Live data from Hacker News

How BART on the Golden Gate Bridge died: A new history

seungylee14.substack.com

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: How BART on the Golden Gate Bridge died: A new history

#111
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if a road has over two lanes in each direction, the route is busy enough to sustain trains/light rail. That's necessary, but not sufficient. Rail requires enough commonality or at least linearity of both source and destination. If it's an octopus on either end of said road, rail doesn't work.

What, does hub-and-spoke not work?

The claim was that rail works if there is enough traffic between two points. That claim is false. It's false even if it's the same traffic at both points.

Hub and spoke is a specific kind of a set of pairs of points. (One point in each pair is in all members of the set.)

Hub and spoke doesn't work unless there's enough traffic to each of the endpoints.

Re: How BART on the Golden Gate Bridge died: A new history

#112
post #13

It seems like every major infrastructure folly, at its heart, simplifies to "Someone made their career espousing a certain worldview, and when facts changed in future decades, were unwilling or unable to change their now-famous beliefs." In this case, car > rail. Which was true and progressive, for a period! Say, 1950 to 1970? But then became false as the growth rate of cars outscaled roads.

In a market-republic society, initiatives such as private automobile technology create a formidable alliance of interests which mass behind the concept of "car > rail":

- Automobile manufacturers: they can sell more cars.

- Fuel industry: Petroleum exploration, extraction, refining, transportation, distribution, and retail sales.

- Independent automobile dealers and repair facilities: sales & services.

- Auto suppliers: Support industry based around the manufacturing and repair.

- Construction companies: Road and highway construction and maintenance.

- Travel and tourism: Auto travel and auto-based tourism ("road trip", car rentals associated with other transport, etc.) emerge.

- Real estate. Automobiles promote suburban sprawl real estate and development. This brings in construction, development, finance, brokers, title insurance, and more.

- Media: Auto advertising becomes a major component of print, broadcast, and cable media.

- Training and instruction: Drivers' training and related services.

- Licencing: Government infrastructure around vehicle and driver certification and registration.

- Sport: Auto racing creates its own fandom and dynamics.

- Popular culture: Various fandoms, tribes, and allegiances based around specific brands, concepts, and activities.

It would be difficult to intentionally devise a more effective self-sustaining, self-perpetuating market-political consortium. I don't believe that the automobile-support-industrial-complex was intentionally conceived --- it is an emergent concept. But once emerged it's phenomenally resilient.

We've seen a few related sectors. The military-industrial complex identified by Eisenhower is one. I'd argue that the healthcare-industrial complex is another. The food and ag sector likely a third.

Post reply on HN