Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#81

Post by Cymen » Tue, May 20, 2014, 10:57 PM UTC

knite wrote: post #50

bluetidepro wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree. I moved to Chicago about a year ago, and have been very happy with how great their public trans is!

I moved from Chicago to San Francisco, and find that San Francisco is significantly easier to get around in. The public transit is worse, but the city itself is smaller, and Uber/Lyft/etc rates are low due to competition, which effectively means personalized pickup/drop-off throughout most of the city is <$10. For an individual, that's often worth it. For a group of 2-3, when compared against the sum of their total p…

I think most people are interested in public transportation to commute to work. I know I am and Uber/Lyft doesn't really help that situation.

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#82

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:09 PM UTC

discardorama wrote: post #70

There are multiple reasons, not just one. Each of them, like drops in a bucket, contributed to fill the bucket. As has been alluded by the OP, till the 1940s SF actually had competing train operators. They would advertise their performance ("shortest time to inner sunset!"), for example, and riders voted with their dollars. Then all but 1 got consolidated/wiped-out, and we ended up with the MUNI (aka SFMTA). The prob…

Well... if they have to live in SF, the operators probably need to be at least the second-highest-paid operators in the US, just to have a roof over them.

That doesn't mean they should be payed higher than teachers, though...

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#83

Post by ripter » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:25 PM UTC

jorde wrote: post #60

Can someone explain why on earth do busses and Muni trains need to stop on every single block? I get that this is convenient and there's probably some disability law behind it but it makes public transportation even slower in SF.

weird, the MUNI busses I take do not stop at every single block. They stop for lights, but they the stops are typically several blocks apart.

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#84

Post by bubbleRefuge » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:26 PM UTC

closetnerd wrote: post #63

bubbleRefuge wrote: post #51

Lets get real. The infrastructure problem in this country has to get solved at the federal level. Since we know here on HN that the federal government is an issuer of currency[1] and state and local government are users of the currency, like households and business, the only entity that can fund the massive infrastructure is said Federal Government. And, unlike China, all federal spending is underwritten by legislati…

I think federal level is definitely at fault but it shouldn't be. We should have more understanding of our local governments, more insight and voting power. We put so much authority and responsibility at the federal level that by the time the system reaches to the local governments its just a mindfuck of bureaucracies that no one can deal with.

Agreed that spending decisions should be more localized but funding has to be federal. They own the money spreadsheet.

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#85

Post by ripter » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:31 PM UTC

discardorama wrote: post #70

There are multiple reasons, not just one. Each of them, like drops in a bucket, contributed to fill the bucket. As has been alluded by the OP, till the 1940s SF actually had competing train operators. They would advertise their performance ("shortest time to inner sunset!"), for example, and riders voted with their dollars. Then all but 1 got consolidated/wiped-out, and we ended up with the MUNI (aka SFMTA). The prob…

Yes, because privatization of public resources has never hurt anyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#86

Post by eqdw » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:43 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #82

discardorama wrote: post #70

There are multiple reasons, not just one. Each of them, like drops in a bucket, contributed to fill the bucket. As has been alluded by the OP, till the 1940s SF actually had competing train operators. They would advertise their performance ("shortest time to inner sunset!"), for example, and riders voted with their dollars. Then all but 1 got consolidated/wiped-out, and we ended up with the MUNI (aka SFMTA). The prob…

Well... if they have to live in SF, the operators probably need to be at least the second-highest-paid operators in the US, just to have a roof over them. That doesn't mean they should be payed higher than teachers, though...

I work in SF, and I don't live in SF.

Why should SF subway operators need to live in SF?

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#87

Post by mblakele » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:44 PM UTC

Low density. Without enough population density it's impossible for transit to be economically viable. Tokyo has it. London has it. NYC has it. SF is... simply not dense enough to support a good transit infrastructure.

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#88

Post by koenigdavidmj » Tue, May 20, 2014, 11:46 PM UTC

al_gore wrote: post #20

jowiar wrote: post #10

One major challenge in the Bay Area often boils down to the lack of a government with the authority to collect taxes and impetus to spend them on Bay Area infrastructure. You either need three city governments and a pile of local ones to get on the same page, or persuade a state government that is not particularly keen on Bay Area spending and hamstrung by ballot initiatives.

This is true, but there's no reason that San Francisco itself couldn't have proper rapid transit instead of street cars. Even just removing cars from those streets and creating dedicated lanes (these exist in some places, of course) would be a huge help.

The streetcars that remain mostly are still there for the Market Street Subway and the Sunset Tunnel. In other words, they are demonstrably better than an equivalent bus route in as-the-row-flies distance.

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#89

Post by AnimalMuppet » Wed, May 21, 2014, 12:07 AM UTC

eqdw wrote: post #86

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... if they have to live in SF, the operators probably need to be at least the second-highest-paid operators in the US, just to have a roof over them. That doesn't mean they should be payed higher than teachers, though...

I work in SF, and I don't live in SF. Why should SF subway operators need to live in SF?

Fair point, but are there places within decent commuting distance that have decent living costs?

Re: Why is San Francisco public transportation so bad?

#90

Post by T-hawk » Wed, May 21, 2014, 12:17 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #33

al_gore wrote: post #17

The common argument against overnight service in non-New York cities is "only two tracks! no time to do maintenance!": http://www.bart.gov/guide/latenight This seems to just completely ignore the existence of the 14th Street-Canarsie and Crosstown lines (L and G services), both of which are dual tracked, yet provide 24/7 service most of the time. The Second Avenue Subway will also be dual tracked (unfortunately).

> The Second Avenue Subway will also be dual tracked (unfortunately). When I worked in NYC, it always amazed me that people 100 years ago had the foresight to build a 4-track system to allow for express trains. A century later...

Thank the invisible hand of capitalism for that one. The NYC subway started as multiple private companies, who had to compete to offer customers good service, which included express trains.

A century later, transportation is de facto a centrally planned command economy, with no competition to create any incentives towards quality service.