Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 401 posts

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#121

Post by asveikau »

nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

I moved out the year before it was scrapped, but I am not so sure it was because of homeless people. When I lived in Seattle I had literally 0 bad encounters with homeless people on buses. [Definitely nonzero on the sidewalks]

The worst part in my view about the free ride zone was when you would take a bus from downtown to outside the zone. You'd need to pay when you left. Which was hard to enforce, so I think a lot of people walked off. Even if you wanted to play it right, you needed to remember when to pay and when not. I remember hearing from drivers that they didn't care if you pay anyway.

Of course in recent years in towns like Seattle or SF there is always somebody trying to say that the homeless are responsible for the downfall of everything.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#122

Post by astrodust »

brewdad wrote: post #93
tomohawk wrote: post #57

Baltimore essentially has no-fare public transit. Anyone can get on the light rail without a ticket, and inspection is spotty at best. If you're caught, you just wait for the next train.

In Portland, you will be cited for non-payment and repeat offenders are "excluded", typically for 30 days. Meaning if you try to board a bus or train you can be arrested for trespass. Does Baltimore not do this?

Imagine if they did this for parking infractions.

30 day license suspension. Heavy fines.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#123

Post by zozbot234 »

kiliantics wrote: post #106
zozbot234 wrote: post #13

Doesn't literal "no cost" public transportation lead to issues with folks abusing the service as a place to hang out? Also, does the service never get congested in other ways? I'd argue that public transportation should be paid for when congested, so that users are incented to shift their use to other times.

Oh no, people hanging out in public spaces! People making use of the space they literally own, how terrible! Couldn't you make the same argument for cars? We should stop people hanging out in their cars and congesting our public roads!

> We should stop people hanging out in their cars and congesting our public roads!

And indeed, we should work on that too. Road pricing is a thing, after all - and it's finally becoming somewhat popular in congestion-prone city downtowns. Free public transit will help this, by providing a clear alternative to private vehicle use.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#124

Post by asveikau »

ksec wrote: post #58
nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

Arh, is this why why people in US hate public transport and prefer to drive themselves or go by taxi? For those of us living in the "outside" world where public transport are the norm, it is sometimes hard to understand why public transport is treated so differently in US.

> Arh, is this why why people in US hate public transport and prefer to drive themselves or go by taxi?

I am an American and I don't get it either. I think it varies by geography, where else you might have lived, etc. I grew up on the east coast and always hated taxis, and didn't like to drive.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#125

Post by dominotw »

farss wrote: post #67
nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

It's not just the free fare - it's the abysmal lack of shelter options and the attempts by cities to criminalize encampments and force people to find somewhere indoors to avoid arrest.

> because it's warm,

allowing encampments won't probably solve that unless they somehow provide heat?

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#126

Post by dominotw »

buzzkillington wrote: post #113
drdeadringer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Out of sight, out of mind" is real and not uncommon.

Not being assaulted is privilege now? I live down town. There's a homeless man on drugs who screams at the top of his lungs at random people every so often until the police come and pick him up. If you would rather he not be out of sight and out of mind please send me your address, I will buy him a one way ticket so he can camp out in your back yard.

> Not being assaulted is privilege now?

wasn't it always?

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#127

Post by toomanybeersies »

nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

Interestingly, here in Melbourne we have a similar system when it comes to paying fares. It's not the bus/train/tram drivers responsibility to ensure you pay your fare, you can walk onto a bus without tagging on and the driver won't even blink, it's the job of roaming ticket inspectors to enforce fare payment.

In my experience, we don't have a particularly significant problem with homeless people and other "undesirables" on public transport. It probably helps that they have police patrols at most train stations at night.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#128

Post by patcon »

buzzkillington wrote: post #113
drdeadringer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Out of sight, out of mind" is real and not uncommon.

Not being assaulted is privilege now? I live down town. There's a homeless man on drugs who screams at the top of his lungs at random people every so often until the police come and pick him up. If you would rather he not be out of sight and out of mind please send me your address, I will buy him a one way ticket so he can camp out in your back yard.

Thanks for helping me think on this.

Background: I personally feel that dealing with our collective failings is a collective burden. Your shitty situation is you getting the short straw in the lottery of who feels that collective failing more acutely.

It's disappointing to hear people conspire on engineering situations so that people like themselves simply don't notice/feel the failing personally, rather than hearing them spend energy working through a more complex resolution of the broader failing.

A don't think anyone's saying you're a bad person. But it maybe sucks to hear that you feel it's been shoved onto you alone (which is prob true), and then that others are rallying behind your shoving it elsewhere out of sight.

(Note: i realize this thread is a pile-on and your not the initial commenter :)

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#129

Post by shkkmo »

buzzkillington wrote: post #111
sutterbomb wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These undesirable aspects are at least partially a result of the same fuck the poor mentality. In countries that actually care for their populations, homeless and otherwise, this problem is far less severe.

So fuck the middle class because the rich don't want to pay taxes?

There's a great deal of evidence that we actually save money by providing housing, shelters and other services to poor people. Unfortunately, the politics make this unpopular and dictate that when they are provided they come with strings attached that discourage their use. It really isn't a question of not wanting to pay taxes and much more question of demonizing poor people.

The money spent on policing, cleanup, and emergency medical care is often far more than we would spend if we would just fund helping lift people out of poverty without all the moralizing.

Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

#130

Post by toomanybeersies »

papreclip wrote: post #68
nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

Yep, I personally would much sooner use public transportation that charged $10 (with no exceptions) than free public transportation. Sharing close quarters with aggressive, smelly, intoxicated, unstable people is stressful and unpleasant

That's a bit elitist, isn't it?

We could also ban vagrants from being inside the city limits at night. Out of sight, out of mind.

More seriously though, take an Uber (or UberPool) if you want clean, sober public transport.

Post reply on HN