William Lind makes a conservative case for public transit (just not buses)


I’ve commented before on some of the opinions of William Lind, mostly regarding New Urbanism.  For those who are unfamiliar, Lind argues the conservative side of supporting New Urbanism and transit.  In this interview with Sarah Goodyear of Grist, he outlines why conservatives should support public transit initiatives.  He argues that supporting transit makes us less reliant on foreign oil sources, and thus is better for national security.  He also says that most conservatives are wrong in thinking that transit systems are subsidized while highways are not.  Not only are highway subsidized, but don’t cover their own costs as well as transit systems, especially rail.  He says that conservatives are more likely to ride rail than they are to ride buses.  Rail transit also has proven to boost property values in the vicinity.  He says that getting kids a transit pass rather than getting them their own car would save families a lot of money.

While most people who read this argument are fine with it, it’s when Lind brings up race that he can loose some people.  He argues that the reason a lot of people don’t ride the bus is because, statistically, buses have a lot of young black males, and young black males are much more likely to commit violent crimes.  One thing he advocates that is related to this is having first- and second-class transit.  This has existed in other parts of the world, and consists of there being one car on a train or different buses on the same route that costs more than another, but the more expensive one is cleaner, has more leg room, or has some other sort of amenity.  Lind argues that this would quell the fears of those worried about who they may have to sit next to on transit.

It’s hard, morally, to agree with Lind on some points.  I would like to think that we could overcome our fear of people of different races and not have to resort to elitism to get people to ride transit.  But Lind’s ideas do speak to some people, and it would be interesting to see what would happen if some of his ideas were implemented.

Advertisements

About Dave Munson
This blog is about architecture, cities, and myself.

One Response to William Lind makes a conservative case for public transit (just not buses)

  1. Monex says:

    Hextall decided to give the City of Calgary the land that is Bowness Park in exchange for streetcar service to his new community. Where developers once pulled Calgarys transit system well beyond the city limits transit now struggles just to reach the citys outermost communities…………REACHING THE LIMITS………..When a developer decides to create a community they pay a transportation tax to the city for road projects in that community. While locations for bus stops and routes are considered during the planning process transit usually lags far behind the immediate construction of roads…………The biggest challenge we face is keeping pace with the demand for transit in up to 20 new communities that are developing at the same time says Ron Collins Calgary Transits spokesman…………When service finally does get started in new communities its usually in the form of a shuttle bus that runs only during peak hours…………I think they actually lose some transit patrons because of their inability to actually fund transit in the initial start-up phase of the community says Bob Clark a vice-president for Carma Developers Ltd.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: