet seen a passenger on them.
They drives routes here all day whether anyone needs them or not. I remember the city council rejected a private alternative a while back to use smaller buses and a flex routing system where based on the riders residences they could actually change routes on the fly.
And you think the bus that your transit district (MTA?) paid $300-400K for and gets around 4 mpg and whose driver earns more than is collected in the farebox each day is less expensive?
To you, maybe. Not to the residents of LA, who are stuck with a 1% sales tax on every purchase just to subsidize your bus ride.
If only users paid for it, it would be a pair of donkeys. those big unions want big bucks to build things!
“article says it is the result of a national sample of 800 people....no doubt all of them standing in the rain at bus stops in front of the Welfare Office.”
Thanks, I was ready to say BS re this study. Then, you did this great job above.
In spite of all the green publicity about how great it is to ride on a dirty bus, driven by someone who hates their job and their riders, we see very few people riding our local buses. The buses are out making their rounds faithfully about 10-12 hours per day with few if any riders.
Our “free” trolley which ran from the outlets to down town and to other sites around downtown was discontinued because few people used it.
We, our grand kids, grand nephews/nieces and adult visitors liked the trolley and so did visitors. It was clean and the drivers acted like they enjoyed the job. The trolley was dced shortly after the meltdown hit.
Those who drive private cars already pay the state/city/county for the privilege (licensing, tags, mandatory insurance, and gas taxes).
Let public transportation be funded from the consumers who use it.
There are some bus drivers who like their jobs. Would you believe that some bus drivers are drawing six-figure salaries?
They don't particularly like their passengers or the service they are providing, but it's an "easy" gig blowing through the route to get to the "break" points.
In Houston, the city refuses internal and extenal ad revenues (something commonly seen on public transportation in other cities).
The revenue is available to fund public transportation, the city refuses it. But it’s driven by the same mindset that required all businesses to put their trash bins behind fences to “beautify” the city.
PS the city raised fares 25%
By “National poll” they meant they asked a baseball team in DC.
Polls usually tend to show that people want less spending and lower taxes in general but poll them on a specific type of spending such as busses, education, etc and they generally say that they want increased spending for that one thing.
I am all for anything that keeps the city folk in the city and out of the countryside. Public transit does that quite well.
“here is an idea. Let the people who ride the bus pay for the bus. All of it, 100% of the actual cost.”
but you use the highway and police departments, hypocrite!
“and a slim majority is willing to pay higher taxes for it....”
somewhere out there some dem has legally changed his name to “slim majority” and is making a freaking fortune at the polls.
Figured, what did they do figure how far it was for the students to the Starbucks, it is not that far to downtown is it?
starbucks is down by the interstate. to the center of town from the school is about half a mile. there’s a couple of indy coffee shops in walking distance. one of these days i’m going to get on, count how many riders in an hour then write to the paper about it.
I’ve explained why I think it’s beneficial overall. If you don’t agree, c’est la vie. I pay taxes for schools even though I have no children. Even Freepers sometimes cannot homeschool.
I think public transit is good provided it largely pays for itself and it isn’t used to increase the strength of unions which cause the cost of implementing transit systems to be prohibitive. When I traveled to Edinburgh I enjoyed the mass transit. I hopped a bus to go to the train station and took a train to South Queensferry every day and back again. It was painless and about $5 bucks a day for the buses and maybe $50 total for the week traveling via the train. Much less than I’d have paid for gas had I gotten a rental. I do think a well designed efficient transit system is a boon for a city and nearly all the costs can be recouped directly or indirectly.
I just don’t want mass transit to become the only way I am allowed to get around or be tied permanently to the outrageous demands of leftist unions. Also the key element for me is simple and I apply the same to public schools. If they work and are cost effectively and aren’t used to eliminate my opinions or my personal liberty then I’m happy to have them. However I don’t want a transit system that works like La Public schools. If all the Teachers were like you I’d have to reconsider that thought.