Death of Public Transportation

[Wesley Mouch]

I'm talking about Democratic control of the state government, which hasn't happened since the 80s. Detroit's mayor can't do regional transit alone.

Ah, I see. Gotta be regional to work. Of course. Feed more money into the dysfunctional beast. That'll do the trick.

Privatization of transit would be an instant failure. The profit motive would lead to almost every route being dramatically reduced in frequency or eliminated entirely. That's the exact opposite of what's needed.

The profit motive encourages more service, not less. You don't need to stop running one existing bus line. Keep funding them. Simply allow private individuals to provide whatever other transportation option where they can make money. Let DDOT keep pissing money, and occasionally running busses on time. But stop the current monopoly.

Can anyone tell us why private transportation and jitneys were banned from the streets? Were there significant problems that couldn't be honestly managed, or was it a money-grab by gov't. What's the story of monopoly civic busses?

[ABetterDetroit]

Ah, I see. Gotta be regional to work. Of course. Feed more money into the dysfunctional beast. That'll do the trick.

The profit motive encourages more service, not less. You don't need to stop running one existing bus line. Keep funding them. Simply allow private individuals to provide whatever other transportation option where they can make money. Let DDOT keep pissing money, and occasionally running busses on time. But stop the current monopoly.

Can anyone tell us why private transportation and jitneys were banned from the streets? Were there significant problems that couldn't be honestly managed, or was it a money-grab by gov't. What's the story of monopoly civic busses?

How are Uber and Lyft not privately operated for profit public transportation enterprises? They certainly have carved a competitive profitable niche.

[Gistok]

How are Uber and Lyft not privately operated for profit public transportation enterprises? They certainly have carved a competitive profitable niche.

Not to mention cab companies.

[Johnnny5]

How are Uber and Lyft not privately operated for profit public transportation enterprises? They certainly have carved a competitive profitable niche.

While they are technically "for profit" neither Uber or Lyft have ever made a single dime of profit. In fact, they both lose billions every single year [[Uber sometimes in just one quarter) and have done so for years.

[ABetterDetroit]

While they are technically "for profit" neither Uber or Lyft have ever made a single dime of profit. In fact, they both lose billions every single year [[Uber sometimes in just one quarter) and have done so for years.

I stand corrected. I thought Uber had cleared last year but was wrong. Still, a healthy gross coming out of the pandemic.

https://www.google.com/finance/quote...IRAZ&window=1Y

[stasu1213]

How are Uber and Lyft not privately operated for profit public transportation enterprises? They certainly have carved a competitive profitable niche.

It would cost $4.00 round trip on a SMART/DDOT 4 hour pass. It will cost up to $30 to $40 round trip using Uber or Lyft

[Jason]

Ah, I see. Gotta be regional to work. Of course. Feed more money into the dysfunctional beast. That'll do the trick.

Since this discussion is about regional [[suburban) bus service, the solution is regional by nature. SMART, the regional transit agency, is a legal entity created by the state legislature.

The profit motive encourages more service, not less. You don't need to stop running one existing bus line. Keep funding them. Simply allow private individuals to provide whatever other transportation option where they can make money. Let DDOT keep pissing money, and occasionally running busses on time. But stop the current monopoly.

DDOT and SMART's performance metrics [[cost per revenue mile and cost per revenue hour) are about the same and are on par with the rest of the country. This makes sense because the main drivers of cost are things like the cost of labor and the cost of fuel, which don't really have economies of scale or very good ways of making them more efficient. If you have an hour of bus service, you have to pay the driver an hour's wage, and you need to buy enough fuel for the bus to be driven for one hour.

Can anyone tell us why private transportation and jitneys were banned from the streets? Were there significant problems that couldn't be honestly managed, or was it a money-grab by gov't. What's the story of monopoly civic busses?

Except for in a few asian countries, every private transit company in the world went bankrupt. In the asian countries they survived with heavy government subsidy. I don't think there were any transit companies in the world that survived as what anyone would consider to be profitable for more than a few decades, and the fact that none of them really lasted longer than the lifecycle costs of their infrastructure just shows that it was never a functional business model to begin with.

It's also worth pointing out that the business model wasn't really about providing transportation services. It was about making money on other businesses which you could artificially control by abusing your monopoly on transportation. The main one was real estate. It's not hard to make money by buying low and selling high when you're the one that determines the value.

[Richard]

Since this discussion is about regional [[suburban) bus service, the solution is regional by nature. SMART, the regional transit agency, is a legal entity created by the state legislature.



DDOT and SMART's performance metrics [[cost per revenue mile and cost per revenue hour) are about the same and are on par with the rest of the country. This makes sense because the main drivers of cost are things like the cost of labor and the cost of fuel, which don't really have economies of scale or very good ways of making them more efficient. If you have an hour of bus service, you have to pay the driver an hour's wage, and you need to buy enough fuel for the bus to be driven for one hour.



Except for in a few asian countries, every private transit company in the world went bankrupt. In the asian countries they survived with heavy government subsidy. I don't think there were any transit companies in the world that survived as what anyone would consider to be profitable for more than a few decades, and the fact that none of them really lasted longer than the lifecycle costs of their infrastructure just shows that it was never a functional business model to begin with.

It's also worth pointing out that the business model wasn't really about providing transportation services. It was about making money on other businesses which you could artificially control by abusing your monopoly on transportation. The main one was real estate. It's not hard to make money by buying low and selling high when you're the one that determines the value.

Brightline that goes from Miami to Orlando and now expanding to Jacksonville and Tampa with many stops in between ,125 mph is privately owned.

When you get off in Orlando you can transfer to sun coast rail
which covers the entire region,larger then Detroits region,also privately owned.

For what it is costing you for one bridge plus the additional yearly maintenance costs the Detroit region could have easily implemented a rail system that connected everybody verses what percentage of the population will be using the bridge 2 times a day?

Uber and the other taxi alternatives are like any other business,once they start to be profitable the government will want their cut and start regulating them to death,not a good idea for one to be putting their eggs in that basket long term.

[Danny]

Well at least the SMART Bus System is fighting very hard to keep cities from opting out. Here are propose routing changes.

https://www.smartbus.org/About/News/...ce-adjustments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WDYb9-9b9o&t=247s