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

#221

Post by weberc2 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:18 AM UTC

shadowgovt wrote: post #31

stretchwithme wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather see nothing being subsidized. If you want to help the poor afford public transit, lower their taxes. Maybe not taking a substantial their working capital and giving it back to them when their old isn't such a bright idea either.

One could cease to provide social security as it is structured if one replaced it with an alternative. We already know from US history that it is unwise (in a humanitarian sense) to trust the public to just save enough to retire comfortably (including having the foresight to keep their savings in assets that don't diminish in value before they are needed to offset continued life without labor into the system).

I thought postwar America was known for investing in real estate to great wealth-building effect? I’m not sure how worthwhile other time periods are for comparison as our economy is so much different.

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

#222

Post by jMyles » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:23 AM UTC

proc0 wrote: post #53

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 so infuriating to see big cities completely incapable of dealing with homeless people as if they are delicate creatures that can't be touched, and then have the majority of people ignore them even though they are assholes that make a scene every single time. Most of these people act that way because no one has taught them any better and therefore they have no incentive to act otherwise.

Having the spent almost the entire past 5 years living happily houseless, I need neither your judgment nor your support.

I do think you are being malicious, though, and I think you know that you are just totally incorrect.

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

#223

Post by new_realist » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:24 AM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #213

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…

The rolling homeless shelter meme is a way to virtue signal against the existence of the homeless. I have been a consistent bus rider in Seattle since the mid 90s, and the bus is not a destination for homeless, much less so than the library. Many homeless people have bus passes legitimately, and are more respectful than the average rider.

As a Seattle bus rider, I would have to disagree. A few outlier homeless (e.g. those who shit on the bus) can create irrational triggers among the general public which decrease bus use.

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

#224

Post by Joakal » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:26 AM UTC

beamatronic wrote: post #189

epicureanideal wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it that's preventing us from forcing our politicians to offer better options? I would vote for a solution to this, and even donate money to it, if enough other people were doing the same. Don't most people feel the same about this issue? What systemic problem is preventing a huge mass of people who agree on this from making a meaningful change happen?

The problem is that as soon as they increase your taxes to pay for something that you want to pay for, they will take that money and use it for something else.

That's not a problem but a feature of government. Otherwise the government will just focus on dirt roads and horses. Don't like taxes? Move to Somalia.

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

#225

Post by jMyles » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:29 AM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #151

epicureanideal wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it that's preventing us from forcing our politicians to offer better options? I would vote for a solution to this, and even donate money to it, if enough other people were doing the same. Don't most people feel the same about this issue? What systemic problem is preventing a huge mass of people who agree on this from making a meaningful change happen?

It's just a much harder problem to solve than you realize it is. The truth is a lot of the homeless people that aren't in shelters choose not to go to shelters. Why? The biggest reason is because shelters don't allow drugs or alcohol, and if you're an addict that's an immediate pass. There are other reasons too. Sometimes couples want shelter together, but most are separated by gender (and for good reason: to prevent…

You say it's not obvious, but then you ask:

> So, what do you do? Allow people to shoot up in a shelter?

And the answer is yes, obviously. Safe-injection sites and opiate maintenance programs work.

And you also go several steps further by ending drug prohibition entirely. Prohibition has created an environment where the only opioid drugs available are highly concentrated and easy to smuggle, just as alcohol prohibition converted a nation of beer and wine drinkers to whiskey addicts. With raw plant forms of coca and poppy available, we'll see far fewer people shooting up heroin or smoking crack (just as we see today in places where cultivation and consumption of these plants is commonplace).

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

#226

Post by NeedASource » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:41 AM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #161

buzzkillington wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Generally, most people who are "pro-homeless" or talk about treating them with respect don't actually live near or otherwise interact with the homeless on a regular or even occasional basis, which lets them feel superior and cast moral judgments on those of us who do live near the homeless and try to do something to contain the problem.

Going to need a source on that. In my experience it is only people who are exposed to homelessness in some way that have any feeling on the matter what so ever.

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

#227

Post by greglindahl » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:43 AM UTC

weberc2 wrote: post #216

kasey_junk wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not disagreeing with your broader point but none of those studies account for space utilization issues. Transit uses space better due to lack of parking and more density per track. No idea how that impacts the actual dollar numbers but it’s worth noting.

The cost per passenger per mile is two orders of magnitude lower for roads than for public transit; I can’t imagine parking space accounting for that.

What is the cost on the road when the road is full and can’t be expanded? Lots of urban areas in the US have this problem.

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

#228

Post by mixmastamyk » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:45 AM UTC

sitkack wrote: post #213

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…

The rolling homeless shelter meme is a way to virtue signal against the existence of the homeless. I have been a consistent bus rider in Seattle since the mid 90s, and the bus is not a destination for homeless, much less so than the library. Many homeless people have bus passes legitimately, and are more respectful than the average rider.

The L.A. metro would like to differ. If only sleeping and smelling were all the problems. How about yelling nonstop obscenities?

I still take the Metro but when bringing the wife and kid with me I get an earful of complaints.

Interestingly, this doesn't happen when we take the metro in Rio de Janeiro. Presumably because there are paid barriers to entry, and employees in the stations. Not sure if they have public mental treatment but they have public hospitals.

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

#229

Post by greglindahl » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:46 AM UTC

freeone3000 wrote: post #34

stretchwithme wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather see nothing being subsidized. If you want to help the poor afford public transit, lower their taxes. Maybe not taking a substantial their working capital and giving it back to them when their old isn't such a bright idea either.

More than half of Americans end up not paying taxes, because their income is too low. If you're saying make it negative, sure, I'm all for that, but I think you are underestimating the poverty situation in America.

Everyone pays tax; you’re likely referring to income tax. Don’t forget sales tax, etc.

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

#230

Post by ALittleLight » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 2:46 AM UTC

bilekas wrote: post #198

ALittleLight wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enforcing laws against the homeless is not the done thing in Seattle. The problem is not thinking of ways to detect their law breaking, but rather that the city chooses compassion over order and consequently ignores their lawlessness instead of enforcing the law. If you do come to Seattle, you'll find the streets teeming with the homeless who are completely undisturbed by the police. Just walking around the city, and…

I honestly appreciate this; its probably one of the reasons I have a subconscious appreciation for Seattle. As I mentioned, I don't know enough about the area/situation. But I am genuinely pleased that people at least give a shit.

I suspect it's easier to appreciate from afar. Personally, I found it quite distasteful and frustrating to live in a dirty and dangerous city. The city's permissive attitudes are a major reason I left.