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

US cities pay too much for buses

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 590 posts

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#151

Post by hamdingers »

rangestransform wrote: post #32
jmyeet wrote: post #27

As people should know by now, in the last few decades China has built a massive amount of public transit infrastructure, both within cities and regional [1]. Some of the subway systems are pretty amazing (eg Chongqing [2]). I'm interested in how they did this and I think it comes down to a few major factors: 1. They standardize rolling stock. The same stuff is used across the country. I think this is really important…

> They standardize rolling stock. re: buses, we have the same rickety ass new flyers essentially everywhere in the US, that doesn't make them any cheaper

Not all New Flyer buses are the same in the same way not all Toyotas are the same.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#152

Post by scythe »

isthispermanent wrote: post #89

So the authors basic argument is to offshore bus production. As if that doesn’t carry any negative side effects. This is exactly what the majority of Americans voted against and exactly why the left can’t find its footing. Everyone is now fully aware that offshoring for a cheap sticker price comes with higher, harder to price costs elsewhere.

There's more than one way to accomplish the goals of protectionists, and the different options are usually not created equal. Some economic policies have worse side effects than others to accomplish similar tasks.

In this case, I think that placing a tax on imports (tariff) is always preferable to an inflexible ban on imports. This is not an unusual approach in economics; it is in fact very common that economists recommend replacing bans with taxes. In fact, even the current administration, which is radical by modern standards, basically always prefers tariffs to bans.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#153

Post by cyberax »

esafak wrote: post #93
bluGill wrote: post #63

Don't be fooled, paying less won't help much since the cost of a bus is a small part of the costs of running a bus route. about half your costs are the bus driver. The most expensive bus is still only 1/3rd of your hourly cost of running the bus. If a more expensive bus is more reliable that could more than make up for a more expensive bus (I don't have any numbers to do math on though). Half the costs of running a b…

I'm hearing you say we should have self-driving buses... which is feasible since their route is fixed.

Once you have self-driving, you don't _need_ buses.

Large buses are fundamentally inefficient, they can never be made competitive compared to cars. And the main source of inefficiency is the number of stops and fixed routes.

You can easily solve all the transportation problems with mild car-pooling. Switching buses and personal cars to something like 8-person minibuses will result in less congestion and about 2-3 times faster commutes than the status quo. Only large dense hellscapes like Manhattan will be an exception.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#154

Post by dgfitz »

bradleybuda wrote: post #143
jibe wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A literal bus factory may not be critical for national security, but the ability to manufacture a vehicle is. So the know-how, the supply lines, and the manufacturing facility are important. The ability to manufacture a fuel injector, a transmission, a windshield is going going to apply to a bus, a plane, a tank..

If only there was an entire American city filled with people and companies who had this expertise. We could call it the "Motor City".

You ignored "supply lines"

I encourage you to find a vehicle made in said city with zero parts sourced from China.

That is the point.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#155

Post by cyberax »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #96
esafak wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hearing you say we should have self-driving buses... which is feasible since their route is fixed.

Bus driver also does things like trigger ramp for handicapped people, strap in wheelchairs securely, answer questions about the route, and security surveillance.

You can have a fleet of specialized self-driving taxis for people with disabilities. They can have articulated ramps or other special accommodations.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#156

Post by mike50 »

jibe wrote: post #128
twoodfin wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The side effects of “Buy American” rules do not include a dynamic, competitive domestic bus manufacturing industry. Just the opposite. If the Chinese want to subsidize our mass transit buildout, why not let them? Are busses really critical national security concerns? If we needed the existing NA producers to build military busses it sounds like we’d be screwed!

A literal bus factory may not be critical for national security, but the ability to manufacture a vehicle is. So the know-how, the supply lines, and the manufacturing facility are important. The ability to manufacture a fuel injector, a transmission, a windshield is going going to apply to a bus, a plane, a tank..

Sure that's why the Hummer was a great vehicle with all the institutional knowledge from GM. /s Also modern engines in tanks and planes are turbine engines with nothing in common to lighter vehicles (APCs trucks etc). Tanks don't have windshields either.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#157

Post by supportengineer »

bradleybuda wrote: post #143
jibe wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A literal bus factory may not be critical for national security, but the ability to manufacture a vehicle is. So the know-how, the supply lines, and the manufacturing facility are important. The ability to manufacture a fuel injector, a transmission, a windshield is going going to apply to a bus, a plane, a tank..

If only there was an entire American city filled with people and companies who had this expertise. We could call it the "Motor City".

Or “Fremont”

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#158

Post by toast0 »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #98
myrmidon wrote: post #7

I think this shows one of the downsides of trade barriers very well: You get stuck with undesirable industries (diesel bus manufacturing), binding capital and labor better used elsewhere (and you easily end up with underperforming, overpriced solutions, too). But I'm curious how much this actually affects transport costs. If such a bus is used 12h/day, then even overpaying 100% for the vehicle should get outscaled by…

Aren’t most busses CNG these days?

Depends on fuel availability. Diesel is available everywhere. CNG has limited availability. In my county, we do have propane powered busses.

CNG and propane have much better emissions profiles, and vehicle lifetime and compressed tank lifetime are a good match for transit, as opposed to personal vehicles where when the compressed fuel tank ages out, the otherwise servicable vehicle turns into a pumpkin.

However, CNG ends up being expensive and may not save much versus diesel... The natural gas is usually not expensive, but compression requires a lot of energy input which is expensive.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#159

Post by rootusrootus »

dayvid wrote: post #88

Worth watching Modern MBA on the inefficiencies of transit in USA. Detailed analysis and comparison against Asian, European and Latin American systems along with private and government run operations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ3LSNXwZ2Y

Repeating the oft-cited but questionable assertion that car companies dismantled city rail systems makes me uncertain about how trustworthy the rest of their claims are. Though they did mention that the US is the most wealthy nation in the world -- did they later offer an opinion whether that would still be true had we approached public transit and health care subsidies the same way European countries did?

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#160

Post by gosub100 »

rfrey wrote: post #117
isthispermanent wrote: post #89

So the authors basic argument is to offshore bus production. As if that doesn’t carry any negative side effects. This is exactly what the majority of Americans voted against and exactly why the left can’t find its footing. Everyone is now fully aware that offshoring for a cheap sticker price comes with higher, harder to price costs elsewhere.

Blaming this on the amorphous "left" is extraordinary, when offshoring has been a 40 year project of corporate America and "shareholder returns at any cost". A neoliberal global order has been the traditional Republican platform.

The left serves corporations at least as much as it claims to represent the people. That is why they are blamed.
Post reply on HN