Comments on: Expo Line: Different Strokes for Different Folks?

By: George Tucker

George Tucker — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 03:34:07 +0000

The current management of the MTA is either hopelessly corrupt or incompetent to manage any interface with the public. They offer a “one way ticket” that can result in a fine or much worse (overly tight handcuffs and a string of verbal threats in my case, both “within approved procedures” according to the Sheriff’s Dept.) if you believe the label (as the term “one way” is used everywhere else) and use it for a one way trip instead of a single ride. (And no sign of the refund due from the county court after 3 months)

They are incapable or unwilling to post the terms of their tickets at the point of sale. A private business could not get away with that scam or use armed thugs to enforce it, but no state agency has jurisdiction over consumer fraud by a government agency.

Besides, they have the worst signage in the world, etc. The MTA should get no subsidies and no support until the management is replaced. (The county govt seriously needs reform, but that is peripheral.)

By: rod

rod — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:21:57 +0000

I may be mis-understanding, but it seems unfair to compare the number of grade-separated crossings on the Gold and Expo Lines, because the Gold Line crosses the L.A. River and a number of hills, and rides the 210 freeway median. So, of course, it has more grade-separated crossings than the completely flat Expo Line.

By: marmolada

marmolada — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 06:19:31 +0000

Sounds like our friend above is part of the BRU conspiracy theorists.

Rail, though,it costs a lot more is without doubt much more effective than
buses will ever be in moving commuters

The very successful Rapid Bus lines in Los Angeles were directly modeled on
the Curitiba system.

Consider this : Los Angeles in the only major US metropolis to be beseiged with
rail versus buses antagonism. Guess why ? could it be because that controversy
has endless funding ? Look into it.

By: demockracy

demockracy — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:20:20 +0000

The story of rail in Southern California is the poster child for wasteful government.

Consider the costs: Heavy rail (subways) costs ten times what light rail costs, which, in turn, costs ten times what bus costs.

The advantage rail has is that is can add cars, so more passengers than bus (40 – 80) can ride with a single driver. Fewer drivers’ salaries are ultimately cheaper, even for light rail.

In the third world (Curitiba Brazil), rather than build a subway for which they received funds, they decided to re-design the bus. Their “Speedybus” carries 270 in a multi-section chassis, and their transit system is literally the best public transportation system in the world. It has an enormous ridership — one that is expanding despite increasing per-capita auto ownership — and it makes a profit. The rolling stock is privately owned, the stops and fares are publicly controlled.

Compare that to the third-rate transit in, for example, Sacramento, and you’ll see that there’s an enormous amount of waste in what we laughingly call “transit” in the U.S.

Of course the government can’t compete with the real masters of the society — the small oligarchy that includes auto dealers, and land speculators who make the sprawl that requires an auto for all trips, and so on.