I moved to Tokyo a few months ago and the train system here is as perfect as it can get. This includes the civilized passengers riding the train, clean, quiet, nobody is talking on their phones, etc.
@@shasmi93 100% my exact thoughts. It will never work in a place that does not follow civil society standards. I also lived near Seoul and the train system is also super efficient.
I love the trains in Tokyo. I was there again last year. During the rush hour trains can be quite crowded though. As a tourist I can try to avoid rush hour, but if I was an office worker, I must admit that it would annoy me if I had to stand for half an hour or more in a crowded train after a long and exhausting work day. Not sure how to fix that. Maybe with more flexible working hours. Public transport is only really enjoyable if you have a place to sit.
@@Dangic23 don’t get me wrong. I love us, and the fact that we are so crazy and loud is why we have the best art and entertainment in the world…. We just need to stop trying to force America to be things it never will be. We don’t do public transport. We do individualism and our own cars.
That's right. Highways pay for themes with gas taxes and tolls you cannot evade. So should public transit. If public transit can't pay for itself then it needs to be removed and dismantled.
@@walawala-fo7ds The only highways that actually pay for themselves are tolled. With few exceptions, the rest don't. Even with places that have profitable highways in the US, the rest of the streets and roads leading up to them are paid for by general funds and debt, not user fees like gas taxes.
Owning a car is nice, NEEDING a car sucks. I drive manual and would say by all definitions I'm a "car guy", but I would much prefer an efficient public transportation system like you would find in Japan or Europe. Cars are such a large expense on the owners through combination of insurance, gas, maintenance, etc.
As a car owner who doesn’t like driving tbqh, I’d love a robust universal public transit and walkable cities across Canada and America. Screw car dependency culture. I wanna hear birds singing, the squirrels, see deer in cities, and smell fresh air.
Realistically, move to Europe or Asia. It'll be decades until things improve sufficiently in America or Canada. Unless a small tourist town like Salida Colorado works for you.
@@bearcubdaycare It would still be nice to improve where you grew up. I would want my kids to be able to stay where they grew up because its people friendly, instead of moving to somewhere else (from Michigan btw, so yeah).
True. People tend to pick the travel option that's the most convenient for them for each trip. In a country where you literally need a car to even participate in society, and there are rarely any options, naturally people will associate the car with freedom and not owning a car with being stuck and trapped outside of society. In a country with viable options, what makes for the best option depends on what you're doing and where you're going.
The fossil fuel and automotive corporate lobby has a lot of power of driving govt. policies. They give more funding to build ugly-as-sin urban highways.
There are three things you can do to make public transportation popular. Make it safe, reliable, and clean. If you can do those 3 things people will ride.
This is a reality in many places in Europe. Car is an option not survival necessity. Sure cars are giving flexibility but are expensive and not everyone wants to drive.
Four things! Luxembourg has made its transit free. This would really be an incentive for people to switch to transit. Just avoiding the cost of fare systems probably pays for the remaining operating costs.
Why does public transit need to be profitable. Its a utility at the end of the day that millions of people depend on and adds value to surrounding businesses
If it's not profitable, you need to constantly supply it with an ever-increasing quantity of money, which means you have to infinitely extort everybody else. Nobody wants to be extorted more. Go pound sand.
Well if it’s not then it’s public money going down the drain for a service they aren’t using frequently. You need it to be profitable so the service is sustainable.
It does NOT work that way. Public transit is NOT supposed to be profitable. Only carbrains would argue otherwise. Trying to make public transit profitable will only succeed in putting more cars on the road. You need to realize that taxation tries to benefit society as a whole. But unfortunately, the ultra-rich _do not want_ to share their benefits because they do not want to share their wealth.
@@dubenforcer people benefit from public transit outside of using it. Housing near public transit is valued higher meaning more in property taxes. Less people driving means less pollution and less car accidents one of the leading causes of death and injury.
@@Da__goat public education isn't profitable but we understand that our society needs a literate population to function. Edit: you know what else isn't "profitable"? The roads most Americans drive on.
It will change when society doesn't say "there isn't enough parking" to something more like "why are there so many cars" Sincerely, A Resident of Car-Dependant San Antonio
@@Enrique-Garcia I mean we have a larger system than we did, but it has been a kind of "one step forward, two steps back" kind of improvement. Any progress we make in LA gets kneecapped by contentious hyper local opponents, mismanagement, disinvestment, and a contentious relationship with the LADOT
the paradox is that there will never be enough parking because the more parking created, the more spots get filled, thus creating an insidious feedback loop. the root problem is the fact there there are too many damn cars and we need alternatives asap
the comments here is a prime example of why public transit is struggling. people in North America see public transit as welfare for the poor and would rather fund the most outrageous "out there" projects before taking a look at public transit. the car brain culture is engrained into people's mindsets and that needs to change before we see real improvements in transit service. public transit in america is a joke compared to Europe and Asia. its an after thought for planners rather than planning projects around it. Even rural areas in Europe and Asia with lower population typically have better transit options compared to here. Its ironic that the land of "freedom" that is US and Canada won't allow its people to choose between driving or any other means of transport. there is no cohesive regional or state level transit planning. the way transit services are run is disjointed from what people really need from their transit providers. people want frequent services in their area, more point to point services, and more importantly people want ease of use. you still can't just tap your phone or credit card in most North American transit services.
The best way to sell cars is through public transit. My commute is 20 minutes by bicycle, 10 by car, & 1 hour by public transit. Most people are lazy & won't ride a bike or an e bike, ∴ cars are king.
It’s hard to make the argument to someone who doesn’t use public transit. Once you start driving then you see road and highway issues and that’s what you care about.
Maybe not for developers/real estate companies. I see more of them willing to build mixed use development, they just need to be nudged to build near transit stations and there you go.
Here in Texas where car is king the suburb roads are choked every day with parents taking kids to and from school while the school buses drive around empty.
@@ronm9428 honestly though schools buses once your in highschool are but really the seats gets too small 😅good enough for elementary to middle school but the last 2 years your basically outgrown the seats
Thank you for the video, CNBC. I am living in US and public transit lover. Hope it will be better. One of saddest thing was US devastated street cars in public by auto lobbying? and now arguing SDGs, share economy and/or CO2 emission etc. But I still gonna use public transit. :)
Poor quality transit service is a policy choice. The solution is simply funding transit to get to a state of good repair, and expand service periods, frequencies, and destinations. Transit is the most effective way to reduce personal transportation costs, roadway fatalities and carbon emissions.
The transit is a symptom of too much zoning and parking restrictions. Get rid of parking minimums, get rid of onerous zoning codes (build taller and denser; get rid of arcane fire codes, etc). and the density of people in one area will then create the demand for public transit and more methods to move massive amounts of people.
@@Dimitris_Half Investing in better infrastructure is 100% necessary but isn't a silver bullet solution. A complex web including zoning reform, investments in public infrastructure, and redevelopment of public spaces for pedestrians are all necessary and just focusing in on one will likely not lead to desired results.
All of the development restrictions were geared towards making things car friendly, this unfortunately meant the gutting of anything else, even local shops and public space, for the movement and storage of cars. This is inherently a political issue, as these are laws and regulations for development.
In the United States, public transport has an image problem. Buses are for the poor, cars are for the rich and successful, or aspiring to be that. You can invest whatever dollars in public transport, but without changing the public’s view of the transportation, the problem will inevitably reappear
I think true in many parts of the US, but I can attest that here in Chicago, buses are seen as a normal, every day transportation option for rich, poor, young and old. If it becomes used by enough people (a bit of a chicken and egg problem) that ideological stigma goes away.
I view public transportation as a limitation to where public transportation can take you. For example I'm in NYC and yes public transportation can be very handy if you're traveling in the 4 borough, you can travel outside to NYC like to long island but in my experience, it's either too slow or if you miss a train, then you'll have to wait ages for another one to arrive. The same goes to MTA in NYC. Not only that, crimes in the subways is also another problem in NYC. So I gave up after numerous promises from the MTA and started driving and one almost immediately I would never want to go back to riding public transportation. It's hard to go back and weather if you can still trust the safety of public transportation.
Public transit also keeps unsafe drivers off the road, i.e drunk people or older people who have lost the ability to safely drive but have no other options
More people being pushed into taking transit = less terrible drivers on the road, resulting in safer traffic and more enjoyable driving experience for car enthusiasts.
I'm a Brit and I've read and watched a lot of information and discussion on this subject. From this side of the pond I can't see there's enough political will in America to do this, on both sides of your politics. Too little investment for too long and the longer that goes on the harder it is to turn it around. Public transport has to reliable, frequent and accessible otherwise people won't use it. It seems from here that America views public transport as the domain of the poor. I am prepared to be persuaded otherwise though.
Look at the surveys in 6:09. The majority of the population wants alternatives to driving. Interest groups and inertia are the major blocking factors. Even so, if you go to major US cities you can already tell they are moving away from cars.
@@underratedbub Its all about political will....Personally I would say there are four pillars as follows:-To implement new planning requirements that include public transportation, new compulsory purchase laws on land, a national strategy on what is built and finally the money to build it. ..Take anyone of those pillars away and it falls down. That's my personal opinion.
@@Jeffhowardmeade it is a horrible thing. The fact we are forced to own a car. Spending thousands of dollars each year on fuel, maintenance, insurance etc.. not to mention wasted time being in traffic
Live far away in the suburbs -> distance between residential wand work area being too far -> many people will use private automobile -> more cars on urban roads -> more road widening project, ignoring housing projects -> cities become polluted and inhabitable Repeat the vicious cycle
I recently made the switch from primarily driving to public transit and it is one of the best changes ive made in my life. I save so much money on car maintenance and gas, and I run into some incredible and wonderful people, and it has allowed me to use the money I would have used on my car or gas to support local businesses more!
I'm glad that this has been getting talked about more, even as a car and motercycle guy, Japan opened my eyes to how freeing good public transit can be
It's interesting that when discussing the economics of transportation that two distinct vocabularies are applied; 'funding' for passenger rail and public transit but 'investment' for freeways and highways
Combining the widely perceived inefficiency of cars as a mode of transportation with the inefficiency of single-family housing definitely contributed to the higher cost of living and taxes.
@@OBSMProductionsYes, it’ll blow your mind if you don’t know about them already, but check out Strong Towns and the Growth Ponzi Scheme. Your intuition is spot on and thankfully there’s an amazingly vibrant organization working to raise awareness about this all over the country and change this sad situation.
America was built wrongly for decades and now it wants to play catch up in two minutes. Labor and construction is so expensive and inefficient compared to Europe. Lobbies of insurance companies, oil, gas, carmakers you name it against the change. Basically you have to throw a bomb in each city and rebuild it. Young generations prefer to not have a car but most of them are obligated. Uber doesn't help, its a shortcut. Its a huge challenge. First, lets stop spending 60% in the military complex. I'm sure, after that, there will be plenty of money for what Americans really need. Drivers will be there in the future, but liberty is about choices not impositions. Car, train, LRT, streetcar, bikes, e-bikes, Ubers, etc. All of that is needed.
The New York City region needs to get a single, unified fare payment system similar to what Tokyo did with Pasmo and Osaka did with PiTaPa. Imagine being able to ride PATH, New Jersey Transit near New York City, MTA Subway, Metro North commuter rail and Long Island Rail Road all on a single payment system. Just that change would dramatically increase ridership because payment would be so easy to do.
People like me come to the U.S. to be able to choose their own destiny, and then realize that you don't even have a choice on how to get to your job - you MUST have a car and that's it. So, no freedom even to choose how to get around.
You MUST have & pay for Car Insurance You MUST have a driver's License You MUST pay for maintenance & repairs You MUST pay for Gas But most importantly of all You must NOT be able to leave you house without a car. Also known as walking. Or risk serious danger
What's really sad is that people don't realize how car ownership, maintenance, insurance, and fuel costs are keeping them poor - they just keep begging for higher minimum wages and lower taxes.
Sure you can. Plenty of people in NYC and other cities live car free. But don't go looking for a house with a yard and demand society provide you a train 😂
I live east of LA and I take the bus on the 10 freeway whenever I go to work. It’s strange that more people don’t do it. I find it way more relaxing than sitting in stop and go traffic. Plus it’s cheaper than driving to work!
How sad is it that the largest city in America is having to resort to compromising trackless tram technology (that is used in tiny Chinese cities that aren't given priority by their government) to get any sort of improvements added to their transit system. How far this country has fallen.
They completely glossed over that 68% of people polled who identify as politically moderate thinks transport policy should shift more trips towards public transit, walking and cycling. For people who identify as moderately conservative, it’s an even 50/50 split. Even 47% of people who identify as conservative chose this option versus “make it easier for most people to drive for most trips.” Instead, the voice-over focuses on the extremes, where finally only 18% of very conservative people favor transport policy that supports more transit, cycling and walking. Check the chart yourself at the 6:24 timestamp.
it was the railroad company that destroyed ours, they raised the railroad tracks that prevented the electric street from crossing the tracks, also all the deaths didn't help either..
We've tried and that got us blindsided into WW1, WW2, and 9/11. Turns out there's only so much "focus on yourself" isolation you can have before violent haters penetrate all the way in.
Transportation freedom meaning having the opportunity to choose. I have two cars, but I chose to ride my bike and take public transport unless I am going to a place which does not have the density required. People who associate the car with freedom have basically only lived in suburbia / rural areas where the infrastructure doesnt support anything else.
I love my car and will continue to drive it. However, if there’s less cars on the road because public transport is viable, it’s a win for everyone. Lower insurance cost due to reduced likelihood of crashing. Good alternative if something ever goes wrong to you car (i.e. your three hour project turns into a three day one). Even if you never plan to use public transport you’ll still receive some of the benefit.
@@kailahmann1823 plus there are ppl who hates driving. I know ppl for whom cars are their babies on wheels, who are advocates for public transit. They want more road for themselves and know driving is not everyone's cup of tea.
trackless trams aren't a solution in any way. adding more road congestion and being forced to share space with cars is practically antithetical to improving public transit infrastructure
OK OK. There's a simple answer to this. PUT MONEY INTO IT. We have such a lack of funding into public transit that when people say they don't use it because its bad. Well no duh. But then they they argue against it when they have never used it. Its just not getting us anywhere.
Being stuck in traffic is honestly miserable. I am thankful to live next to the train, amtrak, and regional rail. Not needing to really drive makes your car last longer, and I probably go to the gas station once a month if need be. Combine that with remote work and chef's kiss.....that is why companies lobby so hard against things giving you more freedom, generally.
You’re forgetting a key piece of information. At the peak of the pandemic the stations weren’t manned and the metrocard vending machines weren’t accepting money because they were full. To add, to protect the bus drivers you had passengers enter through the rear doors that contributed to the evasion. I speak from personal experience.
why does public transit need to be profitable? its purpose is to move people around, quickly and efficiently, not make money. you don't ask highways to be profitable, or the new road built in town to be profitable so why does the metro need to be profitable? it's such an unfair double standard
Maybe we should also be investing in our bike network. I noticed that Paris and London and Amsterdam have wonderful bike networks that supplement the transit network which allows people to better manage the inflation costs with the subway.
There is no data indicating LA Metro is facing a $1 billion deficit. They are in much better financial situation than the other city systems mentioned. Where did you get the data?
As someone who lives in Philadelphia I hate SEPTA so much I had to get a car and now I drive everywhere… and SEPTA is one of the better systems in the country.
@@acornsucks2111Nonsense, driving is and always will be less safe than transit. The numbers aren’t even close. Driving everyday is the riskiest thing average people do in modern society.
leave it to cnbc to dedicate 15-20 minutes to focusing on profitability and 'crime' rather than improving the actual infrastructure, building denser cities, de-incentivizing car usage and igniting a cultural change that places more value on public transit and walkability. half of this video is dedicated to a red herring rather than actual, concrete solutions that would increase ridership ten fold
this country's entire thing has been "your house is your retirement savings" because pensions are gone and dead and 401ks aren't reliable. so yeah people are going to defend the property value of their homes over everything else. it's so much easier to talk about tweaking systems for profitability and to fight crime. what you're proposing is not feasible, would take trillions of dollars, and decades to even achieve. if we even had the knowledge to do so. america simply lacks the expertise to run competent transit networks.
@@mikeydude750 in your make believe world, are Americans just inherently incapable of creating efficient public transit systems according to some innate gene or something? try coming up with an argument that isn't nonsensical next time
I used to exclusively take public transit. But then it just became so unreliable I ended up getting a car. Being 30 minutes late for work or sitting in transit for 1.5 hours isn’t good. I would love to get rid of my car because it’s so expensive, but I can’t because I won’t be able to work and support myself and my family
@misterfunnybones Seriously, i live in NJ and it is crazy when i tell people about my ebike experience and they don't believe me. I have a 52v 60ah ebike and for context how much range i have, i can ride from Newark, NJ to Manhattan, NY going through the George Washington Pedestrian/Cyclist ramp which is free to use, in about an 1 hr+. In comparison, if i drove, that's about $16-$20 dollars in tolls alone not accounting for gas just to enter NY or if i took the train, that would cost about $14 round trip. I have found that cars in this country have a hold of society. People believe that having a car is a necessity and in alot of cases, signals a status quo whether it be middle class or the wealthy and combined with the business nature cars provide(Auto manufacturers, Dealerships, Auto insurance etc). People are unwilling to try out new efficient and low cost means of transportation.
No one enjoys daily driving in cities and suburbs. The idyllic country-road drive is not the norm. The reality is usually infuriating traffic, terrible drivers, and circling the same block or parking lot for 15 mins looking for parking. Public transit means people who can't or don't want to drive are free not to. There will be fewer drunk or elderly drivers on the road. Those who need or want to drive will enjoy less traffic. Even rural residents, for whom driving is a necessity, will enjoy lower gas prices due to lower demand. Public transit benefits everyone.
Public transportation across Europe and Asia is embraced while America has a disdain for it. Here, Public transportation is for poir, inner city, and minorities who can't afford cars. Cars are symbols of status abd independence. We don't have to share personal space with "those " people. Therefore we demand that our tax dollars subsidize riads and not transit because those people don't deserve anything nuce, and if it isn't nice, i won't take it.
It's ridiculous that PUBLIC TRANSIT, a PUBLIC SERVICE needs to be profitable or it's "bad". If you factor in developments that spring up around new public transit however, it IS profitable in most instances. Take the Green Line LRT SW extension here in Minneapolis, profitable new developments have already sprung up along the line, bringing in new residents, generating new jobs, and millions in new property tax revenue for the state and the metro, and the extension isn't even set to open until 2027. We have everything to gain from investing in public transit, and everything to lose by continuing this multi-trillion dollar car-centric ponzi scheme.
To make transit work, we have to develop our cities properly and develop areas around transit hubs. In my city, Almost all of the train stations on the north city of the city are basically abandoned. One station is devoted to a football stadium that is unused most of the week, another is at a closed down arena with almost nothing else around it, and the next few are all in really undesirable areas with low ridership. The city is also ridiculously sprawled out and poorly served, both by transit and because of a complete lack of services and businesses. To address fare dodging and security, the answer is simple: staffed stations. In Japan, at almost every gate, there is paid staff. They monitor entry points, deal with fare issues, and act as station security. And I'm not talking about hundreds of staff. I'm talking about the largest stations served by just a few staff booths because all entrances lead to large, monitored collections of gates. Most stations only have 1 or 2 such booths to handle almost every single gate. Where I live, every single complaint about safety can be solved by having staff working in stations. Deploying security or police to stations only when issues are reported means longer periods of non-control and thus increased safety problems, and deploying security to support a train works the same way. If you instead of staff at stations, they can immediately deal with problems in the station and can quickly deploy to deal with issues on trains. Lastly, additional security means actually doing something about homelessness. People needing to sleep on trains and in stations means they don't have anywhere to go. People using hard drugs on trains and in stations means we have failed both as a society as well as in terms of infrastructure. Using a housing first model and actually funding health, occupational, and recovery programs means getting people off the streets. If you have a place to sleep, you don't need to sleep on the train. If you have a place where you can safely and cleanly use hard drugs, you're not using them in stations. But if you are off the streets, in a safe place, and able to go through treatment while in that safe place, you're not really going to be using hard drugs anymore. Actually doing something about homelessness instead of breaking up camps (displacing the problem), closing treatment and safe-use centres (displacing the problem), and doing nothing (not addressing the problem) means you're not going to be pushing problems into public spaces like train stations and instead will be drawing those problems away so that the transit system can focus on transit issues instead of social issues.
Why doesn't the New York subway have automated trains and platform screen doors? The former would cut costs, the latter add safety, and the city is big enough.
The station platforms would need to be rebuilt to handle the added weight of the platform screen doors. And the MTA runs a mixed fleet of different trains which has a different set of door positions. Until there is a uniform fleet standard it would make it difficult unless you instal platform screen doors that are nimble and can reposition itself based on the type of train. I’ve seen mock ups of this in Japan but that’s not ready for Primetime.
Automated trains are expensive and hard to add to an old system like NYC subway. Mixed fleet of trains means the signalling would also need to be compatible with all the fleets.
That's the problem. No dedicated tracks, no one in our government even cares about our access to modern, frequent, clean and professional service. China and Japan make everyone else look like crap.
"Our cost of building subway assets is five times at the upper end what it costs to build a global subway assets". Why? Tokyo, Singapore, London have similar cost of living as NYC. Is that something cannot be told? It is repeatedly mentioned in the video about the high cost in NYC, but there is no disclosure of the actual cost in $. The blame of lack in government investment is meaningless if there is no real comparison in the actual amount invested. Similarly, operational wise, thank you for mentioning that the MTA operating budget (sans capital) is $19.3 billion. However, there is no comparison to the cost for operating similar systems in cities with equivalent cost of living around the world (Tokyo, Seoul, London...). I personally did an analysis on the MTA's and Tokyo Transit's financial statements before the pandemic, and the disparity in cost was stunning, quite similar to the statement above. Yet until now, no publication in the US has been talking about the issue. This is the first video I encounter that mentioned the cost, but with no real analysis or comparison. We cannot solve any problem if we do not identify what the problem is. Blaming can catch public attention, but not more. Additional investment without knowing exactly where the $ go is equivalent to throwing $ to a rabbit hole.
The gov't is to split on it to pass anything. Plus main reason it takes years before any project is built is because of to much regulations. In NYC you have to pass through agencies and organizations just so your project meets their needs before you can start construction. By then a whole new set of politicians are in office and process repeats
it cost a bit $3,450 for a studio rental to $7,439 for a 4-bedroom rental, same with renting businesses it's also in a urban decay ua-cam.com/video/Zjd1WNhGliY/v-deo.html then the subway you have this ua-cam.com/video/44-IpvZRfAw/v-deo.html and a mall in York just closed down ua-cam.com/video/IRiHBs62jfE/v-deo.html&t
@@knightwolf3511 we need vastly more housing, everywhere. people also need to be allowed to have smaller units. 300-400 sq ft studio apartments are quite enough for a single person living in a city where odds are they're mostly eating out all the time.
This is not about funding. It’s 100% land use. You could take a random city in America and invest 100 billion dollars into an extensive light rail system and it will still spit out low ridership because it is impossible to make it convenient with both low density development enforced by central planning and strange cul de sac road design where you can’t conveniently walk directly to a transit stop. You must allow mass transit become the market choice, and the only way to do this is to legalize all forms of housing and getting rid of parking minimums, large set backs, lot coverage ratios, etc.
Zoning and housing regulations seem to be the root of the problem (and so many other problems with American cities). The fact that anything denser than a single family detached house is illegal on 80%+ properties, and that housing and shops can't be built near each other, makes cars the only practical means of transport for the vast majority of the US. Public transit won't make a comeback until housing rules allow for more density.
The problem is, work has changed since COVID-19. People are working from home half to full time...and they have no intention of commuting in. The transit systems have to be more dynamic. What are they doing for service on Friday through Sunday? Why restrict late night service when people are needing to go home coming from the bar? Do they take a $30 Uber or a $4 on the subway? Point this out. Secondly, why isn't there more policing on the transit systems? People are tired of being hassled, panhandled and roughed up. Make the cars and stations a clean and friendly environment.
The problem with US public transit system lies not with the organization or company running it or with the government, but with the American people who use them. They have no respect for the things that they have. Public transit works in every developed country except here. Most people are too gullible to understand the importance of public transit and remaining are forced to use the subpar service. Until the american public understands the importance of public transit and have respect for the systems already in place, things will never change.
Actually the Originization is why it costs so much to build new transit, because there are all these middlemen and bureaucracy and spaghetti politics that drive up the cost
Good video but I agree with many others who’ve posted, that it’s a very difficult problem to fix due to highly polarized society on the political spectrum (combined with strong auto lobbies on one end). Transportation needs continuous evolution, like every 25-30 years, to be both useful for masses and cost-efficient at the same time. Obviously China and even India seem to have better transit infrastructure today because it’s been built in the last 2-3 decades. It’s a function of what timeline we’re living in. But if they don’t continuously evolve that over next 4-5 decades, they’ll be in a similar spot where US is today.
One of the big problems lots of public transit has(and something I’ve commonly seen on SEPTA in PA) is people skipping on fares. I’d say more than half the people I’ve seen get on the subway in Philadelphia jump the turnstile and don’t pay the fare so SEPTA ends up missing a lot of revenue.
If governments are serious about fighting climate change they should make the relatively small investment in making public transport free, make it available in all major corridors, and give those vehicles priority access so they can glide past traffic.
We tried that actually (making transit free). What happened is all of the homeless moved in and have essentially taken over public transit. Exposure to drugs is so common the agencies warn people not to take it.
Contrast that with Prague, CZ : 1.1mm population, with 3 subway lines (soon to be 4); 26 tramlines; 150 city bus lines, with another 560(!) that extend out to 80km from the centre (the city is only 20km side to side); and 80 regional train lines. Thse all run from 04:30am until midnight, and then the night tram/bus service runs on the main lines in the intervening hours. Connections are vry frequent, and run on time. And all of this for only $0.44 per day with an annual ticket. That's right : my annual transit card here costs
I worked in transit in CA the issue is it really has questionable safety issues.. i was attacked as a driver and nothing was done about it. Plus who wants to lose their job for being one minute late anyways. Thats why their is an issue with hiring operators.
Driving is only fun in 2 contexts, rural 0 traffic, and dedicated race courses. The interstate is boring with intermittent frustration (traffic jams), and terror (near misses and crashes). Inside cities congestion is nightmarish, frustrating, and potentially slower than just walking. And this is ignoring all externalities like polution and pedestrian endangerment.
It's cool as hell when it isn't congested. Some of my best driving memories are driving on that stupidly massive segment of the Katy Freeway in Downtown Houston at 2 AM. The problem is for everything else. Real life isn't 2 AM and for every nice experience I had with a car, I had dozens of bad ones.
When I take transit, my round trip fare is $3.00-$4.00. If I drive, the use of the street is free, there is free parking when I get there. I pay pennies in gasoline and vehicle costs. In the US, we've become a big fan of user fees, except for drivers. When it's all you can eat for the same low price, people eat more. The same goes for freeways.
Most of the old street car lines were basically a real estate scam with respect to the fact that most of the street car companies where either created by or owned by real estate companies the idea being that u buy a bunch of land out in the boonies on the edge of the city develop it and then run a street car line into the city so that persons can easily get to the city and urban core. Now the development is connected to the city and the land price thus increases. Its a similar model to country clubs and golf courses in modern suburbs.
The US is so far behind countries like Japan. They have a perfect example of public transit, with trains going everywhere, that are fast, frequent, safe and clean. You don't even need a car with all the transit options available, and being able to ride a bike in the people friendly streets. As a New Yorker, living in one of the US' best cities with public transit, I fully admire Japan for what they have and think that what we have is a joke.
Take 10% of the US military budget and put it into public transit, I just fix ur problem ur welcome. Yes I know this will not happen cause the military industrial complex won’t allow it.
@@anmolbargujar it’s just allocation of money, 10% of military budget is around 80 billion reallocated to public transit, what kind of source do u want?
Public transit will never get better, long as these raci..........I mean wealthy NIM........I mean some people think public transit as welfare for the poor, and lobby their government officials not to improve and build better transit.
@SparklyObserve-nr8rw So because some people do not want to take "public transport because they might be assaulted or robbed there" we should not make public transit better? Part of making transit better is to make it safe. L Take.
Not having to use NYC public transit has done wonders to my mental and physical health. You fix public transit by fixing it. Then, when it is a better choice then people will use it.
You need a culture shift. People are attached to their cars so much that they are almost emotional support vehicles, not even cars. Regardless of their high costs, people still favor cars as long as cities and states keep building thousands and thousands of kilometers of roads (Ironically, making traffic worse). Secondly, you cannot create the concept of suburbia, shooting yourself in the foot, where there is not even reasonable WALKABILITY, and then expect people to not need cars, which fuels building more roads, which fuels traffic. Car companies shot transit in the head decades ago. And don't get me started on the stupidity in our zoning.
Roads and cars for each family is way cheaper than public transit and rails + tunnels. It's not even close. The United States suffers from extreme amounts of corruption in public works projects. It's better to let people keep their own damn money and let them figure out transportation. Rather than create a centralized monopoly that forces everyone to pay into it in the name of "public service" Trillions of dollars of tax payer money literally disappears every few years. Not even just spent on overpriced contractors. Literally just missing.
@TheLPRnetwork Yes I do. Do you want me to copy paste the numbers in here? The federal budget is about 6 trillion dollars. Only about 50b a year goes into roads highways and bridges. Subway costs 2 billion dollars per mile. And costs 10x as much per mile to maintain tracks than roads. Not even properly maintained either It's not even close to the same magnitude. More importantly the cost of public transit. Worldwide. Not even just in the USA. Is rapidly outpacing inflation even as service stays the same or gets worse. It's not sustainable. Fundamentally unsustainable because the people who own the monopoly will always be able to come up woth excuses for why they need more money and then they force tax payers to cough up. Over and over and over again. Just to maintain service as is. This isn't fundamental to the technology it's fundamental to human organizations that can force their customers to pay and don't have much accountability, like every government project ever.
Public transport should be free at the point of use. Streets should be reserved for emergency, delivery and service vehicles. 16 to 19 thousand are murdered in the entire United States. 30 to 40 thousand people are killed in car accidents.
And Japan high speed rail has had fatality since inception (1964). Although the trainline was found only to be partially at fault, it made changes to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future.
The costs of fare collection and enforcement are so great that the sensible thing to do is to abolish the fare entirely. The added convenience would considerably increase ridership, reducing the per-rider subsidy.
Big banks they interested in maximum household expenditures Thus it's more beneficial for them to each family to pay for one-story house individually while maintaining several cars The more you wrapped in services and additional expenses the better for them. The best example of this is American pharmacy. USA was created by Amsterdam and London money changers. They don’t even allow your capital voting representation.
It was cheaper to just build roads to connect cities especially after WW2. Then we went overbaord and everyone forgot about public transit. It pushed the maintenance of a car which would have been a train cab unto the user. All they need to do is build roads
Big banks they interested in maximum household expenditures Thus it's more beneficial for them to each family to pay for one-story house individually while maintaining several cars The more you wrapped in services and additional expenses the better for them. American pharmacy as an example. USA was created by Amsterdam and London money changers. They don’t even allow voting representation of US capital.
Actually big cities in 3rd world countries often have quite extensive public transit, unlike in the US. Reason being that most cannot afford cars so public transit is needed to get most people around
We need to do what New York did and charge people for driving, however that money should go straight to funding better transit. Then, we wouldn’t have to increase fare costs.
General Motors, Standard Oil and Firestone Tires got busted for conspiring and CNBC mentions it without actually informing the viewer, disgusting corporate behavior as usual!
@@charlierogers8704 not many just about 10% Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 was the streetcars and electric utilities, you could only own one meaning you had to sell off the other
Philippines got this extreme car centric mentality as well. Unlike Thailand and Indonesia, Philippine public transport is so bad. There is a rail project cut by 3 kilometers because rich people dont want poor people easier access to their place.
Most of the world lives in more dense urban areas than do people in the US. It's much easier to build the infrastructure for city transit than to provide it for rural or even suburban populations.
@@Jeffhowardmeade actually Canada has much better buses they have gotten pretty good at Building Subways, and Australia has some of the best Commuter train systems if you put them together you get a fantastic transit system
I moved to Tokyo a few months ago and the train system here is as perfect as it can get.
This includes the civilized passengers riding the train, clean, quiet, nobody is talking on their phones, etc.
Anddddd that’s why public transit will never work in America. We are too rambunctious and rude.
@@shasmi93
100% my exact thoughts.
It will never work in a place that does not follow civil society standards.
I also lived near Seoul and the train system is also super efficient.
I love the trains in Tokyo. I was there again last year. During the rush hour trains can be quite crowded though. As a tourist I can try to avoid rush hour, but if I was an office worker, I must admit that it would annoy me if I had to stand for half an hour or more in a crowded train after a long and exhausting work day. Not sure how to fix that. Maybe with more flexible working hours. Public transport is only really enjoyable if you have a place to sit.
No amount of money or funding can change the culture here. We have a cultural rot, and it’s usually people of a certain…background
@@Dangic23 don’t get me wrong. I love us, and the fact that we are so crazy and loud is why we have the best art and entertainment in the world…. We just need to stop trying to force America to be things it never will be. We don’t do public transport. We do individualism and our own cars.
If highways don’t have to be profitable, then neither does public transit
Thats good because their not.
that’s such a good point. people complain that public transit makes no money well… lol
I was coming here just to post that same point.
That's right. Highways pay for themes with gas taxes and tolls you cannot evade. So should public transit. If public transit can't pay for itself then it needs to be removed and dismantled.
@@walawala-fo7ds The only highways that actually pay for themselves are tolled. With few exceptions, the rest don't. Even with places that have profitable highways in the US, the rest of the streets and roads leading up to them are paid for by general funds and debt, not user fees like gas taxes.
I believe that true freedom of movement is when owning a car is an option, not a necessity.
It is. You can opt to live where it is not needed. However society should not be forced to accommodate anyone who is living outside what is required
@@cmdrls212 But by that logic, you cannot describe what "is required" if the government continues to have policies that forces you into one box
Owning a car is nice, NEEDING a car sucks. I drive manual and would say by all definitions I'm a "car guy", but I would much prefer an efficient public transportation system like you would find in Japan or Europe. Cars are such a large expense on the owners through combination of insurance, gas, maintenance, etc.
@@ahyes589 Exactly. My partner is also a huge car guy but would much rather use a reliable transit system than drive his car places.
An adult will make choices based on reality, other than begging for true freedom.
As a car owner who doesn’t like driving tbqh, I’d love a robust universal public transit and walkable cities across Canada and America. Screw car dependency culture. I wanna hear birds singing, the squirrels, see deer in cities, and smell fresh air.
Realistically, move to Europe or Asia. It'll be decades until things improve sufficiently in America or Canada. Unless a small tourist town like Salida Colorado works for you.
LOL
@@bearcubdaycare It would still be nice to improve where you grew up. I would want my kids to be able to stay where they grew up because its people friendly, instead of moving to somewhere else (from Michigan btw, so yeah).
then walk
"I wanna hear birds singing, the squirrels, see deer in cities, and smell fresh air."
What first world city has this?
"Americans love cars." Largely because of marketing from auto manufacturers, subsidized by the government. Trains are pretty easy to love if you try.
True. People tend to pick the travel option that's the most convenient for them for each trip. In a country where you literally need a car to even participate in society, and there are rarely any options, naturally people will associate the car with freedom and not owning a car with being stuck and trapped outside of society. In a country with viable options, what makes for the best option depends on what you're doing and where you're going.
Yes ! And you can sleep, or eat, or watch a movie, or read a book on the train
@@Czechbound Public transit, especially lite rail and subways, is where you gets harassed by drug addicts and thieves.
@@DuffyGabithat not really the fault of mass transit. That the fault of failure of society.
@@gamerfan8445 Thank you for pointing that out--I hate when people blame transit for the issues caused by the people.
I’m confused… how come highways don’t have to turn a profit but mass transit does?
Because corporations dont own the highways.. but they do own the railroads and public transit abd it shouldn't be that way honestly
The fossil fuel and automotive corporate lobby has a lot of power of driving govt. policies. They give more funding to build ugly-as-sin urban highways.
There are three things you can do to make public transportation popular. Make it safe, reliable, and clean. If you can do those 3 things people will ride.
Agree
cars are better
This is a reality in many places in Europe. Car is an option not survival necessity. Sure cars are giving flexibility but are expensive and not everyone wants to drive.
Four things! Luxembourg has made its transit free. This would really be an incentive for people to switch to transit. Just avoiding the cost of fare systems probably pays for the remaining operating costs.
You missed convenient. If it's not convenient, those others don't matter.
Why does public transit need to be profitable. Its a utility at the end of the day that millions of people depend on and adds value to surrounding businesses
If it's not profitable, you need to constantly supply it with an ever-increasing quantity of money, which means you have to infinitely extort everybody else. Nobody wants to be extorted more. Go pound sand.
Well if it’s not then it’s public money going down the drain for a service they aren’t using frequently. You need it to be profitable so the service is sustainable.
It does NOT work that way. Public transit is NOT supposed to be profitable. Only carbrains would argue otherwise. Trying to make public transit profitable will only succeed in putting more cars on the road. You need to realize that taxation tries to benefit society as a whole. But unfortunately, the ultra-rich _do not want_ to share their benefits because they do not want to share their wealth.
@@dubenforcer people benefit from public transit outside of using it. Housing near public transit is valued higher meaning more in property taxes. Less people driving means less pollution and less car accidents one of the leading causes of death and injury.
@@Da__goat public education isn't profitable but we understand that our society needs a literate population to function.
Edit: you know what else isn't "profitable"? The roads most Americans drive on.
It will change when society doesn't say "there isn't enough parking" to something more like "why are there so many cars"
Sincerely,
A Resident of Car-Dependant San Antonio
We've been saying that for years in the LA area, hasn't changed squat.
@@Enrique-Garcia I mean we have a larger system than we did, but it has been a kind of "one step forward, two steps back" kind of improvement. Any progress we make in LA gets kneecapped by contentious hyper local opponents, mismanagement, disinvestment, and a contentious relationship with the LADOT
Another throwaway cringe comment
@@Enrique-GarciaHLA passed so that’s a sign of change.
the paradox is that there will never be enough parking because the more parking created, the more spots get filled, thus creating an insidious feedback loop. the root problem is the fact there there are too many damn cars and we need alternatives asap
the comments here is a prime example of why public transit is struggling. people in North America see public transit as welfare for the poor and would rather fund the most outrageous "out there" projects before taking a look at public transit. the car brain culture is engrained into people's mindsets and that needs to change before we see real improvements in transit service.
public transit in america is a joke compared to Europe and Asia. its an after thought for planners rather than planning projects around it. Even rural areas in Europe and Asia with lower population typically have better transit options compared to here.
Its ironic that the land of "freedom" that is US and Canada won't allow its people to choose between driving or any other means of transport.
there is no cohesive regional or state level transit planning. the way transit services are run is disjointed from what people really need from their transit providers.
people want frequent services in their area, more point to point services, and more importantly people want ease of use. you still can't just tap your phone or credit card in most North American transit services.
So is a cnbc video. Most of the people who watch it have no interest in the poor
Bingo, you get it!
i like how they assume everyone can drive 😭
@@llamapartyy Hell, most of the people who own cars can't!
The best way to sell cars is through public transit. My commute is 20 minutes by bicycle, 10 by car, & 1 hour by public transit. Most people are lazy & won't ride a bike or an e bike, ∴ cars are king.
There are none or not enough lobbying money for public transit.
It’s hard to make the argument to someone who doesn’t use public transit. Once you start driving then you see road and highway issues and that’s what you care about.
Already spend billions and no one chooses to ride.
@@acornsucks2111 No one? Where are you living?
Maybe not for developers/real estate companies. I see more of them willing to build mixed use development, they just need to be nudged to build near transit stations and there you go.
You should not need lobbying for reasonable actions. Lobbyists are there for corporate initiative interests and protected gains.
Here in Texas where car is king the suburb roads are choked every day with parents taking kids to and from school while the school buses drive around empty.
Why?
@@danieldaniels7571 Because it is extremely uncool to ride the bus. Only losers ride the bus.
@@ronm9428 honestly though schools buses once your in highschool are but really the seats gets too small 😅good enough for elementary to middle school but the last 2 years your basically outgrown the seats
Thats wishful thinking, the buses would just be packed with kids, which is equally as annoying. I've seen it in my city
@@ronm9428walking to the bus stop
Thank you for the video, CNBC.
I am living in US and public transit lover.
Hope it will be better.
One of saddest thing was US devastated street cars in public by auto lobbying? and now arguing SDGs, share economy and/or CO2 emission etc.
But I still gonna use public transit. :)
Poor quality transit service is a policy choice. The solution is simply funding transit to get to a state of good repair, and expand service periods, frequencies, and destinations. Transit is the most effective way to reduce personal transportation costs, roadway fatalities and carbon emissions.
The transit is a symptom of too much zoning and parking restrictions. Get rid of parking minimums, get rid of onerous zoning codes (build taller and denser; get rid of arcane fire codes, etc). and the density of people in one area will then create the demand for public transit and more methods to move massive amounts of people.
@@Dimitris_Half Investing in better infrastructure is 100% necessary but isn't a silver bullet solution. A complex web including zoning reform, investments in public infrastructure, and redevelopment of public spaces for pedestrians are all necessary and just focusing in on one will likely not lead to desired results.
Along with dangerous. White liberals have turned decent culture in a war zone
All of the development restrictions were geared towards making things car friendly, this unfortunately meant the gutting of anything else, even local shops and public space, for the movement and storage of cars. This is inherently a political issue, as these are laws and regulations for development.
@@Dimitris_Halfhe right
Public Transit Does Not Prevent Climate Change Or Global Warming
In the United States, public transport has an image problem. Buses are for the poor, cars are for the rich and successful, or aspiring to be that. You can invest whatever dollars in public transport, but without changing the public’s view of the transportation, the problem will inevitably reappear
I think true in many parts of the US, but I can attest that here in Chicago, buses are seen as a normal, every day transportation option for rich, poor, young and old. If it becomes used by enough people (a bit of a chicken and egg problem) that ideological stigma goes away.
outside of a few cities, you are correct.
that’s why they call it the “death spiral” because lower ridership/investment leads to worse quality which leads to less ridership etc
Reopen asylum and force addicts away from transit facilities
I view public transportation as a limitation to where public transportation can take you. For example I'm in NYC and yes public transportation can be very handy if you're traveling in the 4 borough, you can travel outside to NYC like to long island but in my experience, it's either too slow or if you miss a train, then you'll have to wait ages for another one to arrive. The same goes to MTA in NYC. Not only that, crimes in the subways is also another problem in NYC. So I gave up after numerous promises from the MTA and started driving and one almost immediately I would never want to go back to riding public transportation. It's hard to go back and weather if you can still trust the safety of public transportation.
Public transit also keeps unsafe drivers off the road, i.e drunk people or older people who have lost the ability to safely drive but have no other options
I asked my Texas friend how they date and go to sports games or otherwise imbibe and they said people routinely drive drunk 😢.
More people being pushed into taking transit = less terrible drivers on the road, resulting in safer traffic and more enjoyable driving experience for car enthusiasts.
I'm a Brit and I've read and watched a lot of information and discussion on this subject. From this side of the pond I can't see there's enough political will in America to do this, on both sides of your politics. Too little investment for too long and the longer that goes on the harder it is to turn it around. Public transport has to reliable, frequent and accessible otherwise people won't use it. It seems from here that America views public transport as the domain of the poor. I am prepared to be persuaded otherwise though.
You're right. Using public transit in the US feels like punishment. It's deliberately designed that way.
Look at the surveys in 6:09. The majority of the population wants alternatives to driving. Interest groups and inertia are the major blocking factors. Even so, if you go to major US cities you can already tell they are moving away from cars.
@@underratedbub Its all about political will....Personally I would say there are four pillars as follows:-To implement new planning requirements that include public transportation, new compulsory purchase laws on land, a national strategy on what is built and finally the money to build it. ..Take anyone of those pillars away and it falls down. That's my personal opinion.
I just went on my first long Amtrak trip this week and it was amazing. Looking forward to them updating their fleet though, but I still recommend it.
there currently buying older routes that where sold off / ended in 1970s. in 1970s around 20 railroad companies went bankrupt
Oil + car maker + car insurance = poor public transit
You wrote that like it's a bad thing.
Also airline companies
@@Jeffhowardmeade it is a horrible thing. The fact we are forced to own a car. Spending thousands of dollars each year on fuel, maintenance, insurance etc.. not to mention wasted time being in traffic
@@Jeffhowardmeade insurance is basically a scam in US.
wrong
Live far away in the suburbs -> distance between residential wand work area being too far -> many people will use private automobile -> more cars on urban roads -> more road widening project, ignoring housing projects -> cities become polluted and inhabitable
Repeat the vicious cycle
Sound typical Texas though. 😅
I recently made the switch from primarily driving to public transit and it is one of the best changes ive made in my life. I save so much money on car maintenance and gas, and I run into some incredible and wonderful people, and it has allowed me to use the money I would have used on my car or gas to support local businesses more!
A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.
Switzerland is the example, here literally everyone uses trains.
rich people use cars
@im_a-walking_shitpost_machine yes, in the USA, because the social fabric is long gone.
Rich people use cars
in other countries rich use cars too@@gabriell.4440
I'm glad that this has been getting talked about more, even as a car and motercycle guy, Japan opened my eyes to how freeing good public transit can be
It's interesting that when discussing the economics of transportation that two distinct vocabularies are applied; 'funding' for passenger rail and public transit but 'investment' for freeways and highways
Combining the widely perceived inefficiency of cars as a mode of transportation with the inefficiency of single-family housing definitely contributed to the higher cost of living and taxes.
Ant farms are much more efficient, but not everyone wants to be an ant.
bot
It makes you wonder if that's the reason why we're in a huge deficit, since these development patterns were standardized across the nation 🤔
@@OBSMProductionsYes, it’ll blow your mind if you don’t know about them already, but check out Strong Towns and the Growth Ponzi Scheme. Your intuition is spot on and thankfully there’s an amazingly vibrant organization working to raise awareness about this all over the country and change this sad situation.
An inefficienct lifestyle is fine: IF you limit the population and have zero tolerance immigration policy.
Frankly, unfixable.
Well, would you look at this brand new 50 lane highway!
As a driver… idk why that sounds like it would decrease traffic 🫣💀
@@Iamyanni99Research the economic concept of induced demand
@@Iamyanni99 😂 That why it's popular
@@Iamyanni99it would decrease traffic. And driving would be safer.
I'm pro upping density and more public transit or all types. That said, roads have all sorts of uses outside of just personal transportation
America was built wrongly for decades and now it wants to play catch up in two minutes. Labor and construction is so expensive and inefficient compared to Europe. Lobbies of insurance companies, oil, gas, carmakers you name it against the change. Basically you have to throw a bomb in each city and rebuild it. Young generations prefer to not have a car but most of them are obligated. Uber doesn't help, its a shortcut. Its a huge challenge. First, lets stop spending 60% in the military complex. I'm sure, after that, there will be plenty of money for what Americans really need. Drivers will be there in the future, but liberty is about choices not impositions. Car, train, LRT, streetcar, bikes, e-bikes, Ubers, etc. All of that is needed.
Uber is outsourcing the driving to somebody, who is even more broke than yourself.
tell China and Russia to stop wars as well north Korea then maybe. honestly it sounds like you want Russia to take over Ukraine
The New York City region needs to get a single, unified fare payment system similar to what Tokyo did with Pasmo and Osaka did with PiTaPa. Imagine being able to ride PATH, New Jersey Transit near New York City, MTA Subway, Metro North commuter rail and Long Island Rail Road all on a single payment system. Just that change would dramatically increase ridership because payment would be so easy to do.
More/less coming soon within a few years. Contactless payment everywhere via OMNY and whatever NJ has
America's biggest downfall is thinking everything has to turn a profit - Including Public Transit.
American public transport is 3rd world class.
nope
If you travel well enough you'll notice that so called 3rd world have much better transit. Much safer, cleaner and more frequent.
@@anmolbargujar YEP
3rd world transit is just no transit, and us has transit, no matter how bad it is@@ASD-DAD
America is approaching 3rd world
Tax the rich, build public transit, win
Ultimately, the future of public transit in the US depends on our willingness to invest in it and make it a priority.
Liberal bot asking for more money. That's odd.
@@acornsucks2111This person has over 100K subscribers. You are certifiably brain dead if you think that they are a bot.
People like me come to the U.S. to be able to choose their own destiny, and then realize that you don't even have a choice on how to get to your job - you MUST have a car and that's it. So, no freedom even to choose how to get around.
You MUST have & pay for Car Insurance
You MUST have a driver's License
You MUST pay for maintenance & repairs
You MUST pay for Gas
But most importantly of all
You must NOT be able to leave you house without a car. Also known as walking. Or risk serious danger
What's really sad is that people don't realize how car ownership, maintenance, insurance, and fuel costs are keeping them poor - they just keep begging for higher minimum wages and lower taxes.
@@TheLPRnetwork 100% accurate
Made in USA 😂
Sure you can. Plenty of people in NYC and other cities live car free. But don't go looking for a house with a yard and demand society provide you a train 😂
I live east of LA and I take the bus on the 10 freeway whenever I go to work. It’s strange that more people don’t do it. I find it way more relaxing than sitting in stop and go traffic. Plus it’s cheaper than driving to work!
How sad is it that the largest city in America is having to resort to compromising trackless tram technology (that is used in tiny Chinese cities that aren't given priority by their government) to get any sort of improvements added to their transit system. How far this country has fallen.
Great video, now do one on how big car companies lobby against public transit
They completely glossed over that 68% of people polled who identify as politically moderate thinks transport policy should shift more trips towards public transit, walking and cycling. For people who identify as moderately conservative, it’s an even 50/50 split. Even 47% of people who identify as conservative chose this option versus “make it easier for most people to drive for most trips.”
Instead, the voice-over focuses on the extremes, where finally only 18% of very conservative people favor transport policy that supports more transit, cycling and walking.
Check the chart yourself at the 6:24 timestamp.
Remember when General Motors, Standard oil, and firestone bought out and destroyed tons of street car systems all over the US????
SCANDAL
it was the railroad company that destroyed ours, they raised the railroad tracks that prevented the electric street from crossing the tracks, also all the deaths didn't help either..
"Who Framed Roger Rabbit!!!"
Maybe, just maybe, spend less money on foreign wars and focus on the needs of the people in the country.
Hey you’re talking crazy talk.
Well hey now Boeing would not be able to make money making bullet trains. Military several hundred million dollar hardware, yes..
That will NEVER happen
We've tried and that got us blindsided into WW1, WW2, and 9/11. Turns out there's only so much "focus on yourself" isolation you can have before violent haters penetrate all the way in.
Simple solution to do this is to have the defense contractors go to making trains. In the 80s Boeing made light rail trains
Transportation freedom meaning having the opportunity to choose. I have two cars, but I chose to ride my bike and take public transport unless I am going to a place which does not have the density required. People who associate the car with freedom have basically only lived in suburbia / rural areas where the infrastructure doesnt support anything else.
I love my car and will continue to drive it. However, if there’s less cars on the road because public transport is viable, it’s a win for everyone. Lower insurance cost due to reduced likelihood of crashing. Good alternative if something ever goes wrong to you car (i.e. your three hour project turns into a three day one). Even if you never plan to use public transport you’ll still receive some of the benefit.
Also less bad and stressed drivers. Not every holder of a driving license is a good driver.
@@Erintii 100% agree.
@@Erintii exactly. You'd get those people of the road, who clearly shouldn't be allowed to drive a car.
@@kailahmann1823 plus there are ppl who hates driving. I know ppl for whom cars are their babies on wheels, who are advocates for public transit. They want more road for themselves and know driving is not everyone's cup of tea.
trackless trams aren't a solution in any way. adding more road congestion and being forced to share space with cars is practically antithetical to improving public transit infrastructure
We need more Subways and commuter rail
OK OK. There's a simple answer to this. PUT MONEY INTO IT. We have such a lack of funding into public transit that when people say they don't use it because its bad. Well no duh. But then they they argue against it when they have never used it. Its just not getting us anywhere.
Being stuck in traffic is honestly miserable. I am thankful to live next to the train, amtrak, and regional rail. Not needing to really drive makes your car last longer, and I probably go to the gas station once a month if need be.
Combine that with remote work and chef's kiss.....that is why companies lobby so hard against things giving you more freedom, generally.
The enormous amount of money wasted due to heavy traffic is already a valid point to invest on public transit.
You’re forgetting a key piece of information. At the peak of the pandemic the stations weren’t manned and the metrocard vending machines weren’t accepting money because they were full. To add, to protect the bus drivers you had passengers enter through the rear doors that contributed to the evasion. I speak from personal experience.
why does public transit need to be profitable? its purpose is to move people around, quickly and efficiently, not make money. you don't ask highways to be profitable, or the new road built in town to be profitable so why does the metro need to be profitable? it's such an unfair double standard
Cash Jordan covered those new subway turnstiles and he found one person paying and 5 people running behind them so that they don't have to pay.
Make it a federal felony to smoke fentanyl or any chemical on a bus or train
having to walk 20 minutes to get to a grocery store 500m away is wild
You are assuming people can walk. I know people who drive 10m to their mailbox.
Maybe we should also be investing in our bike network. I noticed that Paris and London and Amsterdam have wonderful bike networks that supplement the transit network which allows people to better manage the inflation costs with the subway.
I hate owning a car. It’s a money pit
There is no data indicating LA Metro is facing a $1 billion deficit. They are in much better financial situation than the other city systems mentioned. Where did you get the data?
As someone who lives in Philadelphia I hate SEPTA so much I had to get a car and now I drive everywhere… and SEPTA is one of the better systems in the country.
You are a lot safer now.
@@acornsucks2111Nonsense, driving is and always will be less safe than transit. The numbers aren’t even close. Driving everyday is the riskiest thing average people do in modern society.
SEPTA's been in controlled demolition for decades. we need to restore transit
@@acornsucks2111 lol yeah no one dies in cars
SEPTA needs to be better tho, the Regional Rail trains need to be more frequent and the Subway needs more expansion
leave it to cnbc to dedicate 15-20 minutes to focusing on profitability and 'crime' rather than improving the actual infrastructure, building denser cities, de-incentivizing car usage and igniting a cultural change that places more value on public transit and walkability. half of this video is dedicated to a red herring rather than actual, concrete solutions that would increase ridership ten fold
this country's entire thing has been "your house is your retirement savings" because pensions are gone and dead and 401ks aren't reliable. so yeah people are going to defend the property value of their homes over everything else.
it's so much easier to talk about tweaking systems for profitability and to fight crime. what you're proposing is not feasible, would take trillions of dollars, and decades to even achieve. if we even had the knowledge to do so. america simply lacks the expertise to run competent transit networks.
@@mikeydude750 in your make believe world, are Americans just inherently incapable of creating efficient public transit systems according to some innate gene or something? try coming up with an argument that isn't nonsensical next time
I used to exclusively take public transit. But then it just became so unreliable I ended up getting a car. Being 30 minutes late for work or sitting in transit for 1.5 hours isn’t good. I would love to get rid of my car because it’s so expensive, but I can’t because I won’t be able to work and support myself and my family
E bike. No crowded bus, limited exposure to pathogens, inexpensive, healthy active transportation.
Hell yeah! More bike paths and widder sidewalks for everyone!
I'm all for it as long as I can ensure mine doesn't get get stolen
bot
With ebike you'll always be the minority and the most at risk when it comes to your safety.
@misterfunnybones Seriously, i live in NJ and it is crazy when i tell people about my ebike experience and they don't believe me. I have a 52v 60ah ebike and for context how much range i have, i can ride from Newark, NJ to Manhattan, NY going through the George Washington Pedestrian/Cyclist ramp which is free to use, in about an 1 hr+. In comparison, if i drove, that's about $16-$20 dollars in tolls alone not accounting for gas just to enter NY or if i took the train, that would cost about $14 round trip.
I have found that cars in this country have a hold of society. People believe that having a car is a necessity and in alot of cases, signals a status quo whether it be middle class or the wealthy and combined with the business nature cars provide(Auto manufacturers, Dealerships, Auto insurance etc). People are unwilling to try out new efficient and low cost means of transportation.
Less cars and more people friendly infrastructure is necessary here!
No one enjoys daily driving in cities and suburbs. The idyllic country-road drive is not the norm. The reality is usually infuriating traffic, terrible drivers, and circling the same block or parking lot for 15 mins looking for parking.
Public transit means people who can't or don't want to drive are free not to. There will be fewer drunk or elderly drivers on the road. Those who need or want to drive will enjoy less traffic. Even rural residents, for whom driving is a necessity, will enjoy lower gas prices due to lower demand.
Public transit benefits everyone.
Public transportation across Europe and Asia is embraced while America has a disdain for it. Here, Public transportation is for poir, inner city, and minorities who can't afford cars. Cars are symbols of status abd independence. We don't have to share personal space with "those " people. Therefore we demand that our tax dollars subsidize riads and not transit because those people don't deserve anything nuce, and if it isn't nice, i won't take it.
It's ridiculous that PUBLIC TRANSIT, a PUBLIC SERVICE needs to be profitable or it's "bad". If you factor in developments that spring up around new public transit however, it IS profitable in most instances. Take the Green Line LRT SW extension here in Minneapolis, profitable new developments have already sprung up along the line, bringing in new residents, generating new jobs, and millions in new property tax revenue for the state and the metro, and the extension isn't even set to open until 2027. We have everything to gain from investing in public transit, and everything to lose by continuing this multi-trillion dollar car-centric ponzi scheme.
To make transit work, we have to develop our cities properly and develop areas around transit hubs. In my city, Almost all of the train stations on the north city of the city are basically abandoned. One station is devoted to a football stadium that is unused most of the week, another is at a closed down arena with almost nothing else around it, and the next few are all in really undesirable areas with low ridership. The city is also ridiculously sprawled out and poorly served, both by transit and because of a complete lack of services and businesses.
To address fare dodging and security, the answer is simple: staffed stations. In Japan, at almost every gate, there is paid staff. They monitor entry points, deal with fare issues, and act as station security. And I'm not talking about hundreds of staff. I'm talking about the largest stations served by just a few staff booths because all entrances lead to large, monitored collections of gates. Most stations only have 1 or 2 such booths to handle almost every single gate. Where I live, every single complaint about safety can be solved by having staff working in stations. Deploying security or police to stations only when issues are reported means longer periods of non-control and thus increased safety problems, and deploying security to support a train works the same way. If you instead of staff at stations, they can immediately deal with problems in the station and can quickly deploy to deal with issues on trains.
Lastly, additional security means actually doing something about homelessness. People needing to sleep on trains and in stations means they don't have anywhere to go. People using hard drugs on trains and in stations means we have failed both as a society as well as in terms of infrastructure. Using a housing first model and actually funding health, occupational, and recovery programs means getting people off the streets. If you have a place to sleep, you don't need to sleep on the train. If you have a place where you can safely and cleanly use hard drugs, you're not using them in stations. But if you are off the streets, in a safe place, and able to go through treatment while in that safe place, you're not really going to be using hard drugs anymore. Actually doing something about homelessness instead of breaking up camps (displacing the problem), closing treatment and safe-use centres (displacing the problem), and doing nothing (not addressing the problem) means you're not going to be pushing problems into public spaces like train stations and instead will be drawing those problems away so that the transit system can focus on transit issues instead of social issues.
Why doesn't the New York subway have automated trains and platform screen doors? The former would cut costs, the latter add safety, and the city is big enough.
because its a public system and not private so they have no incentive to innovate or increase quality.
mta is fine as it is it doesnt need more money
better spent on the roads
The station platforms would need to be rebuilt to handle the added weight of the platform screen doors. And the MTA runs a mixed fleet of different trains which has a different set of door positions. Until there is a uniform fleet standard it would make it difficult unless you instal platform screen doors that are nimble and can reposition itself based on the type of train. I’ve seen mock ups of this in Japan but that’s not ready for Primetime.
Automated trains are expensive and hard to add to an old system like NYC subway. Mixed fleet of trains means the signalling would also need to be compatible with all the fleets.
That's the problem. No dedicated tracks, no one in our government even cares about our access to modern, frequent, clean and professional service. China and Japan make everyone else look like crap.
"Our cost of building subway assets is five times at the upper end what it costs to build a global subway assets". Why? Tokyo, Singapore, London have similar cost of living as NYC. Is that something cannot be told? It is repeatedly mentioned in the video about the high cost in NYC, but there is no disclosure of the actual cost in $. The blame of lack in government investment is meaningless if there is no real comparison in the actual amount invested.
Similarly, operational wise, thank you for mentioning that the MTA operating budget (sans capital) is $19.3 billion. However, there is no comparison to the cost for operating similar systems in cities with equivalent cost of living around the world (Tokyo, Seoul, London...). I personally did an analysis on the MTA's and Tokyo Transit's financial statements before the pandemic, and the disparity in cost was stunning, quite similar to the statement above. Yet until now, no publication in the US has been talking about the issue. This is the first video I encounter that mentioned the cost, but with no real analysis or comparison. We cannot solve any problem if we do not identify what the problem is. Blaming can catch public attention, but not more. Additional investment without knowing exactly where the $ go is equivalent to throwing $ to a rabbit hole.
The gov't is to split on it to pass anything. Plus main reason it takes years before any project is built is because of to much regulations. In NYC you have to pass through agencies and organizations just so your project meets their needs before you can start construction. By then a whole new set of politicians are in office and process repeats
American companies charge too much money. That's why.
it cost a bit $3,450 for a studio rental to $7,439 for a 4-bedroom rental, same with renting businesses
it's also in a urban decay ua-cam.com/video/Zjd1WNhGliY/v-deo.html
then the subway you have this ua-cam.com/video/44-IpvZRfAw/v-deo.html
and a mall in York just closed down
ua-cam.com/video/IRiHBs62jfE/v-deo.html&t
@@knightwolf3511 we need vastly more housing, everywhere. people also need to be allowed to have smaller units. 300-400 sq ft studio apartments are quite enough for a single person living in a city where odds are they're mostly eating out all the time.
This is not about funding. It’s 100% land use. You could take a random city in America and invest 100 billion dollars into an extensive light rail system and it will still spit out low ridership because it is impossible to make it convenient with both low density development enforced by central planning and strange cul de sac road design where you can’t conveniently walk directly to a transit stop. You must allow mass transit become the market choice, and the only way to do this is to legalize all forms of housing and getting rid of parking minimums, large set backs, lot coverage ratios, etc.
Zoning and housing regulations seem to be the root of the problem (and so many other problems with American cities). The fact that anything denser than a single family detached house is illegal on 80%+ properties, and that housing and shops can't be built near each other, makes cars the only practical means of transport for the vast majority of the US. Public transit won't make a comeback until housing rules allow for more density.
The problem is, work has changed since COVID-19. People are working from home half to full time...and they have no intention of commuting in. The transit systems have to be more dynamic. What are they doing for service on Friday through Sunday? Why restrict late night service when people are needing to go home coming from the bar? Do they take a $30 Uber or a $4 on the subway? Point this out. Secondly, why isn't there more policing on the transit systems? People are tired of being hassled, panhandled and roughed up. Make the cars and stations a clean and friendly environment.
The problem with US public transit system lies not with the organization or company running it or with the government, but with the American people who use them. They have no respect for the things that they have. Public transit works in every developed country except here. Most people are too gullible to understand the importance of public transit and remaining are forced to use the subpar service. Until the american public understands the importance of public transit and have respect for the systems already in place, things will never change.
Actually the Originization is why it costs so much to build new transit, because there are all these middlemen and bureaucracy and spaghetti politics that drive up the cost
This was good until autonomous busses were presented as a panacea.
Good video but I agree with many others who’ve posted, that it’s a very difficult problem to fix due to highly polarized society on the political spectrum (combined with strong auto lobbies on one end).
Transportation needs continuous evolution, like every 25-30 years, to be both useful for masses and cost-efficient at the same time. Obviously China and even India seem to have better transit infrastructure today because it’s been built in the last 2-3 decades. It’s a function of what timeline we’re living in. But if they don’t continuously evolve that over next 4-5 decades, they’ll be in a similar spot where US is today.
Oh for sure, I'm not debating that. Just stating the obvious :)
One of the big problems lots of public transit has(and something I’ve commonly seen on SEPTA in PA) is people skipping on fares. I’d say more than half the people I’ve seen get on the subway in Philadelphia jump the turnstile and don’t pay the fare so SEPTA ends up missing a lot of revenue.
If governments are serious about fighting climate change they should make the relatively small investment in making public transport free, make it available in all major corridors, and give those vehicles priority access so they can glide past traffic.
We tried that actually (making transit free). What happened is all of the homeless moved in and have essentially taken over public transit. Exposure to drugs is so common the agencies warn people not to take it.
@@RefreshingShamrock That has nothing to do with making it free.
Alot of people already take it as "free."
Making public transit free decreases investment, unless other funding sources are increased.
It's free if you don't pay, which is why it is so bad.
Contrast that with Prague, CZ : 1.1mm population, with 3 subway lines (soon to be 4); 26 tramlines; 150 city bus lines, with another 560(!) that extend out to 80km from the centre (the city is only 20km side to side); and 80 regional train lines. Thse all run from 04:30am until midnight, and then the night tram/bus service runs on the main lines in the intervening hours. Connections are vry frequent, and run on time. And all of this for only $0.44 per day with an annual ticket. That's right : my annual transit card here costs
We love freedom so much that we force people to go into debt to buy cars because we don't have alternative transportation methods
I worked in transit in CA the issue is it really has questionable safety issues.. i was attacked as a driver and nothing was done about it. Plus who wants to lose their job for being one minute late anyways. Thats why their is an issue with hiring operators.
Driving is the msot miserable way to travel around the city
Driving is only fun in 2 contexts, rural 0 traffic, and dedicated race courses.
The interstate is boring with intermittent frustration (traffic jams), and terror (near misses and crashes). Inside cities congestion is nightmarish, frustrating, and potentially slower than just walking.
And this is ignoring all externalities like polution and pedestrian endangerment.
@@jasonreed7522 rural is lovely I agree
@@jasonreed7522 might as well make the interstate into a big conveyor belt
It's cool as hell when it isn't congested. Some of my best driving memories are driving on that stupidly massive segment of the Katy Freeway in Downtown Houston at 2 AM.
The problem is for everything else. Real life isn't 2 AM and for every nice experience I had with a car, I had dozens of bad ones.
I love driving. Always have.
When I take transit, my round trip fare is $3.00-$4.00. If I drive, the use of the street is free, there is free parking when I get there. I pay pennies in gasoline and vehicle costs.
In the US, we've become a big fan of user fees, except for drivers. When it's all you can eat for the same low price, people eat more. The same goes for freeways.
It's weird how people will (correctly) point out that "free healthcare" isn't *technically* free but are happy to believe that about roads.
As long as people think public transit is supposed to be a self sustainable business, it's going to fail. It's a service, the same as roads.
Make transit a priority and invest in the success of it like we do for our interstate system
Most of the old street car lines were basically a real estate scam with respect to the fact that most of the street car companies where either created by or owned by real estate companies the idea being that u buy a bunch of land out in the boonies on the edge of the city develop it and then run a street car line into the city so that persons can easily get to the city and urban core. Now the development is connected to the city and the land price thus increases. Its a similar model to country clubs and golf courses in modern suburbs.
That would keep them motivated to maintain service...well until they sold out. Then Adios. Maybe if it was rentals.
How is funding a roadway and not a bus a double standard when the bus would need to drive on a road? roads are public transit!
The US is so far behind countries like Japan. They have a perfect example of public transit, with trains going everywhere, that are fast, frequent, safe and clean. You don't even need a car with all the transit options available, and being able to ride a bike in the people friendly streets. As a New Yorker, living in one of the US' best cities with public transit, I fully admire Japan for what they have and think that what we have is a joke.
Take 10% of the US military budget and put it into public transit, I just fix ur problem ur welcome. Yes I know this will not happen cause the military industrial complex won’t allow it.
pls dont ever get into politics with ur brainlet takes.
source
@@anmolbargujar it’s just allocation of money, 10% of military budget is around 80 billion reallocated to public transit, what kind of source do u want?
Why can't we have a transport industrial complex instead. Raytheon can shift gears, if they really are such great engineers.
Public transit will never get better, long as these raci..........I mean wealthy NIM........I mean some people think public transit as welfare for the poor, and lobby their government officials not to improve and build better transit.
@SparklyObserve-nr8rw So because some people do not want to take "public transport because they might be assaulted or robbed there" we should not make public transit better? Part of making transit better is to make it safe. L Take.
@SparklyObserve-nr8rwYou do know that can happen anywhere, right? In some cities, both can happen while you’re in your car.
Not having to use NYC public transit has done wonders to my mental and physical health.
You fix public transit by fixing it. Then, when it is a better choice then people will use it.
You need a culture shift. People are attached to their cars so much that they are almost emotional support vehicles, not even cars.
Regardless of their high costs, people still favor cars as long as cities and states keep building thousands and thousands of kilometers of roads (Ironically, making traffic worse).
Secondly, you cannot create the concept of suburbia, shooting yourself in the foot, where there is not even reasonable WALKABILITY, and then expect people to not need cars, which fuels building more roads, which fuels traffic.
Car companies shot transit in the head decades ago.
And don't get me started on the stupidity in our zoning.
Roads and cars for each family is way cheaper than public transit and rails + tunnels.
It's not even close.
The United States suffers from extreme amounts of corruption in public works projects.
It's better to let people keep their own damn money and let them figure out transportation. Rather than create a centralized monopoly that forces everyone to pay into it in the name of "public service"
Trillions of dollars of tax payer money literally disappears every few years. Not even just spent on overpriced contractors. Literally just missing.
@@flakgun153
Waaaaay incorrect and off the mark. Plus, Laughably misinformed.
@@flakgun153
Is this why companies move few packages in many small cars?
Lol
@flakgun153 Oh buddy, you have no idea how expensive cars really are.
@TheLPRnetwork Yes I do. Do you want me to copy paste the numbers in here?
The federal budget is about 6 trillion dollars. Only about 50b a year goes into roads highways and bridges.
Subway costs 2 billion dollars per mile. And costs 10x as much per mile to maintain tracks than roads. Not even properly maintained either
It's not even close to the same magnitude.
More importantly the cost of public transit. Worldwide. Not even just in the USA. Is rapidly outpacing inflation even as service stays the same or gets worse. It's not sustainable. Fundamentally unsustainable because the people who own the monopoly will always be able to come up woth excuses for why they need more money and then they force tax payers to cough up. Over and over and over again. Just to maintain service as is. This isn't fundamental to the technology it's fundamental to human organizations that can force their customers to pay and don't have much accountability, like every government project ever.
guys everyone knows we just have to add one more lane to fix traffic!
Public transport should be free at the point of use. Streets should be reserved for emergency, delivery and service vehicles.
16 to 19 thousand are murdered in the entire United States. 30 to 40 thousand people are killed in car accidents.
And Japan high speed rail has had fatality since inception (1964). Although the trainline was found only to be partially at fault, it made changes to prevent such incidents from occurring in the future.
Fare enforcement is needed to pay for security and infrastructure. Free transportation is bad for transportation.
The costs of fare collection and enforcement are so great that the sensible thing to do is to abolish the fare entirely. The added convenience would considerably increase ridership, reducing the per-rider subsidy.
Exactly. Most roads don't have tolls, why should most public transit?
I wish there were enough suburban public transit methods for me to not need to own multiple vehicles.
21:10 lol climbing over or under is difficult ....but going right through the middle...not so much
transit in the US is equivalent to third world countries. how? why? big oil….cars cars cars.
Big banks
they interested in maximum household expenditures
Thus it's more beneficial for them to each family to pay for one-story house individually while maintaining several cars
The more you wrapped in services and additional expenses the better for them.
The best example of this is American pharmacy.
USA was created by Amsterdam and London money changers.
They don’t even allow your capital voting representation.
It was cheaper to just build roads to connect cities especially after WW2. Then we went overbaord and everyone forgot about public transit. It pushed the maintenance of a car which would have been a train cab unto the user. All they need to do is build roads
Big banks
they interested in maximum household expenditures
Thus it's more beneficial for them to each family to pay for one-story house individually while maintaining several cars
The more you wrapped in services and additional expenses the better for them. American pharmacy as an example.
USA was created by Amsterdam and London money changers.
They don’t even allow voting representation of US capital.
no
Actually big cities in 3rd world countries often have quite extensive public transit, unlike in the US. Reason being that most cannot afford cars so public transit is needed to get most people around
We need to do what New York did and charge people for driving, however that money should go straight to funding better transit. Then, we wouldn’t have to increase fare costs.
General Motors, Standard Oil and Firestone Tires got busted for conspiring and CNBC mentions it without actually informing the viewer, disgusting corporate behavior as usual!
They absolutely forgot to mention how many street cars they destroyed. Thanks for mentioning that.
@@charlierogers8704 not many just about 10%
Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 was the streetcars and electric utilities, you could only own one meaning you had to sell off the other
🔥FACT🔥 Small suspended train cars would be more affordable & less disruptive to connect dead zones to train stations in cities like NYC & Chicago 🤏
Philippines got this extreme car centric mentality as well. Unlike Thailand and Indonesia, Philippine public transport is so bad.
There is a rail project cut by 3 kilometers because rich people dont want poor people easier access to their place.
Thailand however is absolutely insane on road safety.
JICA has a lot of proposals to build transits in the 1990s however our crocodiles are busy swallowing our tax
That makes sense… EUROPE was very focused on Transit, and that’s why i love it there!
Most of the world lives in more dense urban areas than do people in the US. It's much easier to build the infrastructure for city transit than to provide it for rural or even suburban populations.
As long as liberals run it, it will be ineffective and cost too much.
Most travelers and commuters already don't care about flyover states
Not Necessarily Canada and Australia have figured out how to do it (although it still costs a lot to build)
@@IndustrialParrot2816 Canada has no better public transport than do cities in the US. Never been to Australia.
@@Jeffhowardmeade actually Canada has much better buses they have gotten pretty good at Building Subways, and Australia has some of the best Commuter train systems if you put them together you get a fantastic transit system
the autonomous train bus thing is pure grift. Will never go as fast as a train and isn't much better than a bus