Salaries and Firms - DC

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
a) cost per mile yes, but the distances are much greater.
b) you still have to go through a tunnel to get into DC. If you're going from Vienna to Ballston, the fare is still pretty cheap.

$2.15 for a rush hour fare is not that cheap...

Originally posted by George Bush
Burger, C.J.--glad you found my post entertaining; in many ways, it is better to be entertaining than right. I am afraid that this post is going to be much less entertaining... sorry.

In terms of my diatribe, I take it that all of us agree that machines with many moving parts (such as... oh, I don't know, escalators) belong under rooves, if not behind walls, not heading unprotected into snow and salt and rain; and that the Metro's infamous "hub and spoke" design *might* have made sense in nineteen-seventy-whenever, but causes ridiculous overcrowding today.

Sorry for blowing of so much steam at once, but there is so much about our subway that we can all agree to hate, I sometimes get carried away.

As for fare structures, though, I fear that my penchant for attacking the Metro may have obscured my point... I was not attacking graduated fares. Graduated fares may or may not make sense, but my argument in that post was about the EXPONENTIALLY GRADUATED SURCHARGE for peak usage. Let me respond to your points by the numbers:

1) the fixed cost of serving the suburbs are greater than of serving downtown... maybe, BUT NOT A RELEVANT POINT if true, because you get access to far more revenue if you go out to the burbs, so that the cost and revenue increase together. Not increasing this costs will not save you money.

It is a network effect, sort of like telephone usage: the value of every subway stop increases with the addition of each other stop, becuase more riders and more destinations come within reach of each other. I doubt very much that a downtown-only subway could come close to paying for itself, because as I mentioned earlier, COMMUTERS PROVIDE THE VAST BULK OF REVENUE. Week-end/off-peak usage just doesn't pay the bills.

Variable costs? Probably not. If variable cost were the only issue, the trains would only run during rush hour, when they are profitable.

2) Suburbanites benefit even more from metro than downtowners... check.

I was trying to make that point when I said that WE subsidize YOUR (well, Pai-Gow's, anyway) week-end use of what is effectively OUR commuting system. The system was not built for urbanites, but rather for commuters... which is why it irritates us that you ride for so much less.

3) People are willing to pay for space... check.

4) The surcharge should apply to everyone... check. What I was trying to say was that

Peak: White Flint-Jud. Sq. = $3.50
Dupont Circle-J. S. = $1.35

Off-Peak WF-JS = $2.25
DC-JS = $1.10

*BUT* (key point) during Peak, EVERY SPACE ON THE TRAIN AT METRO CENTER is filled. Two stops later, Mr. Dupont Circle leaves, ending his revenue contributions to the subway. Mr. White Flint remains on for another hour, paying the whole time.

EACH of them has forced someone else to stand on the platform.
Surcharge for Dupont: 15 c.
for White Flint: $1.25

loss to system: $1.10 for Dupont passenger, whose space could have been filled by someone going to White Flint.

My proposal: a FLAT SURCHARGE if your trip goes through Chinatown/Metro Center/L'Enfant Plaza DURING RUSH HOUR. So,

Peak: WF-JS = $3.25
DC-JS = $2.10

and both are paying $1 TO RIDE DURING PEAK TIME because they are preventing someone from getting on at MetroC/CT/L'EP. No surcharge if your trip doesn't go through MC/CT/L'EP, though, because you aren't forcing people off the train.

THAT BEING SAID....

They should not be trying to raise revenues with subways. All transportation systems cost money. Maybe something like the Brooklyn Bridge, as a toll, turns a profit, MAYBE... but the Beltway doesn't. ALL of us, both PaiGow, me, and the rest of you, are paying for the Beltway, but the USERS of the eco-friendly, quality-of-life-enhancing subway pay a good chunk of what the system costs. Hmmm...

Unfortunately, the lay-out of the stupid thing means that only a select few can take advantage of it. Our earlier Old Town Alexandria poster can no more take advantage of the subway than could someone living in G'town, and those are DESIREABLE areas.

Still, I think that people should be encouraged to take advantage of the subway, so at the end of the day, I think that I favour a flat fare. For one thing, you don't need to worry about swiping out at the far end. Anyway, that's my two cents.

a) you are scary
b) I dunno about Ju Square to Dup Cic, but Farragut North to an exit the same number ofstopsduring peak is only $1.10. Considering its only about a mile or less,I would say the price is right. I dont know where the hell White Flint is but it sounds many many miles away. Why one would live there and thus becaume an embitterd commuter cog on the metro wheel spenind too much time going toand fro just so he can get to his beige office and back to his cultureless office max town is beyond me, but i would say the mileage alone justifies whateve ryou spend. It is still WAY cheaper and less aggravating than driving, no?

[ms. naughty diplomat]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
a) cost per mile yes, but the distances are much greater.
b) you still have to go through a tunnel to get into DC. If you're going from Vienna to Ballston, the fare is still pretty cheap.

i'd assume that the tunnel from rosslyn to foggy bottom was probably pretty expensive. given the depth of the tunnel at that point due to the need to go under the potomac and the fact that it is over a mile between those two stations, it had to be one of the most expensive streches of metro to build. the same would hold true for the section of the green line that goes under the anacostia river. underwater tunnels tend to be most expensive of all.

ms. naughty diplomat

[George Bush]

I'll bet that you are absolutely right, the underwater tunnels probably cost an arm and a leg to build, and the bridges were undoubtedly not cheap, either. Is there a point that you wanted to make about that cost, or was that cost the point itself?

Maybe PaiGow princess is right... perhaps I should have hit urban planning instead of law.

That being said, your poker Highness, I am not *personally* harmed by the cost of the trip to White Flint, except inasmuch as it leads people to drive in instead of taking mass transit, clogging our roads and polluting our lungs. (and probably acidifying our lakes and rivers, although the Potomac might be protected by the tidal waters)

I just used to get on at Judiciary Square. I AM embittered by the stupidity of the morons who designed this system, not by my own commuting preferences. White Flint? In BF Maryland? Goodness, no, I live in Alexandria, less than 10 minutes from the Metro. (10 minutes on foot)

You are absolutely right about the suckiness of being a cog in the commuting wheel... and no, where I live, the Metro is not cheaper than driving, unless I travel off-peak.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by George Bush
I AM embittered by the stupidity of the morons who designed this system, not by my own commuting preferences

The problem is metro has gotten too damn popular for its designed size. Ridership has gone beyond what the design makes sense for. A couple of downtown hubs work if traffic isn't that large, but it's gotten too big for it.

They need 8-car trains during rush hour, but don't have the money. THey need to run the orange line through a different tunnel under the river and not through metro center. But that all costs major $$ that they don't have.

BTW, how is it that the 8-car trains can't be handled by the stations? THey all seem to be exactly 8 cars long. If someone fucked up that big-time--making the stations 71/2 cars long--they do deserve to be shot.

Originally posted by George Bush
I'll bet that you are absolutely right, the underwater tunnels probably cost an arm and a leg to build, and the bridges were undoubtedly not cheap, either. Is there a point that you wanted to make about that cost, or was that cost the point itself?

Maybe PaiGow princess is right... perhaps I should have hit urban planning instead of law.

That being said, your poker Highness, I am not *personally* harmed by the cost of the trip to White Flint, except inasmuch as it leads people to drive in instead of taking mass transit, clogging our roads and polluting our lungs. (and probably acidifying our lakes and rivers, although the Potomac might be protected by the tidal waters)

I just used to get on at Judiciary Square. I AM embittered by the stupidity of the morons who designed this system, not by my own commuting preferences. White Flint? In BF Maryland? Goodness, no, I live in Alexandria, less than 10 minutes from the Metro. (10 minutes on foot)

You are absolutely right about the suckiness of being a cog in the commuting wheel... and no, where I live, the Metro is not cheaper than driving, unless I travel off-peak.

Who is this metro loathing, concerned for the environmental poster with the smarts to not live in BF Maryland? Except fot the Alexandria part, you are like my total match! Unless its Old Town in which case there are no exceptions. And you know the true spelling of my "name". Vegas for the Fourth darling?

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The problem is metro has gotten too damn popular for its designed size. Ridership has gone beyond what the design makes sense for. A couple of downtown hubs work if traffic isn't that large, but it's gotten too big for it.

They need 8-car trains during rush hour, but don't have the money. THey need to run the orange line through a different tunnel under the river and not through metro center. But that all costs major $$ that they don't have.

BTW, how is it that the 8-car trains can't be handled by the stations? THey all seem to be exactly 8 cars long. If someone fucked up that big-time--making the stations 71/2 cars long--they do deserve to be shot.

How about these asshole metro drivers who keep the doors open for like thirty seconds or a minute at every stop? Or the ones who keep talking and talk ign like they are all microphone happy? Shut up and drive, bitch. Has anyone ever had the guy who likes to point out that Rosslyn is the first stop in the Commonwealth of Virginia? Totally unnecessary.

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by paigowprincess
How about these asshole metro drivers who keep the doors open for like thirty seconds or a minute at every stop? Or the ones who keep talking and talk ign like they are all microphone happy? Shut up and drive, bitch. Has anyone ever had the guy who likes to point out that Rosslyn is the first stop in the Commonwealth of Virginia? Totally unnecessary.

Don't they all do that???

Same thing with Pentagon on the Yellow line.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by paigowprincess
How about these asshole metro drivers who keep the doors open for like thirty seconds or a minute at every stop? Or the ones who keep talking and talk ign like they are all microphone happy? Shut up and drive, bitch. Has anyone ever had the guy who likes to point out that Rosslyn is the first stop in the Commonwealth of Virginia? Totally unnecessary.

Yeah, it's like it's some sort of state law or something--now entering Virginia-please stop engaging in sodomy.

But the train drivers that watch you out the window as they shut the door in your face are even worse.

Anyway, what they're saying is all immaterial to me now--i've entered my own little musical world on the metro and don't have to listen to all the shit.

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)


Anyway, what they're saying is all immaterial to me now--i've entered my own little musical world on the metro and don't have to listen to all the shit.

Except for, of course, the Singin' Korean.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by MisterEbola
Except for, of course, the Singin' Korean.

I think my ipod will win even that battle.

[ms. naughty diplomat]

Originally posted by George Bush
I'll bet that you are absolutely right, the underwater tunnels probably cost an arm and a leg to build, and the bridges were undoubtedly not cheap, either. Is there a point that you wanted to make about that cost, or was that cost the point itself?

actually i think that was my point. and i do know a bit about urban planning, which is undoubtably a way more interesting topic than law. of course, as some of the problems with metro show, even urban planning professionals can't get everything right. part of the problem is that transit systems reflect the ideals of the time when they were conceived and for a comprehensive heavy rail system like metro, because of the time and cost of construction, it may well be oboslete by the time of completition.

metro was conceived during the 1950s and 1960s using the assumptions of the time - namely of suburban to city center commuting. the original system was not completed until about 2000 when the green line was finally completed. by that point, the edge city style of development has met that there are now many people who commute suburb to suburb rather than around. of course, the highway system which was also a product of 1950s or earlier planning (not only in washington but throughout the u.s.) is also woefully inadequate for modern needs. throughout the washington area there are abandoned and long gone rail lines that if they still existed could be the basis of a light rail system at a relatively low price (one which could essentially paralell the proposed metro line to dulles airport, another could have gone from rockville, maryland through bethesda to georgetown) because the track and right of way would have already been there. these rail lines are gone forever - they were destroyed in the 1950s and 1960s in an increditably short sighted move.

los angeles is of course the best and most classic example of the planning assumptions of yesterday turning into the urban nightmare of tomorrow. they have spend billions of dollars to not come close to recreating the street car system that they had in 1950 which was abandoned in favor of roads that today are just as obsolete as the street car seemed in 1955.

but there are tons of cities between washington and la who suffer from obsolete urban planning and today are trying to undo the damage that the decision to base almost everything on highways in the 1950s has caused. in fact, even in the cities that have public transit systems, they were mainly products of the 1960s where they were centered on getting people from the suburbs to downtown and do not reflect the modern trend towards decentralization of business offices. in fact, i think the main problem is that urban planning professionals spend the last 50 years trying to complete the plans created in the 1950s rather than coming up with new plans. i think the original interstate highway system just got completed a few years ago as well.

ms. naughty diplomat

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by ms. naughty diplomat
throughout the washington area there are abandoned and long gone rail lines that if they still existed could be the basis of a light rail system at a relatively low price (one which could essentially paralell the proposed metro line to dulles airport, another could have gone from rockville, maryland through bethesda to georgetown)

Yep, the W&OD would make for a fine commuter rail line.

Are they technically "gone forever"? I thought the rails to trails thing was technically an easement from the RRs to the RtT group,because otherwise the neighbors would get their land back. That said, it might well be politically impossible to reopen those rail lines, even if legally the right exists.

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Yeah, it's like it's some sort of state law or something--now entering Virginia-please stop engaging in sodomy.

As I pointed out to my wife last night, I do believe that sodomy is now legal. What a great country this is.

Originally posted by paigowprincess
Who is this metro loathing, concerned for the environmental poster with the smarts to not live in BF Maryland? Except fot the Alexandria part, you are like my total match! Unless its Old Town in which case there are no exceptions. And you know the true spelling of my "name". Vegas for the Fourth darling?

Paigow fishing for e-dates for a major holiday? I'm shocked.