MTA stats show more subway trains are late

[trainfan22]

Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens all have good areas by subways, and they also have bad areas by subway. The corridors in the Bronx weren't initially ghettos. The Grand Concourse used to be upper-middle class, and corridors like Broadway in Brooklyn were once bustling retail corridors, even with subways and elevated lines.

 

They became ghettos because they depopulated, but this depopulation also came after the highways were built and wrenching societal change in the late '50s-'70s (like school desegregation), so linking that with the subways decades after they were built is a bit spurious, and definitely not statable as fact.

IIRC, some of the buildings will be residential at the Hudson Yards near that new  line station, of course it won't be cheap to live there and I doubt the   will bring crime to that area. 

 

The "subway brings crime to neighborhoods" argument just doesn't make sense, people really think goons are sitting in a room with somewhere throwing a dart at a subway map to pick an "nice" area to troll 

 

 

Astoria, West End and Sea Beach has no major crime problem along there routes, just off the top of my head.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You're right. Morris Park is such a terrible place.

 

It has nothing to do with subways. It has to do with white flight that began when the abominations known as housing projects were put up. All of the areas that had housing projects put up deteriorated significantly. The good areas left are the ones that fought against nearby housing projects.

 

The upper east side and midtown are full of subways. Look at how they've deteriorated.

 

In time, the spillover from the housing projects expanded and forced more people out for the "ghetto" types.

 

Development doesn't fix this, as middle and working class people cannot afford the rents that come with it. Hence the flight to the far reaches of the city, suburbs, etc. Developers can't justify "developing" areas that don't have subway service.

 

There are very few places left in general that are safe from the bullsnitch of the "ghetto" and the financial sword of development. But the subway is not to blame for that. City Hall's policies and continued support for the "project agenda" for the last 60 years have been.

Nice try, but Morris Park is the exception in the Bronx and not the rule. Name three other Bronx neighborhoods with subways that are good. Your argument that it's the projects isn't completely true given the fact that numerous Bronx neighborhoods with subway service and no projects are subpar.

 

Furthermore, the subway serves the masses but it doesn't work for everyone. Ferry service, and other services should be expanded where possible. If the subway was so great you wouldn't have folks protesting new lines. It's overly expensive to implement new lines, promotes over development and crowding and lowers the quality of life overall. There is nothing great about packing on to a filthy subway like herd or evading the stench of piss on the platform. Our subway system is outdated, filthy and overrated to say the least.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens all have good areas by subways, and they also have bad areas by subway. The corridors in the Bronx weren't initially ghettos. The Grand Concourse used to be upper-middle class, and corridors like Broadway in Brooklyn were once bustling retail corridors, even with subways and elevated lines.

 

They became ghettos because they depopulated, but this depopulation also came after the highways were built and wrenching societal change in the late '50s-'70s (like school desegregation), so linking that with the subways decades after they were built is a bit spurious, and definitely not statable as fact.

Yeah right. That's why areas of Staten Island on the South Shore and Mid-Island have appealed to their local leaders to have a fare policy or a ticket policy re-instated on the SIR because they argued that having stations free on the SIR made it easy for thugs from impoverished areas to come to the affluent areas and cause problems, and they're absolutely right. In fact there are some subway stations that people simply avoid due to the vagrants that hang around them, so subways certainly can bring crime. 

[BronxBombers]

Nice try, but Morris Park is the exception in the Bronx and not the rule. Name three other Bronx neighborhoods with subways that are good. Your argument that it's the projects isn't completely true given the fact that numerous Bronx neighborhoods with subway service and no projects are subpar.

 

Furthermore, the subway serves the masses but it doesn't work for everyone. Ferry service, and other services should be expanded where possible. If the subway was so great you wouldn't have folks protesting new lines. It's overly expensive to implement new lines, promotes over development and crowding and lowers the quality of life overall. There is nothing great about packing on to a filthy subway like herd or evading the stench of piss on the platform. Our subway system is outdated, filthy and overrated to say the least.

 

Pelham Bay, Wakefield, Parkchester, Norwood, Eastchester, Pelham Gardens

[Lance]

Furthermore, the subway serves the masses but it doesn't work for everyone. Ferry service, and other services should be expanded where possible. If the subway was so great you wouldn't have folks protesting new lines. It's overly expensive to implement new lines, promotes over development and crowding and lowers the quality of life overall. There is nothing great about packing on to a filthy subway like herd or evading the stench of piss on the platform. Our subway system is outdated, filthy and overrated to say the least.

Way to completely miss the point entirely. Then again, that's your usual M.O., so I can't say I'm surprised. I'm not even going to touch this ferry thing again because I'm done talking ferries. You want my opinion on expanded ferry service? Check my previous posts on the subject.

 

On the subject of building new subway lines, of course people are going to protest building new ones. There's always going to be opponents to subway construction and you're Exhibit A. Thing is, nobody wants to be inconvenienced by the work that subway construction entails, much like is the case with any construction project, but they'll gladly enjoy the benefits of it. Take Second Ave for instance. With all of the problems regarding its construction, when that extension opens in a couple of years, it will garner plenty of riders despite said problems.

 

Oh, and because I'd be quite remiss to let this one slide by, on the one hand, you're saying the subway is overrated, but on the other, you've acknowledged the record number of riders in recent years as indicative that the MTA needs to increase service. Which one is it? Because I'm almost positive that if the subway was so overrated, it wouldn't be seeing ridership levels not seen since the '50s.

[CenSin]

Furthermore, the subway serves the masses but it doesn't work for everyone. Ferry service, and other services should be expanded where possible.

You're picking the most inefficient types of services to expand.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Way to completely miss the point entirely. Then again, that's your usual M.O., so I can't say I'm surprised. I'm not even going to touch this ferry thing again because I'm done talking ferries. You want my opinion on expanded ferry service? Check my previous posts on the subject.

 

On the subject of building new subway lines, of course people are going to protest building new ones. There's always going to be opponents to subway construction and you're Exhibit A. Thing is, nobody wants to be inconvenienced by the work that subway construction entails, much like is the case with any construction project, but they'll gladly enjoy the benefits of it. Take Second Ave for instance. With all of the problems regarding its construction, when that extension opens in a couple of years, it will garner plenty of riders despite said problems.

 

Oh, and because I'd be quite remiss to let this one slide by, on the one hand, you're saying the subway is overrated, but on the other, you've acknowledged the record number of riders in recent years as indicative that the MTA needs to increase service. Which one is it? Because I'm almost positive that if the subway was so overrated, it wouldn't be seeing ridership levels not seen since the '50s.

Population growth in NYC is at record levels and most people don't have a choice but to use the subway. Just because it's at record levels doesn't mean all is well. Delays continue to worsen, and numerous riders complain that the system stinks overall. Given the sluggish economy, high rents and mortgages people are generally forced to use the subway. If folks had disposable income surely more would use other alternatives. I hear of quite a few young folks that take cabs everywhere, but that's not something many can do.

You're picking the most inefficient types of services to expand.

Because surely the subway can handle more riders... *Sarcasm*

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Pelham Bay, Wakefield, Parkchester, Norwood, Eastchester, Pelham Gardens

Wakefield, Parkchester and Norwood good neighborhoods?? LMAO. I know of someone who lives in Norwood. The guy is a principal earning 100k, but lives in Norwood because of the amount of space he can get. He has had his car broken into at least twice and can't wait to get the hell out. The Irish ran out of Norwood EN MASSE to Woodlawn... Better try again with that one...

 

Wakefield is overrun with crime. Parkchester... Knew a lady there that couldn't wait to get out of there as well and the other areas you mentioned have subways on the fringes of the neighborhood so they're up for debate. The good parts of Pelham Bay are AWAY from the subway. Same thing with Pelham Gardens.

[BronxBombers]

Wakefield, Parkchester and Norwood good neighborhoods?? LMAO. I know of someone who lives in Norwood. The guy is a principal earning 100k, but lives in Norwood because of the amount of space he can get. He has had his car broken into at least twice and can't wait to get the hell out. The Irish ran out of Norwood EN MASSE to Woodlawn... Better try again with that one...

 

Wakefield is overrun with crime. Parkchester... Knew a lady there that couldn't wait to get out of there as well and the other areas you mentioned have subways on the fringes of the neighborhood so they're up for debate. The good parts of Pelham Bay are AWAY from the subway. Same thing with Pelham Gardens.

 

Your definition or bad and mines are different. I think the neighborhoods I listed are good neighborhoods. Your just picking out specific things that happened to the people you know and twisting it into something bad. I don't think Wakefield is overrun with crime, maybe your confused with Williamsbridge (which barely has crime itself) You said pick neighborhoods that have subway service that are good and Pelham Bay & Pelham Gardens and the others I listed are it. Maybe it's me but the Bronx gets a bad rep for something that happened years ago. Every neighborhood has crime in it but that doesn't make it a bad neighborhood to live in. I live in the South Bronx and I feel safe.

[bobtehpanda]

Yeah right. That's why areas of Staten Island on the South Shore and Mid-Island have appealed to their local leaders to have a fare policy or a ticket policy re-instated on the SIR because they argued that having stations free on the SIR made it easy for thugs from impoverished areas to come to the affluent areas and cause problems, and they're absolutely right. In fact there are some subway stations that people simply avoid due to the vagrants that hang around them, so subways certainly can bring crime. 

 

So let me get this straight. A few whiny Staten Islanders completely negates the fact that there are, in fact, good neighborhoods by subway stops in other boroughs. Because that's how logic works.

 

Sunnyside in Queens has been by the subway all its life, and it has always been a nice neighborhood. But I guess all the "vagrants" and "unsavory types" the subway brings must really decrease property values and safety a lot, right? That's why rent in Brownstone Brooklyn is so gosh darn cheap these days.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So let me get this straight. A few whiny Staten Islanders completely negates the fact that there are, in fact, good neighborhoods by subway stops in other boroughs. Because that's how logic works.

 

Sunnyside in Queens has been by the subway all its life, and it has always been a nice neighborhood. But I guess all the "vagrants" and "unsavory types" the subway brings must really decrease property values and safety a lot, right? That's why rent in Brownstone Brooklyn is so gosh darn cheap these days.

A few whiny Staten Islanders... Please... Some areas are fine and safe with subways and some aren't, and you trying to downplay the areas that aren't doesn't change the fact. Queens isn't Staten Island or the Bronx or Brooklyn. Different strokes for different folks.

 

Your definition or bad and mines are different. I think the neighborhoods I listed are good neighborhoods. Your just picking out specific things that happened to the people you know and twisting it into something bad. I don't think Wakefield is overrun with crime, maybe your confused with Williamsbridge (which barely has crime itself) You said pick neighborhoods that have subway service that are good and Pelham Bay & Pelham Gardens and the others I listed are it. Maybe it's me but the Bronx gets a bad rep for something that happened years ago. Every neighborhood has crime in it but that doesn't make it a bad neighborhood to live in. I live in the South Bronx and I feel safe.

LMAO... I'm sorry but Williamsbridge and Wakefield are two of the highest crime areas in the city. I've traveled through Williamsbridge and they flood White Plains Road with cops practically on every corner. TONS of drug trafficking in that area. It's also suffered heavily from shootings. You need to get out more because I sure as hell do and know the deal. You can check the crime stats if you don't believe me and they apply to the here and now, not the past.

 

I'm also in the South Bronx weekly, and that place has a LONG WAY to go. Sticking a few condos in between loads of housing projects and thinking it's good to go is a joke. People hustling and hanging out everywhere down there is the norm.

 

I'm a New Yorker with street smarts. I know a ghetto when I see one.

[Fresh Pond]

Your definition or bad and mines are different. I think the neighborhoods I listed are good neighborhoods. Your just picking out specific things that happened to the people you know and twisting it into something bad. I don't think Wakefield is overrun with crime, maybe your confused with Williamsbridge (which barely has crime itself) You said pick neighborhoods that have subway service that are good and Pelham Bay & Pelham Gardens and the others I listed are it. Maybe it's me but the Bronx gets a bad rep for something that happened years ago. Every neighborhood has crime in it but that doesn't make it a bad neighborhood to live in. I live in the South Bronx and I feel safe.

Hell I live in Brownsville (the place most people are afraid to enter), and I feel perfectly safe here

[BronxBombers]

LMAO... I'm sorry but Williamsbridge and Wakefield are two of the highest crime areas in the city. I've traveled through Williamsbridge and they flood White Plains Road with cops practically on every corner. TONS of drug trafficking in that area. It's also suffered heavily from shootings. You need to get out more because I sure as hell do and know the deal. You can check the crime stats if you don't believe me and they apply to the here and now, not the past.

 

I'm also in the South Bronx weekly, and that place has a LONG WAY to go. Sticking a few condos in between loads of housing projects and thinking it's good to go is a joke. People hustling and hanging out everywhere down there is the norm.

 

I'm a New Yorker with street smarts. I know a ghetto when I see one.

 

Wakefield & Williamsbridge are highest crime areas in the city? Doubt it. I guess you forgot about Midtown, East New York, Brownsville, the South Bronx. What I mentioned in my previous post is that Wakefield is a good neighborhood. Yeah there are crime here and there but every single neighborhood in the city has crime. A few crimes doesn't make a neighborhood a horrible neighborhood. Also I never said the South Bronx was a good neighborhood. I said I feel safe walking around the South Bronx. Anyways we can agree to disagree, your definition of a bad neighborhood is completely different from mines. You can go ahead and lump every single neighborhood in the Bronx as "bad & ghetto" when in reality it really isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Wakefield & Williamsbridge are highest crime areas in the city? Doubt it. I guess you forgot about Midtown, East New York, Brownsville, the South Bronx. What I mentioned in my previous post is that Wakefield is a good neighborhood. Yeah there are crime here and there but every single neighborhood in the city has crime. A few crimes doesn't make a neighborhood a horrible neighborhood. Also I never said the South Bronx was a good neighborhood. I said I feel safe walking around the South Bronx. Anyways we can agree to disagree, your definition of a bad neighborhood is completely different from mines. You can go ahead and lump every single neighborhood in the Bronx as "bad & ghetto" when in reality it really isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

I didn't say the highest. I said two of the highest. They are certainly near the top in terms of neighborhoods with high crime and both have subways that don't help the situation.

[bobtehpanda]

A few whiny Staten Islanders... Please... Some areas are fine and safe with subways and some aren't, and you trying to downplay the areas that aren't doesn't change the fact. Queens isn't Staten Island or the Bronx or Brooklyn. Different strokes for different folks.

 

And so because some areas don't want more subways, we just shouldn't expand subways even more than we are now? Please. Express buses and ferries are very temporary solutions, considering that not all areas can/should have express bus service if they're not going to use it, and there aren't actually that many people living or working within walking distance of the waterfront to justify New Jersey-style ferry service.

 

I didn't say the highest. I said two of the highest. They are certainly near the top in terms of neighborhoods with high crime and both have subways that don't help the situation.

 

And correlation isn't causation. They might not help, but you also can't say for a fact that they are aggravating the situation, especially considering that there are police and security cameras around the system. It's a lot easier to stop or search a train or a bus than a getaway car.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

And so because some areas don't want more subways, we just shouldn't expand subways even more than we are now? Please. Express buses and ferries are very temporary solutions, considering that not all areas can/should have express bus service if they're not going to use it, and there aren't actually that many people living or working within walking distance of the waterfront to justify New Jersey-style ferry service.

 

 

 

And correlation isn't causation. They might not help, but you also can't say for a fact that they are aggravating the situation, especially considering that there are police and security cameras around the system. It's a lot easier to stop or search a train or a bus than a getaway car.

Express buses and ferries have been running for DECADES. They are not "temporary" fixes. As for the cameras, please... Most of the cameras are broken anyway.

[SubwayGuy]

Wakefield's numbers are heavily influenced by nearby Edenwald and the crime filled border with Yonkers.

 

PS - Edenwald has little to no subway service and is one of the worst areas of the entire Bronx.

 

The Bronx in general is not a good area, though it does have decent spots here and there, so it's not a good example to use. Look at Brooklyn - Brooklyn Heights, Borough Park, Park Slope, Kensington, Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst - all of these areas have subways and are fine. Yet it's only east of Flatbush Avenue that things start to get really crappy.

 

Queens is much of the same. The reason for development in LIC / Astoria is...the subway. Sunnyside is still a nice neighborhood, Middle Village, Forest Hills.

 

The subway is a draw when encouraging responsible tenants and homeowners to live in a neighborhood because of the ease of commute. New Yorkers deal with the longest commutes in the country (and some of the largest in the world) so this is no surprise.

 

Buses take longer and snarl up traffic, taxis and carpooling are slow and inefficient, boats are slow and only help with interborough traffic. Bikes are proving to be a completely inefficient and unsafe waste, particularly since they do not seem to be held to follow the rules of the road. Every other method of transportation is inefficient.

 

The subway would be a better place if we got off this BS and went back to the days when people had manners. It's high time quality of life crimes were enforced, and people who were repeat offenders eventually wound up in jail. As for the mentally ill, it's time to get them off the streets by putting them in isolated hospitals where they cannot leave until released...or send those people away from the city entirely to other facilities. The "showtime" crooks should be arrested on the spot and any money on them confiscated and held as evidence, and never returned to them. No bums loitering in train stations etc.

 

Concurrently with that, homeless shelters need to be made safe. Those homeless who commit crimes at homeless shelters deserve a fate worse than death - the denial of all government programs and exile from the city, if not outright jail time followed by the same.

 

Not only will this eliminate numerous delays caused by these charletans and bums, it will also improve the quality of the system.

 

As for the neighborhoods, they will improve when they are made safe, which the removal of the underclass causing the problems (which disproportionately negatively impact minority neighborhoods) will stabilize those areas and reduce overall crime and the appearance of blight in those areas.

 

As for the projects...two words. Wrecking ball. A better solution would be to put projects residents in regular apartment buildings with no notice to others that they are on public housing, in various neighborhoods. The caveat being that no more than 1 or 2 may live in any one building. Isolate them, and they will stand out like a sore thumb if their kids start acting up. That's the problem - the damn kids. You can't stick a bunch of single moms working all the time and old people raising their grandchildren in a building together where the kids run wild and who grow up with role models in pop culture (which, regardless of your race or who you identify with, right now is a steaming piece of turd) and expect them to turn into anything other than little felons trying to get money.

 

The flip side of that is no more tax breaks to luxury buildings who promise "low rent" apartments. This two tiered system prices the middle class right out of the city, which is what you've seen. In fact, a hard cap on the number of luxury apartments in new construction in general would be a better way to keep prices down. Force developers to build medium quality in a quantity of buildings, instead of a low quantity of extremely large luxury buildings.

 

This country as a whole has a lot of cleaning up to do. From politicians who are corrupt and spending money they don't have, to the excesses of banks, healthcare insurers, and other moneyed interests who are largely unchecked (and ramping up to screw the system again). To the underclass that lurks about destroying otherwise safe neighborhoods, pissing people off, and crying unfair when one of their rights are taking away, but bragging about how they got away with one every time they take someone else's rights away.

 

And we've got to step off that politically correct BS if we're ever going to have a serious discussion about doing it.

[B35 via Church]

Census stats show that NYC's transients population is increasing....

MTA stats show more subway trains are late...

MTA stats show ridership on its buses are declining.....

 

I'd like to see a stat on just how many people in this city are using bikes, ferries, choppers, taxi's, personal motor vehicles, rollerblades, skateboards/longboards, pogo sticks, FEET, and/or teleport to get around....

 

My point? This is to be expected... So I don't want to hear any whimpering from the MTA about late subway trains when they have a tendency to deter bus usage....

 

“This is an extraordinarily complex issue,” NYC Transit Division President Carmen Bianco said at an committee meeting on Monday.

No it isn't, miss/misses/mizzz Carmen Bi-onn-cohhh...

Stop f*cking trying to force 10 pounds of shit inside a 5 pound bag & you wouldn't have this problem.

 

As fares rise service declines!

...and vacations from the suits get longer!

[Quill Depot]

Buses are no solution. I know SBS makes it look like an alternative, but face it we'd all take subway over SBS any day. Look at the past. A good example is DC before their metro was built. Chaos to get the downtown.

Also, highways. They would be great but we aren't in LA folks. Everybody wants to go to downtown, and there will never be a true highway through downtown. Plus parking is a huge issue in this city.

 

The MTA needs to work on better crowd dispersion and distance between trains. For instance, trains aren't equally packed. This would require more entrances in large stations and better mobility along the platform. Grand Central for instance is a station with no mobility on the platform, you're pretty much stuck where the stair lets out unless you push along.

[B35 via Church]

Better crowd dispersion & distance between trains means nothing if the city's population continues to keep growing at the rate it does.... The MTA can have exits/entrances all over the place & have each and every train on every line running perfectly exact distances behind each other like clockwork & that would still do nothing to address capacity issues.... Passengers simply trying to get onto already crowded trains is one of the main reasons trains run late; and the whole *in a hurry to get nowhere fast* attitude that NY-ers tend to have, does not help matters at all....

 

The problem of lateness is a problem that the MTA is simply going to have to take on the chin.....

[Trainmaster5]

Thank you SubwayGuy for pointing out the things that many posters overlook with their simplistic post/counterpost responses. I've been following this thread for a while and I've seen some things that are obvious if one would take the time to think things through without the built-in bias. One of the dumbest ideas held by some New Yorkers is that subways create crime in otherwise safe neighborhoods. The old "mugger mover" argument. Think about it for a moment. An underground mode of transportation through an unseen neighborhood versus a bus or automobile where a person up to no good can scope out everything up-close and personal. The personal auto, bus, elevated, and (finally) the subway is the correct order for most property crime types and always has been. Ask a law enforcement person and that's their usual response. Taking it a little further if I wanted to rob or cause you bodily harm and get away with it foot and personal auto are the way to go.You would have to be a few fries short of a Happy Meal to commit a crime and hope to escape by subway or even a bus. Not saying it hasn't been tried before but why would I or any thinking criminal trap him/herself on a subway train? As far as the argument about transportation modes ( bus-rail-ferry ) goes there are a few ways to look at the argument. If the argument is about  cost efficiency rail wins hands down. Subway, el, trolley, railroad , MNRR,NJT, LIRR,PATH, SEPTA, MBTA may all be loathed by their ridership but those agencies are not stupid. Even when the agencies run other services within their locations the emphasis is always on rail service first and foremost. Quite frankly, by their charters/ mandates they would be failing their constituents by focusing on the other modes to the detriment of rail service. Passenger loads=money in that world so a 10-12 car subway/railcar will always trump surface transit. I'm sure that everyone has seen the railroad commercials on television by now. They may be self serving but they are basically true. Substitute a bus for every tractor-trailer you see. The environmental argument holds true. When I'm in NYC or on Long Island I love exploring by bus but I'm aware how buses affect the quality of life in the city. I can tell you that when I'm in NC driving on interstate US 95,US 40, or US 74 the air is cleaner than it is in parts of NYC  even with the truck traffic down there. Ferry service has to be an afterthought in any argument in the region. Unless it is  greatly subsidized long distance ferry service from Eastern Nassau or Suffolk County is a pipe dream. No one who commutes from out there would pay full price for such a service if it was offered. The same arguments about location given about NYC hold true out there. Unless you live next to the dock itself one must use his/her private auto or a bus or cab to get to the dock itself. If ones destination is not at the arriving dock then one must use another mode of transport to finish his/her trip. Then there is the capacity/speed problem. Larger boats add ridership capacity but are inherently slower. Throw in the weather related problems with snow, rain, ice, etc., and no private business would want to touch this idea with a 10 foot pole. The only way I could envision ferry service being practical are those already running services. I may be short-sighted but I can't see ferry services being economically viable on a large scale in the near future. Just my opinion. Carry on.

[Trainmaster5]

Better crowd dispersion & distance between trains means nothing if the city's population continues to keep growing at the rate it does.... The MTA can have exits/entrances all over the place & have each and every train on every line running perfectly exact distances behind each other like clockwork & that would still do nothing to address capacity issues.... Passengers simply trying to get onto already crowded trains is one of the main reasons trains run late; and the whole *in a hurry to get nowhere fast* attitude that NY-ers tend to have, does not help matters at all....

 

The problem of lateness is a problem that the MTA is simply going to have to take on the chin.....

You've nailed it. The problem is capacity. Unfortunately no one wants to address the issue head-on. The city and state cry poverty. The riders don't want to pay more. The NIMBYs don't want "mugger movers" in their neighborhoods. Nobody is really looking ahead. It's all for the next election cycle. In general I find that NYC residents with that attitude you mentioned aren't as intelligent as they were when I was a kid. They've become very short-sighted in certain ideas. As one who still considers himself a Brooklynite no matter where I lay my hat at night I'd like to make a point. I don't care where you live, where you came from, where your parents came from, whether you own or rent, your skin color, your sexual orientation, whom you worship/don't worship..The neighborhood is not yours personally. I've seen neighborhoods evolve all across this city in my lifetime. I've seen entire boroughs change although that takes longer to accomplish. Things like the VZ bridge, Third Avenue el, Parsons-Archer, Myrtle Avenue el, WTC, Kings Plaza, Metrotech, Fulton el, A&S ,Alexander's, and Gimbels, train to the Rockaways are all things that have come or gone in my lifetime. Heck, East Flatbush/Rugby or Flatbush/ Prospect-Lefferts Gardens are something that changed in my lifetime that I'm sure BrooklynBus and B35 via Church can attest to. The point I'm trying to make is that many people are afraid of change for whatever self absorbed reasons they may have yet we New Yorkers lack thje true visionary talent(s) among us to lay out a true workable plan for the future.. The "what's in it for me" mentality rather than how will this impact my children/grandchildren in the future. I'm not blaming the but rather the people we've put into leadership roles in the city and state.Which elected officials are looking at the capacity issue and what are they doing about it ? This problem didn't just appear overnight. It can't be solved overnight either. Question is whom is even thinking about the problem overnight? It's great that we forum members can hash it out among ourselves but where are the people we elect and pay? Carry on.

[B35 via Church]

As far as the argument about transportation modes ( bus-rail-ferry ) goes there are a few ways to look at the argument. If the argument is about  cost efficiency rail wins hands down. Subway, el, trolley, railroad , MNRR,NJT, LIRR,PATH, SEPTA, MBTA may all be loathed by their ridership but those agencies are not stupid. Even when the agencies run other services within their locations the emphasis is always on rail service first and foremost. Quite frankly, by their charters/ mandates they would be failing their constituents by focusing on the other modes to the detriment of rail service. Passenger loads=money in that world so a 10-12 car subway/railcar will always trump surface transit. I'm sure that everyone has seen the railroad commercials on television by now. They may be self serving but they are basically true. Substitute a bus for every tractor-trailer you see

I didn't read the whole thread, so I don't know who's arguing that buses are more efficient than subways (in general)... They certainly are not.

 

My premise is, you as an agency can't already have the problem of overcrowded subway trains.... And then try to force even more people onto these same trains while doing little to nothing to accomodate/account for any ridership increases onto that same mode.... You realize this, and then you stumble across an article (well in this case, a forum post) stating that the MTA has stats & it shows that more subway trains are late.... I'm like, mmm hmm, great Revelation there.

 

That's why I liked how "Eileen Thomas" put it there... Every year seems like it's worse than the next...

Yeah, because the population is increasing & the MTA is still maintaining status quo when it comes to the actual trains... Burning money on aesthetics "burns" me up, when you see so many people standing on platforms either trying to sardine their way onto a subway car (even after running 2-3 cars down or w/e), or "letting this one (train) go" in hopes that the train behind it will allow for a little more wiggle room to get on the thing.....

 

Then she goes on to say, oh how she's glad the MTA is keeping track of this (my retort to that part is, this is something I believe they knew for a long time now, so "gladness" resembles nothing of the emotion I have for the situation) & what particularly are they gonna do about it.... Yeah, other than raise fares & try to pull wool over the riding public's eyes, I'd like to know this as well....

 

See, I don't like the parallel that's being drawn here with bringing up that stats are now present to show that trains are late....

 

Like I said above, trains can arrive like clockwork & issues of capacity are still going to remain prevalent...

 

I don't want to post in caps like I'm aiming this partial rant at you (because I'm not), but I don't need a damn stat to show me what I can see, and what I've been seeing with my own two eyes with the subway system for quite some time now.... The implementation of the subway countdown clocks only illustrated things that much more - no stats necessary

 

And one more thing - no more boasting & gloating on how you're breaking subway ridership records!

That would be like Brett Favre (before this season) going up to every NFL QB & gloating that he has the most passing TD's...

I'm the type of person that would wait for the the worst QB in the league (Geno... Geno!) to walk up to him & say *yeah MF, but you got the most INT's also*...

 

...and would laugh every single time because it's true.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

And so because some areas don't want more subways, we just shouldn't expand subways even more than we are now? Please. Express buses and ferries are very temporary solutions, considering that not all areas can/should have express bus service if they're not going to use it.

 

 

However, the areas that express buses run (for the most part) use them in an efficient manner.

[B35 via Church]

You've nailed it. The problem is capacity. Unfortunately no one wants to address the issue head-on. The city and state cry poverty. The riders don't want to pay more. The NIMBYs don't want "mugger movers" in their neighborhoods. Nobody is really looking ahead. It's all for the next election cycle. In general I find that NYC residents with that attitude you mentioned aren't as intelligent as they were when I was a kid. They've become very short-sighted in certain ideas. As one who still considers himself a Brooklynite no matter where I lay my hat at night I'd like to make a point. I don't care where you live, where you came from, where your parents came from, whether you own or rent, your skin color, your sexual orientation, whom you worship/don't worship..The neighborhood is not yours personally. I've seen neighborhoods evolve all across this city in my lifetime. I've seen entire boroughs change although that takes longer to accomplish. Things like the VZ bridge, Third Avenue el, Parsons-Archer, Myrtle Avenue el, WTC, Kings Plaza, Metrotech, Fulton el, A&S ,Alexander's, and Gimbels, train to the Rockaways are all things that have come or gone in my lifetime. Heck, East Flatbush/Rugby or Flatbush/ Prospect-Lefferts Gardens are something that changed in my lifetime that I'm sure BrooklynBus and B35 via Church can attest to. The point I'm trying to make is that many people are afraid of change for whatever self absorbed reasons they may have yet we New Yorkers lack thje true visionary talent(s) among us to lay out a true workable plan for the future.. The "what's in it for me" mentality rather than how will this impact my children/grandchildren in the future. I'm not blaming the but rather the people we've put into leadership roles in the city and state.Which elected officials are looking at the capacity issue and what are they doing about it ? This problem didn't just appear overnight. It can't be solved overnight either. Question is whom is even thinking about the problem overnight? It's great that we forum members can hash it out among ourselves but where are the people we elect and pay? Carry on.

lol @ mugger movers...

 

The MTA has to know the problem is capacity; I'm someone that does not like being played for a fool.... Like anything else, it's all about a dollar & how far you can stretch one..... Of course you aren't gonna get too many to admit that (for a few reasons)....

 

As far as the rest of your post, you know what time it is.... And had I moved out to Aberdeen twp. (with someone who is now an ex), there is no way in hell I would "rep" there... Nor have you ever seen a post from me reppin' East Flatbush, "son" - I just live here & that is the extent of it... I get the whole being prideful of where you live, but I don't care if it's the grimiest of hoods or the most pristine of suburbs, the shit isn't mine... That's something that's never moved me; that whole I'm better than ______ because I live ____ and you live _____ ordeal.... It's corny to me.