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

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

#281

Post by aptwebapps » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:53 AM UTC

markdown wrote: post #260

hanniabu wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, just earlier this post showed up in my thread with people trying to criminalize sleeping in public areas so homeless can be arrested. https://www.npr.org/2019/12/16/788435163/supreme-court-wont-...

Well they should, shouldn't they. Nobody should be able to monopolize and ruin the commons, whether or not they have a home. The problem isn't the criminalizing of sleeping in public spaces, it's the lack of publicly funded shelters and publicly funded (incl. mental) healthcare for the homeless. We should pay to give them a place to sleep, and punish them just like anyone else if they choose to set up camps in public…

If you'll hold off on the criminalization until all the shelters are built, maybe, but the former is easier than the latter and not everyone is equally invested in the two endeavors.

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

#282

Post by EForEndeavour » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:55 AM UTC

forthwall wrote: post #104

ngngngng wrote: post #62

I guess Salt Lake City must be too small to count. Or not qualify on some other metric. All the light rail trains in the city are free, but once you get outside of a certain region there is a charge.

This isn't true. ( https://www.rideuta.com/Fares-And-Passes/Current-Fares )

No, it is true that Salt Lake City passengers may ride buses and light rail for free within the Free Fare Zone mapped out here: https://www.rideuta.com/Fares-And-Passes/Free-Fare-Zone

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

#283

Post by jessaustin » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:57 AM UTC

rshnotsecure wrote: post #35

Quick question, has anyone here heard of a very odd company in Kansas City called... https://joesdatacenter.com . All of the staff on LinkedIn exist...but there are only 3 of them and apparently the founder and CEO just got out of community college? They claim to have at least a few ten thousands of floor space, so that must be minimum $25 million in server capital assuming all are used. They also for some reason bro…

Haha there's no way that weather data is right. They're reporting a high of "54.4°F" when it was snowing most of the day? Pull the other one.

Maybe all the "APTs" should route through Joe's if they don't want a serious response?

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

#284

Post by IAmEveryone » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:57 AM UTC

cameldrv wrote: post #170

ksec wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The reasons are: 1. Public transit is very slow relative to cars. This is because the U.S. was mostly built after the invention of the car, which means road capacity is higher, parking is easier, and distances are farther. Even in places with decent public transit, it takes 2-3x as long to get somewhere on public transit as driving a car. 2. The U.S. is a rich country and more people can afford their own car or to ta…

At least in cities and during the day, good public transport is faster than cars at any distance. In London or Paris (and even New York), you'll see hedge fund managers on the subway.

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

#285

Post by tigeba » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 4:59 AM UTC

lacker wrote: post #12

Unfortunately, I think this is a step backwards. According to the US Census, about 1% of commuters in Kansas City use public transportation. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/31000US28140-kansas-city... It's hardly "public" transportation at all, if it's only useful to 1% of residents. If public transportation is going to make any impact on the lives of Kansas City residents, it first has to be providing a useful s…

You have to be somewhat careful with statistics like these when dealing with cities like KC. Population information is frequently reported as 'Metro Area' as in the source you provided. The actual population of KCMO is FWIW, I live in the metro area and the buses are not super useful for me, but I used the streetcar frequently when I was working downtown. The streetcar is 'free' and is funded by a special tax along the streetcar line, that was voted for by the people that live along the line. It has been very popular and the city recently voted to expand it for several more miles. The latest announcement is expanding the 'free' to buses. I don't know if there is really a plan to pay for that yet.

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

#286

Post by jessaustin » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 5:01 AM UTC

tubaguy50035 wrote: post #186

robsinatra wrote: post #184

Kansas was running on fumes for a long time by not taxing. Now, this? One group of idealists were replaced with another with no more sensibility than their counterparts.

You're mistaking Kansas City, MO with Kansas City, KS. Kansas (the state) was running on fumes for a long time. Kansas (the state) also has nothing to do with this. These are literally the first three words of the article: "Kansas City, Missouri"

Kansas the state was named after Missouri's second city. I guess they were just clever enough not to name it "Joplin"...

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

#287

Post by jessaustin » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 5:06 AM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #123

kiliantics wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When driving in Texas last week, I noticed they have "we'll mail you the bill" tollways. I.e., if you have a transponder in your car you pay a lower rate automatically. If you don't have a transponder, they'll read your license plate each time you pass a camera, and send you a bill like those red light cameras do. This seems like it could work in Kansas City. The thing is, traffic in Kansas City isn't near as bad as it is in other parts of the nation, so it might not be necessary.

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

#288

Post by cpitman » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 5:06 AM UTC

IAmEveryone wrote: post #284

cameldrv wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasons are: 1. Public transit is very slow relative to cars. This is because the U.S. was mostly built after the invention of the car, which means road capacity is higher, parking is easier, and distances are farther. Even in places with decent public transit, it takes 2-3x as long to get somewhere on public transit as driving a car. 2. The U.S. is a rich country and more people can afford their own car or to ta…

At least in cities and during the day, good public transport is faster than cars at any distance. In London or Paris (and even New York), you'll see hedge fund managers on the subway.

That really depends on the city. In DC, my drive commute is ~10-20 minutes in the morning, and my train commute is ~40+ minutes. Why? Because I have to transfer once, and walk to and from the stations on either side.

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

#289

Post by tigeba » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 5:10 AM UTC

edmundsauto wrote: post #36

reaperducer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If public transportation is going to make any impact on the lives of Kansas City residents, it first has to be providing a useful service to them. Why does that have to be "first?" Why not make it free, and also make it useful? If the goal is to increase ridership, making the rides free lowers the barrier for people in transit-served areas. Then you can subsequently or simultaneously expand it. It makes no sense to k…

What if making it free makes it less useful to most people? There's another comment talking about how they became rolling homeless shelters when they went to free, and use dropped because of hygiene issues.

There have been no fares on our streetcars in KC since they debuted a few years ago. Currently they require EVERYONE to exit the streetcar when it terminates at either end of the route and this seems to work. Not sure what they will do with the bus lines yet.

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

#290

Post by Paradigma11 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 5:18 AM UTC

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…

Do homeless people in the US really care about tickets?

Here in vienna they take the public transport anyway since the ticket inspectors dont bother with them and the dedicated securities will throw them out anyway if they are forced to bother.

Worst case is that they spent some hours at a warm police station.