It’s a sign of distinction that the Washington Metro Rail system has not one but at least two blogs dedicated to documenting the system’s poor operating condition. One of the blogs reports that, in July, MetroRail suffered from nearly 500 problems that led to a “deviation from normal scheduled service,” all but about 20 of which were due to maintenance failures.
The other blog reviews a recent WMATA report on the system’s health and concludes that “it’s the trains, stupid,” meaning that the train cars are experiencing so many breakdowns that “Metro should lay off the track work for a while” and concentrate on repairing the railcars.
The problem with that is that tracks and signals are responsible for lots of problems too. Broken rails are common, with an average of nearly one cracked rail a week in 2011. Faulty signals, of course, were responsible for the crash that killed nine people in 2009. Signals may cause the fewest number of equipment-related train delays, but nobody wants to admit they were busy fixing doors but letting people die because they neglected the signals.
European doctors proved that drinking mineral water keeps pancreatic viagra price canada juice and bile less acidic, liquid, and less “aggressive”. There is always a better choice for viagra online in uk try these guys sex pills. But regular stop of the urine in between viagra usa mastercard can cause harmful impact on the bladder. viagra canadian The effect generally takes about an hour or less depending on one’s body reaction.
The other web site complains that the DC metro has some of the highest fares of any transit system in the country when measured by the percentage of operating costs covered by riders (about 50 percent in the case of Metro). But these operating costs don’t include maintenance costs, which are drastically underfunded and which, when any funds at all are spent on them, are counted by the FTA as capital costs. Of course, no one ever talks about maintenance costs when planning new rail lines because those costs are, for the most part, in the distant future.
The real message should be that it’s the incentives, stupid. If most of the money to run the system comes from users, then planners will have incentives to design the systems to be cost effective and managers will have incentives to put resources where they are needed, such as maintenance, rather than into new construction when they can’t afford to maintain what they’ve got. Unfortunately, our transit systems are mostly funded out of tax dollars, which mainly gives transit agencies incentives to figure out ways to wheedle more dollars out of taxpayers. Since, for the most part, the taxpayers don’t actually ride transit, managers have little incentive to plan or run the transit systems for the users.
Rode the WMATA this morning, staring out the window at long stretches of chainlink fence all of it set in a continuous concrete curb. The curb is covered with stains from the rust coming off the chain link fence. Was that physical infrastructure really necessary? Do those chain link (barbed wire topped) fences really need to be in a continuous concrete curb?
They’re 34 years old, time to replace them all, think my $13/day fare is going to pay for it???
think my $13/day fare is going to pay for it???
No, taxpayers & auto drivers will. The WMATA can’t even cover its own operating costs with fairs. What a joke, what if Greyhound operated that way?
Greyhound uses tax payer funded communal infrastructure that doesn’t exist on a profit or loss basis.
No one asked you for your irrelevant opinion, go back to the meth pipe.
Seems like you’re one meth.
So now it’s “communal infrastructure” and not roads? Give it a rest. I’m going to keep cutting and pasting this til you give it up.
“Roads don’t exist on a profit or loss basis.â€
Argumentum ad nauseam or argument from repetition or argumentum ad infinitum is an argument made repeatedly (possibly by different people) until nobody cares to discuss it any more. This may sometimes, but not always, be a form of proof by assertion.
Many roads exist on a profit or loss basis. They often show up as losses on city governments‘ profit/loss statements.
Some roads won’t be constructed unless the proposal passes a “financial feasibility study†to determine whether or not it will “profitable for a private company to operateâ€.
There are even road corporations that operate on a profit and loss basis.
Roads around the world, including roads in China, exist on a profit and loss basis:
“Heading into 2012, our priorities are to ensure that we manage our business well, grow the toll road business and its profitability and increase shareholder value. At the same time, we continue to lookout for quality toll road projects to enlarge our toll road portfolio,†Mr Dong added.
You can now stop repeating this assertion over and over and over. Saying it a million times won’t make it so.
You NEVER link to any evidence (we still remember your failed attempts to use HTML tags) and you repeat the same gibberish day in and out.
It is time to STEP AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD highwayman.
Thanks for calling him on his BS, Frank. He’s a real pest that just won’t give it up.
Yes there are some private-for-profit toll roads, though they wouldn’t have any traffic if it were not for all the other roads that didn’t exist on a profit or loss basis.
“Roads don’t exist on a profit or loss basis.â€
Argumentum ad nauseam or argument from repetition or argumentum ad infinitum is an argument made repeatedly (possibly by different people) until nobody cares to discuss it any more. This may sometimes, but not always, be a form of proof by assertion.
Many roads exist on a profit or loss basis. They often show up as losses on city governments‘ profit/loss statements.
Some roads won’t be constructed unless the proposal passes a “financial feasibility study†to determine whether or not it will “profitable for a private company to operateâ€.
There are even road corporations that operate on a profit and loss basis.
Roads around the world, including roads in China, exist on a profit and loss basis:
“Heading into 2012, our priorities are to ensure that we manage our business well, grow the toll road business and its profitability and increase shareholder value. At the same time, we continue to lookout for quality toll road projects to enlarge our toll road portfolio,†Mr Dong added.
You can now stop repeating this assertion over and over and over. Saying it a million times won’t make it so.
You NEVER link to any evidence (we still remember your failed attempts to use HTML tags) and you repeat the same gibberish day in and out.
It is time to STEP AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD highwayman.
Metrosucks, you’re not honest for shit!
Randall:
Maintenance costs are paid out of operations. I think you are confusing that with capital renewal.
When railroads used betterment accounting and immediately expensed capital renewal as an operating expense this was perhaps better understood, but now they use GAAP.
Also, Metro was designed to be supported out of operations, as were BART and PATCO. PATCO, the first to open, turned operating profits in the first years of its existence in the early 1970’s. Unfortunately for them, the inflation of 1974-1982 completely changed the cost structure of labor and material and energy as compared to the fares people could afford to pay out of wages and in comparison to driving on free streets on the surface, and dramatically increased construction costs. The social changes of the same period oversaw an equally disruptive upheaval in the built environment, with working people fleeing DC and similar cities to more distant suburbs.
Metrosucks and Frank, you really need to stop hyper-ventilating when The Highway scores a valid point.
As he said, yes, there are some toll roads, but there a lot more that are lot more that aren’t evaluated on that basis–but maybe they should. Wouldn’t come out favorably to the biases of Metrosucks and Frank, something I’d look forward to. For statement of such an obvious fact, there is no need for a reference.
Perhaps a strategy to even flummox guys like Metrosucks and Frank is to quote the big facts that blow their arguments out of the water–of which there’s a never-ending supply. Have you notice that I’ve cited a lot of facts here over the years complete with links, but I have YET to have an intellectually sound response, and usually with teethknashing and name-calling, if any response at all.
Should frustrate them even more–though when it clear to any reasonable reader that they’re running their keyboards like idiots, don’t hesitate to call them out. It is also fun and entertaining.
Perhaps you didn’t read this line, msetty, so it bears repeating: If all you have are attacks, both of you now please shut the %u©k up.
I’m tired of your mischaracterizations (I’m not “right-wingâ€) and your attacks. I’m tired of YEARS of the highwayman persona saying the same stuff over and over and over. Fact is you and Dan and highwayman have stifled the discussion here with your repeated personal attacks, appeals to ridicule, and in the highwayman’s case, non-sequiturs and libelous accusations against The Antiplanner, whom I respect.
Criticism is great. All you offer are profanity-laced, emotion-based attacks.
/ignore
Government isn’t depriving you of roads.
Frank, you have nothing to be angry at.