> Because public transport is underfunded, most people associate public > transport with inefficiency, poverty and bad government. But the disgust > with > traffic grows daily and people do not want freeways too near their cul de > sacs. > Michael Perelman part of public transit 'renaissance' in 1970s was result of growing disenchantment with urban freeway system...renewal was largely financed by federal govt't which appropriated about $89 billion between 1970-1994 for mass transit development...feds spent almost same amount between 1990-1994 on interstate highway system and estimates indicate similar amount is needed to repair about 5,000 of existing 42,500 miles of system... cost overuns on new systems, failure to meet ridership projections, and inability to operate at a profit left federal mass transit funding vulnerable to budget attacks and ideological polemics... for example, low ridership (about 20% of projections) on Miami's Metrorail served as rationale for cutting federal subsidies and free markeeter rhetoric intended to turn people off to mass transit, but without continuing fed aid, feeder lines needed to raise ridership can't be built... today, state (47%) and federal (9%) subsidied make up majority of public transit revenues with fares and ads contributing the rest... but operations lost money even at peak of public transit ridership earlier in 20th century...so to get advantages - convenience, punctuality, speed, lower oil costs, reduced pollution - it may not be possible to demand that public transit systems run at a profit... Michael Hoover
