Supporters of a Milwaukee streetcar boondoggle are chiding a city alderman for expressing the fear that streetcar passengers could be vulnerable to crime. Apparently, opponents of progressive ideas like streetcars aren’t supposed to use real facts when making the case against those ideas.
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics reports crime by transit mode. When those numbers are compared with passenger miles by transit mode, it turns out that light-rail riders are far more likely to be victims of crime than bus riders. Light-rail riders are three times as likely to be raped or sexually assaulted, twice as likely to suffer aggravated assault, and five times as likely to be robbed as bus riders. Yet anyone who points this out is apparently “fear mongering.” Streetcars aren’t exactly the same as light rail, but they share one feature that buses don’t have: the driver is often in a separate compartment from the passengers, so can’t do as good a job monitoring passenger behavior.
purchase generic levitra Another important thing about kamagra is concerned with its different dosages. The buy cialis http://www.learningworksca.org/broadening-the-benefits-of-dual-enrollment/ generic name of Kamagra is Sildenafil Citrate. It is even more important that men get sexually stimulated. order viagra cheap The condition of ED is also known as male erectile dysfunction. super active tadalafil
On the other hand, the Wisconsin Reporter reveals the “incestuous relationships” among streetcar supporters, all connected together by a PR firm called Meuller Communications. All this really points out is that streetcars involve lots of money and lots of people want to get in on the action. Contrary to some, the Koch Brothers don’t stand to make a dime if streetcar lines are not built, but many other people and companies stand to make millions if they are built. For this reason alone, Milwaukeeans should be wary of any claims made for streetcars.
The Antiplanner wrote:
On the other hand, the Wisconsin Reporter reveals the “incestuous relationships” among streetcar supporters, all connected together by a PR firm called Meuller Communications.
Wonder who (or what) is funding Meuller Communications?
All this really points out is that streetcars involve lots of money and lots of people want to get in on the action. Contrary to some, the Koch Brothers don’t stand to make a dime if streetcar lines are not built, but many other people and companies stand to make millions if they are built. For this reason alone, Milwaukeeans should be wary of any claims made for streetcars.
I am no fan of the Koch boys and their billions, who I believe are doing significant injury to the nation with their money.
But I am not a fan of streetcars either, especially streetcars that state and local taxpayers will have to pay for twice – to build them, and then to operate them. Beyond that, federal taxpayers will probably have to pick up at least some of the tab for building the line and purchasing the rolling stock (remind me again what national interest is served by any streetcar project?).
What’s with the spike in homicides on buses in 1998? What happened?
Did they redefine aggravated assault in 2008?
Why are there so many vehicle thefts on transit vehicles? Are people stealing buses and trains?
[This was in the AASHTO clippings today]
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Bus drivers’ union voices opposition to Milwaukee streetcar
Quotes:
The union representing 1,700 Milwaukee County transit workers announced it is opposed to the downtown streetcar plan.
“It may seem odd for our union to oppose a streetcar which will undoubtedly create many jobs for our members,” Amalgamated Transit Union President Lawrence Hanley wrote in a letter dated Tuesday to Ald. Joe Davis, an opponent of the $124 million project.
“However, based on our recent experience with streetcar projects throughout the U.S., we believe that your resources would be more wisely spent on the expansion of your bus network. In fact, we are very concerned that the streetcar will negatively impact existing bus routes and hurt the working families who rely on them.”
But the alderman didn’t use real facts, at least not in the quote for which he’s being chided. Instead he made a prediction unsupported by any facts in order to arouse people’s fear of crime:
His evidence for this is so far from being true (what Chicago streetcar is he even referring to?) that it’s unclear what universe he’s in:
Glad the media took off its blinders and looked under the hood of the other side, for once. Usually, they simply regurgitate press releases from city offices, that were likely drafted by companies like Meuller Communications, and with a dozen different corrupt contractors feeding off the ensuing federal money tsunami. Progressives cry fowl and “follow the money trail!” all the time, but never seem to notice the clear funding connections in the rail boondoggle transit camp.
Cars are 5 times as lethal than rail per passenger mile:
http://freakonomics.com/2009/07/02/the-danger-of-safety/
I’m looking forward to hearing about Milwaukee Alderman Joe Dudzik’s voting against any funding of highway and road construction, since they promote this extremely dangerous mode of transportation.
On the other hand, it’s much more dignified to suffer death in a fiery crumpled heap of metal than at the hands of the urban thugs that make up the majority ridership of rail.
Gilfoil wrote:
I’m looking forward to hearing about Milwaukee Alderman Joe Dudzik’s voting against any funding of highway and road construction, since they promote this extremely dangerous mode of transportation.
Care to retract or modify any of the above?
In light of a story from the AP that ran on our all-news CBS affiliate radio station in the Washington, D.C. media market yesterday – Tech advances lower chance that driver will die in car crash.
Some quotes:
The chances of a driver dying in a crash in a late-model car or light truck fell by more than a third over three years, and nine car models had zero deaths per million registered vehicles, according to a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Improved vehicle designs and safety technology have a lot to do with the reduced risk, but a weak economy that led to reductions in driving may also have played a role, the institute said.
The study, which examined fatalities involving 2011 model year vehicles, looked at how many driver fatalities occurred in a particular model over the course of a year of operation, expressed as a rate per million registered vehicle years. It found there was an average of 28 driver deaths per million registered vehicle years through the 2012 calendar year, down from 48 deaths for 2008 models through 2009.
When the institute looked at the issue eight years ago, there were no models with driver death rates of zero.
Why retract C.P.? If the fatality rate of automobiles is five times the fatality rate of heavy rail, and the fatality rate of automobiles is cut by a third, that’s still much higher than the rate for heavy rail unless it increased dramatically at the same time.
Ignore the zeroes. It’s a small numbers problem. The 95% confidence bound on the Odyssey for example is 0-37, it just barely qualified for their study with 100,518 registered vehicle years of exposure.
Interesting how much angst there is on this blog about a relatively small streetcar project in downtown Milwaukee, versus Scott Walker’s stupid multi-billion dollar unneeded, and mostly unwanted (well, except by the Stalinist highway bureaucrats), expansion of I-94. There is an increasingly dramatic lack of perspective here.
I would be amazed if the auto apologists on this blog could produce a credible rebuttal to the real history of adoption of the automobile in this country, included the chapter outlined here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/27/debunking-the-myth-of-the-american-love-affair-with-cars/. Money quote:
“This ‘love affair’ thesis is like the ultimate story,” says Peter Norton, a historian at the University of Virginia, who warns that we need to revisit how we came to believe this line before we embrace its logical conclusion in a future full of driverless cars. “It’s one of the biggest public relations coups of all time. It’s always treated as folk wisdom, as an organic growth from society. One of the signs of its success is that everyone forgets it was invented as a public relations campaign.”
Of course, my enemies here will claim I’m imagining things. Tell it to Professor Norton, who has bothered to study the actual history as revealed by the empirical record.
“Of course, my enemies here will claim I’m imagining things.”
Well, no shit Sherlock! You’re imagining that by enough harrumphing and bullshitting, you can bully Americans into moving to the Bronx while you and your rich Smart Growth buddies cool off with a margarita at your Malibu mansions (or Napa vineyard, as it may be). We are not going to redo a century of development just because you and your annoying friends find it displeasing to their quaint aesthetics.
And this is the real money quote from that page, a comment:
“Norton falls prey to the same disingenous logic that he whines about. He laughably argues that, with the exception of enthusiats, no one wanted personal vehicle, and he sources some old editorials. He further attributes the unprecedented demand for autos on clever advertising. I personally can’t help but question the credibility of a historian that just fell off the turnip wagon (can one expect anything different from a progeny of the University of Virginia?). Mr Norton’s ill gotten grab for a 15 minutes of fame, completely disregards the fact that the mass transportation model came to a crash when more Americans left the overcrowded cesspool that mismanaged urban cities had become, moving to newly created the suburban space and CHOSE the personal convenience and time efficiency of personal operated vehicles. I challenge urbanites and the Norton fan club to travel to more different places in Md, Va and DC and accomplish more tasks with Metro or a bus than with a car, AT ANY GIVEN TIME. Anyone that has taken the bus knows about schedules and missing or delayed buses, or having to walk blocks from a metro stop in the middle if winter. Don’t get me started on bicycles as mass transportation.
Where Norton’s attempt to score points gets gutted is the fact that what causes the results of congestion (thus increased “highway” development) is overcrowding spurred by mass housing developers. Case in point, WMATA did a study a few years after the DC metro system was created, to see if it had actually reduced vehicle ridership. The reason why the subway was created at the time was to stem traffic congestion. The study found both metro AND personal vehicle ridership had each increased 25%. The reason was an explosion of townhouse and condo development had occurred, ie a huge influx of more people to fill in new housing. Today, urban developers’ front group, “Smartgrowth”, justify importing huge numbers into “vertical sprawl” using the same failed mass transport logic.“
ahwr wrote:
Why retract C.P.?
Claims like this, based on old data:
“Cars are 5 times as lethal than rail per passenger mile:”
If the fatality rate of automobiles is five times the fatality rate of heavy rail, and the fatality rate of automobiles is cut by a third, that’s still much higher than the rate for heavy rail unless it increased dramatically at the same time.
Like it or not, most U.S. travelers do not seem very interested in taking heavy rail trains (and most cannot, since most of the nation is not served by such lines).
Ignore the zeroes. It’s a small numbers problem. The 95% confidence bound on the Odyssey for example is 0-37, it just barely qualified for their study with 100,518 registered vehicle years of exposure.
You inadvertently made my point, speaking of small numbers.
Person travel on modes involving steel wheels on steel rails accounts for well under 1% of all such travel in 2012 across the entire U.S. Outside of New York City and some of its suburbs, if all steel wheel on steel rail transit went away, I don’t think many people would notice.
Zilliacus, your talking points are a bit out of date. Pretty sure we’ve moved the goalposts from “outside of New York” to “outside of New York and a few large cities”:
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=site:ti.org+%22outside+of+new+york%22
gilfoil wrote:
Zilliacus, your talking points are a bit out of date. Pretty sure we’ve moved the goalposts from “outside of New York” to “outside of New York and a few large cities”:
We?
I was speaking for myself, not for anyone else.
Zilliacus, good point you are making, but just one correction I wanted to make. Your statement above would be correct if written as follows:
“Outside of New York City and some of its suburbs such as San Francisco, if all steel wheel on steel rail transit went away, I don’t think many people would notice.”
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/as-bart-ridership-grows-dont-expect-any-longer-trains/Content?oid=2918336
“Every day, riders pack into BART’s crowded cars at peak commute times. And as the Bay Area’s population booms, riders are contending with even more packed trains than ever before.”
I just hope the AP can come to the Bay Area to pitch the idea of replacing BART with buses, it will go over well with the frustrated commuters, and plus they will be raped and mugged less.
msetty, what about the I-94 expansion is unneeded? IIRC several sections of that project are congested 4.5 – 6 hours / day..
msetty, what about the I-94 expansion is unneeded?
It’s unneeded because Scott Walker is a devil worshipping Koch puppet and msetty doesn’t like cars.
msetty might have this in mind:
http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Highway%20Boondoggles%20USPIRG.pdf
http://wispirg.org/news/wip/i-94-corridor-draft-eis-options-disregard-data-community-and-taxpayer-concerns
But that doesn’t show that the expansion is clearly unwarranted and wasteful. I agree that it’s good to question the need. But I haven’t seen anything on the project that shows that it as a whole is clearly unwarranted.
The above excerpt is a great example of it. It points out that over a short period of time usage has decreased. It sets readers up for the classic “the future is linear” trap where we tend to assume the current trend, no matter how short it’s period, will continue out into the future for decades. They imply that WDOT hasn’t noticed this recent blip and their predictions are incorrect.
More problematic is their incorrect claim that the expansion is based on future traffic growth. Much of that section of freeway today is congested for 4.5 – 6 hours during the day. There is already more demand than a supply. There is clear demand for this extra capacity today. Expansion is not dependent on the modest 10-20% vehicle usage growth they predict.
I agree we should question all of these projects regardless of the technology being employed. I’m just not seeing a compelling reason to get worked up over the I-94 expansion. On the other hand, the city of Milwaukee itself is looking to commit $300-500M to running trams. I am concerned that the city is looking to spend that much – and that is just the city’s portion, at time when 35-40% of children in the city live below the poverty line.
VMT statewide is flat over a decade. You have an untolled road that’s congested for a small part of the day. With tolls to even demand over a longer period of time you could avoid spending 800+million, never mind the blight and displacement from the construction of a double decked/widened freeway. Locals have made clear they don’t want the project. Does their voice matter for nothing? The AP and many of this blogs posters seem to think it does when people are opposing transit projects. And you’re worried about spending less than half as much on a network of trams? This first streetcar is less than a tenth as much.
What is for sure is that the money spent on the freeway will provide FAR more utility than anything spent on shiny, worthless toy trains. The streetcars will clog up the streets and enrich corrupt government cronies; they will provide zero public service.
never mind the blight and displacement from the construction of a double decked/widened freeway
Blight and displacement never seem to matter when building a $200 million a mile worthless toy train in Portland, in an area that was already well served by buses. And the double-deck freeway will presumably be narrower than the facility it will replace.
What we also forget is that the money for the freeway expansion is from other car drivers. The money for the worthless toy train is stolen from automobile users and local taxpayers. Not only is it utterly worthless, but it also hurts the pockets of local residents.
I am sure there are many reasonable objections as to the utility of this particular upgrade, but to pretend that the streetcar should somehow be compared to the highway in terms of usability and capacity is laughable on its face.
Three people in the San Jose area have successfully and permanently avoided rape and mugging by choosing freedom and autonomy rather than a government boondoggle transit failure for their mobility needs:
http://www.mercurynews.com/traffic/ci_27438101/fatal-crash-southbound-hwy-101-san-jose
Get bent, taxman!
Very appropriate, Frank. Gilfoil is almost certainly some sort of tax-feeding government functionary. Few in the private sector would view their supposed “customers” with the level of contempt it does. On the other hand, if your “customers” were forced to buy your product at gunpoint and pay tribute every year at gunpoint, that might change things a bit.
Thanks for the clip! It looks like the walkable neighborhood where have my morning coffeee, a short bicycle ride from where I work for the Department of Self Esteem, a new division of the Federal Government which Obama established to indoctrinate children whose parent drive more than 5 miles more than their recommended carbon allowance.
What about the I-94 expansion is unneeded? IIRC several sections of that project are congested 4.5 – 6 hours / day. Does it need to be congested at least 7 hours a day before more capacity is needed? At least 12 hours?