Should public transit focus on access or efficiency?Access means you have full access to underused (but possibly vital to some) routes and night/weekend service at the cost of undermining the "public transit is efficient" argument, but efficiency means you cut those routes and timetables.Can't have both in a single system.
Focusing on efficiency almost always means a compromise in passenger safety so it's pretty much a non-starter
>>2079205>Focusing on efficiency almost always means a compromise in passenger safetyHow?
>>2079200it should focus on not being a financial drain on the taxpayer
>>2079245>what are highways ?
>>2079275Highways? Like the things buses use? Or does all your Amazon stuff get delivered by light rail?
I think it should focus exclusively on running over small, fluffy, adorable animals.
>>2079245You are a financial drain on the taxpayer too and you're not nearly as pretty as a diesel locomotive
>>2079245Favoring efficiency, then, but I think that at least most American transit agencies could save enormous amounts of money by cutting dead weight on the administration side before they even look at route efficiency.
>>2079200Efficiency is gutting your way to irrelevance. Access costs more money, but cities gain the investment back in increased traffic density, an increased labor pool, and increased economic activity from lower-income residents. Also, I think the "efficient" model of ferrying people from suburbs to central business districts is dead. A lot traditional desk jobs either moved out to exburbs or went hybrid/remote. If anything, transit should focus on serving hospitality and medical workers. Which should mean more night/weekend service.
>>2079205OP explained the dichtonomy presented fairly well. How did you miss that?>>2079245This argument, if it is supposed to imply public transport should pay for itself, is not entirely valid. The difference between any other business and public transport is that there is no market economy to begin with. Can't have two or more parallel rail networks so no real and functional competition for example. The state providing some services is a fact, public transport might just be one of those, like security o algo.>>2079275LGBT nigg and motorist inclusion zones.>>2079200IMO it should focus on access. If it is not a public enterprise but a state service it should be available to as many citizens as possible, tertiary lines and stations should not be culled, driving rural areas to become even less attractive to some while turboing the hellholes towns are.HOWEVEROWEVERAlmost all public transport known to me is motorized transport and thus a straight, white, healthy, adult male must reject it. Rip up the tracks and highways, torch the stations, sink the ships and monkey wrench the airplanes.
>>2079284maintaining roads is a constant, costly process. rails don't fall apart constantly and need to get rebuilt. so the tax burden on roads is much greater. just because you derive utility from the only system in place doesn't mean it is not a tax burden
>>2079343This is true. And also the induced demand thing. Just aDd MoAr LaNeS to the point where as a whole motoring beats all other modes of transportation et voila you have proof that they control your government and your country is full of undesireables.
>>2079343>>2079345Make it less obvious when you're samefagging
>>2079200>Can't have both in a single system.So split the system into two models.Japan did this with their rail system. All the EFFICIENT routes stayed private. All the inefficient niche routes that still serve a useful function for their surrounding community were converted to a public/private split trust.They can remain interoperable and have the same minimum standards, but operate under different financial systems and incentives.
>>2079346I'll make it completely obvious that I'm not
>>2079348Who do you think is falling for this in 2026?
>>2079349if I wanted to make the points that he did, I could have just put them in my post. I don't even have Photoshop or whatever, I don't know how to do what you're implying.
>>2079347Whatever Japan did it didn't work because their rail network is notoriously inefficient in-spite of their rolling stock being the fastest on Earth. At the end of the day, the loading and unloading of passengers and scheduling will always be your main bottleneck
>>2079351>I don't know how to do what you're implying.You're doing that thing where you pretend not to know better. Again, who do you think is falling for it?
>>2079353Retarded comparison. How can you compare a commute in a 1 million city to one in a 5, 10 or 20 million city?In Tokyo if you commute just 1 hour that's luxury because the city is ginormous, in a European medium city 1 hour means you're out in bum fuck nowhere and too poor to own a car.Add to that that good public transit might actually tend to increase average commute because people can live further away from work in a bigger place rather than scrambling to get a tiny apartment close to work to avoid an impractical commute. Like, in Switzerland people used to live very close to work until a few decades ago because cities were small and you often worked the same job forever, but now with rail service being so good and people changing jobs often it's common to commute between regions which makes for a long commute time but also means that people have the option of working far away for better options in jobs or housing.tl;dr statistic is fallacious and useless
>>2079346Make it less obvious you should fuck off back to africa ASAP since you're not interested in the debate but only here to present fallacies.This also hints at you being unable to support your own stance since you would have done exactly that instead if you could and had half the mental capacity of a modern human.
>>2079380see >>2079349
>>2079345>as a whole motoring beats all other modes of transportationAre there are any countries where trains are more desirable AND the road network isn't a hideously underbuilt, outdated network of medieval streets?
>>2079387You're deranged and on the internet too much. Go outside. >>2079459I do believe so. I recently had a conversation with a vietnamese for example who told me about their time at home. I didnt sperg nor want to so I didn't touch on "REEEEE cars, trains and airplanes are for fags" but they still made a pretty convincing point that train and bus in their country of origin is awesome because its cheap (might be subsidized idk), reliable, regular service and literally goes from anywhere to bumfuck nowhwre and back to god knows where.I heard similar stories from people from. other countries that must sharw some common traits.
>>2079464I accept your concession.
