Posted on 02/11/2010 6:55:32 AM PST by Willie Green
Forty years ago, I rode the "South Shore" daily, about 50 miles into downtown Chicago. It was great. It was on-time, efficient, all-electric, virtually nonpolluting and was safe, and I didn't have to drive the Dan Ryan Expressway.
However, fast-forwarding 40 years, I contend anyone advocating any investment either private or public for any ground-based rail systems have simply not done their research. Polk County should not wait for high-speed rail if we can get funds for a 21st century monorail system which could connect to Orlando's "antique, light rail." There are many monorail manufacturers offering modular systems worthy to have the name Lego and perhaps Lakeland Electric and/or others could showcase any solar-power expertise.
The footprint of these systems is small and, being elevated, they do not even cross with ground transportation like highways, interstate highways or existing rail. We're also blessed with enough acreage to provide inexpensive parking for riders. We could also subsidize riders in return for part-time (nonunion) employment, lowering operating costs. Free ridership or employment is never guaranteed.
Like the Seattle monorail system, which was meant to be torn down within a few years after the 1962 World's Fair but couldn't be, because it was simply too efficient and too profitable, and is still there today, we could certainly build a 21st-century example for the rest of the country.
No other system can easily be molded into what the public wants and needs. We could say to high-speed rail, OK, we're ready, no matter where you put your Polk County stop.
I was 13 when I rode Seattle's monorail and now I'm 60. It would be so cool if I could ride Polk County's version.
Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there’s nothing on earth
Like a genuine,
Bona fide,
Electrified,
Six-car
Monorail!
What’d I say?
Ned Flanders: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: What’s it called?
Patty+Selma: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: That’s right! Monorail!
[crowd chants `Monorail’ softly and rhythmically]
Miss Hoover: I hear those things are awfully loud...
Lyle Lanley: It glides as softly as a cloud.
Apu: Is there a chance the track could bend?
Lyle Lanley: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
Barney: What about us brain-dead slobs?
Lyle Lanley: You’ll be given cushy jobs.
Abe: Were you sent here by the devil?
Lyle Lanley: No, good sir, I’m on the level.
Wiggum: The ring came off my pudding can.
Lyle Lanley: Take my pen knife, my good man.
I swear it’s Springfield’s only choice...
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!
All: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: What’s it called?
All: Monorail!
Lyle Lanley: Once again...
All: Monorail!
Marge: But Main Street’s still all cracked and broken...
Bart: Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken!
All: Monorail!
Monorail!
Monorail!
[big finish]
Monorail!
Homer: Mono... D’oh!
"..We could also subsidize riders ..."
Funny.
if we can get funds
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
Monorails are more expensive to build than freeways. Freeways are more expensive to build than railroads.
If you want to save money build railroads. Freeways are not free either.
virtually nonpolluting......there’s an ignorant statement right there.............
"...if we can get funds for.."
Taxes
Not necessarily....
Traditionally, infrastructure construction has often been funded through the issuance of tax-free bonds... and the debt is repaid via revenues from tolls/fares.
"..We could also subsidize riders ..."
Funny.
Many municipalities deliberately choose to subsidize mass transit because it is believed to benefit local businesses and merchants (much the same way as providing "free" municipal parking lots.)
IMHO, it will probably be unnecessary to subsidize mass transit riders in many locales due to rising fuel and insurance costs and tolls imposed on highways (because legislators are too afraid to increase the gas tax to cover highway maintenance costs.)
That, and simply because traffic congestion and gridlock is a PITA.
Freeways are paid by the users, via fuel tax. By and large, the more you use, the more tax you pay.
We don’t need any new transportation lines.
Move to, or away from, what ever quality/price/choice line you like.
If WG likes monorails, move to Seattle. If you like palm trees and beaches, move to Florida. If you like urban elevated railroads, move to New York.
Total untruth. It doesn't bother me, or 300 hundred million Americans.
I and hundreds of millions of Americans, as thinking adults, have structured our lives to never encounter it.
Everybody else, have as adults, made rational choices to live in areas with high population density. So, that's there choice. Everyone in a traffic jam...WANTS TO BE THERE, otherwise they wouldn't be there. They are free to choose. They choose traffic.
Well, not quite true, the Seattle Monorail is indeed profitable, in fact it does have the distinction of being the only fully self-sufficient public transit system in the United States.
The reason is that it is only 1 mile long and connects 2 tourist destinations, but it is profitable.
I wouldn’t cite that as an example that you could put in an urbanwide system and be profitable, but it is profitable.
Taxes have to be paid. Investments that draw capital away from the private market, cause there to be less funds available in the taxed market, which means higher rates. There is no free lunch. You have a very shallow comprehension of economics.
Essentially all prospective American light-rail projects are promoted as being self-sufficient; no burden on the taxpayer.
In order to come up with the numbers to justify these claims, is is the custom for promoters wildly to underestimate construction and operating costs, and overestimate future ridership.
The persuasiveness of many of these boosters comes from having first taken the precaution to deceive themselves.
The Las Vegas monorail cost $142 million per mile.
The Orange County, CA light rail (85% elevated) cost $101 million per mile.
I would guess that there is a lot of variability in the cost of a freeway, depending on the number of bridges
The key word is elevated. I regular railroad (not elevated is much cheaper)
Just like the schools. The highways are maintained by either incompetent/political/time clock punching state bureaucracies. The repairs are done by overpaid, unproductive union labor with that great union quality. The contractors are usually hooked up firms that get the jobs for political payoffs. The highways themselves suffer from the classic economics case of the tragedy of the commons.
Like everything else, they are well funded. However there is never enough to fund beyond the appetites of players involved. Politicians, unions, contractors.
My solution?
Get rid of the federal gas taxes, and sell, permanently, the highways. All of them.
They are too important to be in the hands of incompetent, high cost, poor quality government.
Taxes have to be paid. Investments that draw capital away from the private market, cause there to be less funds available in the taxed market, which means higher rates. There is no free lunch. You have a very shallow comprehension of economics.
Those private market firms who are "too big to fail" have proven themselves to be negligent and irresponsible investors.
So perhaps it's time for taxpayers to invest in public infrastructure. At least then we get a tangible structure for our taxes instead of an empty hole in our pockets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.