When did LA nearly double the cost of using its subway?!

Nobody has really answered his question. The responses have generally been
either (1) you can ride around all day long for $3, or (2) many people ride
public transportation to and from work.

This gentleman simply wants to travel from point A to point B on a municipal
rapid transit system. He doesn't want to ride aimlessly around all day
long, nor is he going round-trip to work. In the old days this would be
called paying a single fare.

I suspect the reason for this trend is that, unlike the old days where the
government was responsible for regulating public transportation so that
fares were fair, today government runs public transportation itself and
cannot be bothered with being fair. It runs the transit system for the
convenience of itself (and perhaps its unionized employees), and coming up
with fair fare rules is too difficult.

wrote:

A couple wks ago I took the subway from LAX to LAUS.

I was shocked! to see that the LA system no longer allows you to ride
multiple subway lines for $1.60. Instead, unless you are riding a
single line, you must buy a $3 day pass.

This amounts to doubling the subway fare for anybody who transfers to a
2nd subway line!

When did LA ramrod this outrage through? Didn't the passengers protest?

In article .com,
wrote:

You don't get hit in the face with southern Cal's disdain for transit
until you try to reach south Orange County from LAX. ride the G shuttle
from LAX to green line Aviation station, switch to blue line, switch to
red line, catch amtrak down to Irvine, and then have someone come get
you.

That problem is all due to about a one-mile gap between the eastern
terminus of the Green Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station. If that gap
could be filled one could easily ride between LAX and Orange county using
the Green Line and Metrolink (and potentially, Amtrak, all the way to San
Diego).

Filling that gap should be, in my opinion, one of the top priorities of
MTA's planning.

Merritt

In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:

Oh, grow up! Large amounts of money have been spent in LA on transit but
hardly anybody wants to use it.

Partly because of stupid planning like leaving a one-mile gap between the
eastern end of the Green Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station.

It is not a matter of "wanting" to us transit. People don't "want to use
transit" they "want to get from A to B". People will only use transit
when it is more convenient or economical than the alternatives.

Merritt

In article ,
sechumlib wrote:

wrote:

When did LA ramrod this outrage through? Didn't the passengers protest?

When was the last time you recall a protest against increased fares
being successful?

But it this case, there was no significant protest at all.

Merritt

"Adrian Auer-Hudson" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jack May wrote:
anybody wants to use it.

To which LA do you refer? My commute in Los Angeles County, SoCal, is
on very well utilized trains. So I have to assume you know another
metropolis that rejoices in the same initials.

That is strange because in LA I often use a hotel where I see the trains
going past and they are almost empty most of the time

What do you define as very well utilized. Carrying two people most of the
day with maybe more during commute times. Do you define very well utilized
is any lie you can come up with as long as you don't have to use actual
data.

"Merritt Mullen" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
wrote:

You don't get hit in the face with southern Cal's disdain for transit
until you try to reach south Orange County from LAX. ride the G shuttle
from LAX to green line Aviation station, switch to blue line, switch to
red line, catch amtrak down to Irvine, and then have someone come get
you.

That problem is all due to about a one-mile gap between the eastern
terminus of the Green Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station. If that gap
could be filled one could easily ride between LAX and Orange county using
the Green Line and Metrolink (and potentially, Amtrak, all the way to San
Diego).

Filling that gap should be, in my opinion, one of the top priorities of
MTA's planning.

Oh there is always some excuse where it would work perfectly if such and
such little problem was fixed on one link or so There are far too many
excuses to be credible anymore with failure rampant over all transit
systems.

I repeat again that the main problem is that transit is technically the same
as trying to bring back 8 track tapes in an iPod world. Transit(8 track)
does not and never will compete with the better transportation (music
player) in the number one choice that people select, which of course are
cars (iPods).

I told about being in Los Angeles without a car:

Losca sin ruedas
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z3FC240D1
__________________________________________________ _________________
"San Francisco is a pleasure. Los Angeles is a headache" Rita (NYC)
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ - http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 --- IClast at SFbay Net

P.S.
The sex part is not on line but it's available by request.

Merritt Mullen wrote:

In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:


Oh, grow up! Large amounts of money have been spent in LA on transit but
hardly anybody wants to use it.


Partly because of stupid planning like leaving a one-mile gap between the
eastern end of the Green Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station.

It is not a matter of "wanting" to us transit. People don't "want to use
transit" they "want to get from A to B". People will only use transit
when it is more convenient or economical than the alternatives.

Well, it depends. People "want to use" the Staten Island Ferry both for
transit and because it gives one a great view of the Statue of Liberty.

In European cities, we often will use our transit passes just to ride
out to the end of one line and back to see what a random part of the
city looks like.

And in Mexico City, even the subway is scenic, since each station has a
display of the archaeological finds discovered when they dug the station.

However, none of this applies to the LA subway. :-)

--
Evelyn C. Leeper
Complaint is the largest tribute heaven receives,
and the sincerest part of our devotion. --Jonathan Swift

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Merritt Mullen" wrote in message
...

It is not a matter of "wanting" to us transit. People don't "want to use
transit" they "want to get from A to B". People will only use transit
when it is more convenient or economical than the alternatives.

Google did (is still doing?) a transit page for Portland. They included the
cost of the trip and compared it against auto. Transit IS cheaper than SOV.

Well part of what makes the Staten Island Ferry more convenient or
economical than the alternatives, is that there is no fare charged to use it
AND it is much more direct to lower Manhatten than going through Brooklyn or
New Jersey.

It is more convenient or economical than the alternatives.




Pete



"Evelyn C. Leeper" wrote in message
...
Merritt Mullen wrote:

In article ,
"Jack May" wrote:


Oh, grow up! Large amounts of money have been spent in LA on transit
but hardly anybody wants to use it.


Partly because of stupid planning like leaving a one-mile gap between the
eastern end of the Green Line and the Norwalk Metrolink station.

It is not a matter of "wanting" to us transit. People don't "want to use
transit" they "want to get from A to B". People will only use transit
when it is more convenient or economical than the alternatives.

Well, it depends. People "want to use" the Staten Island Ferry both for
transit and because it gives one a great view of the Statue of Liberty.