The Antiplanner is flying to DC today to participate in a couple of forums. First, at noon on Wednesday, the Antiplanner will join Ryan Avent, Adam Gordon, and Matthew Yglesias in a discussion of The Death and Life of Affordable Housing.
If you are in DC, the deadline for signing up for this event is noon today. As of yesterday, 206 people had signed up to fill Cato’s 200-seat auditorium, but there are always some no-shows. Alternatively, you can watch the event live on your computer.
On Thursday, the Antiplanner will join Sam Staley and Alan Pisarski at a forum on Capital Hill about Saving Urban Transit from the Federal Government. The Antiplanner will present a new paper on the Great Streetcar Conspiracy, which is more detailed (but more generic) than the Antiplanner’s critique of the Milwaukee streetcar scam. This forum will be at noon in room B-340 of the Rayburn House Office Building.
Both events offer a “free” lunch (you only have to listen). If you are in DC, I hope to see you at one of these events.
I’m reading your Milwaukee Streetcar Scam paper. Excellent work. Hopefully it will be instrumental in derailing Milwaukee’s boondoggle.
I’ll be in the air and will miss the webcast. I’ll have to catch a rerun!
DS
Go easy on Little Yglesias. I won’t get it into the details, but I have it on good authority that it’s easy to make him cry.
Iced Borscht wrote:
Go easy on Little Yglesias. I won’t get it into the details, but I have it on good authority that it’s easy to make him cry.
Is he related to John Boehner?
I (personally) love streetcars and trams, and I have no problem supporting the systems that have survived for various reasons in places like New Orleans, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.
But that does not mean that we should be building new streetcar systems (or, in most cases, light rail) when buses can do the job at least as well – and buses can share infrastructure with other vehicles, which rail cannot usually do (and there are a few places where rails mostly dedicated to transit are used for freight operations, most-notably the Long Island Railroad).
For those that do not like heavy-duty internal combustion engines running up and down their streets, and have heavy bus service, then trolleybuses can provide electric-powered transit without the high cost of tracks.
the highwayman Reply:
June 12th, 2012 at 6:53 pm
Though tracks are not expensive. Get a road reclaimer, dig down 1 foot and lay your track. It also acts like rebar, stretching out the street pavement life till to the next rebuild in 30+ years.
metrosucks Reply:
June 12th, 2012 at 10:34 pm
+1, CP. Are you referring to the buses in Seattle, for example, that I think run on both electric overhead wires (when available) and on their own engines?
C. P. Zilliacus Reply:
June 14th, 2012 at 7:55 am
Yes, those Seattle buses would fit what I was thinking about, though there are also trolleybuses that only run on overhead electric power. I have seen those in San Francisco (very appropriate there because of the steep grades) and in Philadelphia, Penna.
Frank Reply:
June 13th, 2012 at 11:39 am
“For those that do not like heavy-duty internal combustion engines running up and down their streets…”
I certainly hate the diesel smell, but what I hate more is that bus drivers run red lights with seeming impunity. Once this spring I had to swerve to avoid being crushed by an articulated bus. WTF is up with buses ignoring traffic rules? In some ways, rail seems more regimented and predictable than buses.
metrosucks Reply:
June 13th, 2012 at 11:42 am
I agree Frank; I have seen this a lot too. I’ve also seen it from tow truck drivers and other semi-official functionaries.
I believe the bottom line is that anyone connected to the state’s organs of traffic enforcement or operation are given passes on actions that would land the rest of us in hot water or result in a ticket (ie, extortion note).
C. P. Zilliacus Reply:
June 14th, 2012 at 8:03 am
This is one instance where automated photo enforcement of red light violations is a good thing, as long as the charges that result are a matter of public record (as they should be).
I am shocked that the Cato Institute would advertise that there really is “a free lunch”.
metrosucks Reply:
June 12th, 2012 at 11:31 pm
Lol.
C. P. Zilliacus Reply:
June 14th, 2012 at 8:04 am
I was about to comment on that.
But in Randal’s defense, he did put the word free in quotes.
MJ Reply:
June 14th, 2012 at 11:19 am
Perhaps they should have advertised it as a “complimentary lunch”.