Metro's preference for rail doesn't just harm bus riders.
Taxpayers are also being thrown under the late, overcrowded bus. It costs the transit agency $4.54 in subsidiesfor each unlinked trip taken on a bus, compared to the $25.74 Metro spends subsidizing each unlinked rail trip.Far from learning from its past mistakes of prioritizing rail over bus service, Metro and Los Angeles politicians appear to be doubling down on this failed approach. Metro's '28 by 28′ plan to finish 28 transit projects by the start of the 2028 Olympics includes 13 rail transit expansions, compared to 5 bus-related projects.
Metro's prioritization of new rail lines over old buses is even catching criticism from transit advocates."When Metro marshals its might to build shiny new capital projects, it sucks the remaining air out of the room. In turn, buses get older, less reliable, less frequent," wrote Joe Linton of Streetsblog in reference to the 28 by 28 plan.Unlike bus service, which is efficient but boring, rail offers politicians unbeatable ribbon-cutting opportunities, says Feigenbaum.
Note the first line? That means transit rail is bout 1/5 as CO2 efficient, it is a polluter, an ice melter. But in Cal;ifornia, that is OK, like burning forests becomes OK. That is not green, that is the same crap 5,000 economists want to do with your carbon taxes, dark brown.
AOC and Dianeboth pull this stuff, clueless dingbats. Further, the 5,ooo economists who signed onto carbon tax knew, ten years ago, that bus was much more CO2 efficient, these same economists knew that California raised carbon taxes three times, and what was it spent on? More, not less, CO2 pollution, and these same 5,000 economists knew this for ten years or they are incompetent.
These economists have no plan to prevent co2 pollution, starting with Stiglitz, they plan to have more of it and call it a social compact! 100% 'This time is different' fraud.
No comments:
Post a Comment