Glad to have you back in the saddle! I'm going to have to re-read this tonight, it's good and lots of items that need contemplation.
For now I'll just say Empires in the end always turn on themselves. The luckiest thing to happen to the people of Japan, was the USA forcing it off the path of it's Empire, but it does come with the horrible baggage of being a proxy, if at times, an unwilling proxy.
It took longer than a night, but thankful for the comment about "not needing to be political" by one of the commenters. I think it's all political in the end. The best transport systems come about in societies which at the time also had the best medical care, low to no unemployable (vs. employed), and a concept that every citizen counts. The redistribution of the common weal to bring a fair and improving quality of life to all residents. It's when Capitalism gets a hold of a system and begins to extract that it all falls away.
Transit in the US is not a "thing" because it largely fails to support the FIRE sector (finance, insurance, real estate). Because land is a consumable in the US, the economic machine is fueled by automotive-centric development. Things like big box retail, Amazon warehouses, McMansion enclaves, low-rise office parks, drive-thru fast food, free parking, etc, etc simply couldn't exist in the absence of cars. Transit simply doesn't support these post 1960s type things. Interstate highways and freeways are the infrastructure that the FIRE sector requires. It further has allowed for the hollowing out of urban cores. Didn't Cheney say the American way of life is non-negotiable? We have gasoline at the same price as 1980.
S.Y. Lee's examples of Japan or France or Korea are valid... but those robust transit systems operate in geographically constrained areas and have a legacy of state centralized planning. Plus the FIRE sector thrives with highly restricted zoning which results in redevelopment of urban cores. Even so, there is no shortage of highway building in a place like France and the low density development on the periphery.
One of the few examples of successful passenger rail is Brightline... but they've also gotten boatloads of public money and bonding to develop infrastructure. Most importantly, they own the land around which stations have been located, so even if it loses money the corporate structure still wins. Of course SE Florida is choked with traffic.
California HSR is an unfortunate mismanaged mess... i don't know how hourly service from Merced to Bakersfield with bus connections to the Bay or LA can ever work out. The connections to the final end points are huge engineering and management challenges, and the Central Valley slo-mo construction provides zero encouragement for completion. It has been a cost-plus contractors' grift.
Lack of connectivity and balkanization as cited is a huge barrier. Places like NY Penn Station epitomize the problem with no run-throughs to different systems or states. Connecticut doesn't want to spend money that benefits New Jersey. DC is that same way with the commuter rail systems or Virginia and Maryland. Thus, the terminals are clogged. Boston can build the Big Dig for cars but can't manage to do the same for rail.
Transit and passenger rail were hopeless under democrats and is only slightly more hopeless under Trump.
Canada likely wouldn’t even exist in its current form without the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway between 1875 and 1885. It’s difficult to imagine us summoning the political will to duplicate that massive effort in these benighted neoliberal times.
Privatization is looting of the public commons, much as the original enclosure movement in the UK. Brett Christophers does great work on the modern scourge of privatization in the UK in “The New Enclosure: The Appropriation of Public Land in Neoliberal Britain” and “Rentier Capitalism: Who Owns the Economy, and Who Pays for It?”
Great article. I enjoyed reading it very much, and I agree on many (many many!) points you've made. So many, I can't even list them.
I do think, however, there's one very important consideration here: By some measures, if California were a country, it would have the 5th largest economy in the world—roughly in line with Japan. Similarly, South Carolina has a population and GDP roughly equivalent to Finland. Both countries manage incredible public services, including transit.
Which is to say: federal cuts are appalling, but what they really do is highlight the absolute neglect of our state and local political leaders. States and cities absolutely have both the means and the authority to fund and operate transit without federal help (although federal help would be amazing!). But state and local politicians lack the courage to do it, because it would require raising taxes. (#TaxTheRich!)
That's all! I'm solidly middle-class, but I'd personally be thrilled to redirect the money I pay on a bank note toward a slightly higher tax payment (say, $200-$400/month?!) if the result was convenient, safe, reliable, and comprehensive state and regional transit networks. But I realize I'm probably a minority in that...
Hi Peter, thanks for writing. I focused on the federal/national level in this article because as you kind of inferred there are so many multitudes in how cities and states in the United States choose to prioritize transit. And that in itself is a problem; very few countries operate such a balkanized governance structure to its public transit and mobility like the US. For most countries, transportation is a national interstate issue -- and we have a federal government. Considering the Biden administration was at least willing to pump money into a beleaguered public transit industry during COVID, the stark contrast of the Trump administration compelled me to write this.
Tiniest little correction: the Middlemarch character you quote is Caleb Garth, not Caleb Vincy. I only know this because I'm just finishing up reading it (upon a mention of it on Sandy Johnston's Bluesky)! Amazing how current a lot of the book still is, considering it's 150 years old!
I am German (spent part of my youth in the US) and I am a great fan of public transport. When I was 13 I admired the Bart and later discovered the NYC transit system. To my mind it is by conception (express lines and local lines) still the best designed system I have seen anywhere in the world. Pity that it is so run down and starved of funds. I wholly and totally agree that privatisation is the most stupid idea anybody could come up with. I remember the fight that Ken Livingston fought and lost in London and what disaster privatisation was.
But here's the but: the people who are on our side suffer from stupidity and ideological blindness. To wit: why drag carbon reduction, LGBTQ, mass immigration and other assorted madness into the whole thing? All this ideological nonsense by people who are on our side -at least theoretically in reality they often team up with the money people - repels the common people who need and often love public transport. In reality the problems of public transport are completely beyond left and right it is all common sense. Anyhow love to hear you worked on the Bart. And you should have mentioned the Washington DC metro. In its Darth Vater design and spooky public announcements it is certainly one of a kind. Still I rate it highly as well.
For me, the connection between social issues and transit is intuitive, if not immediately obvious. They're all related in prioritizing more people--of every kind--over fewer. Ultimately, as a self-proclaimed leftist and socialist, that's my perspective: the world is better when there are more people in it, not fewer. However those people define themselves and where they come from--straight, gay, cis, trans; native, immigrant--is irrelevant, at the end of the day.
In order to provide a good quality of life to as many people as possible without inviting ecological catastrophe, it certainly seems to be that Earth cannot sustain everyone having equal access to a car. Ergo, good transit--good urbanism--is required to provide a good quality of life to the largest number of people possible. (There's also just the geometric problem of car ownership in very large cities. The space for a car-dependent Manhattan would mean that Manhattan couldn't exist as it is; you'd have to level the whole thing for parking. And how is e.g., Lagos supposed to modernize without in essence dissolving itself, unless it builds a massive rail network for transportation?)
You're right that transit doesn't need to be politicized. In fact, I'd argue that the invisibility of car ownership in the American context proves that it isn't, really; it's still a very niche concern among members of the Democratic party. I think that's in part because no one disagrees that transportation--i.e., travel--is a good thing. What so many of us Americans are blind to are the barriers to travel that car dependency puts up, even to those of us who have it.
“We have just dined, and, however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity.”
S.Y., I'm a great fan of both Ha-Joon Chang and Byung-Chul Han, along with the honorary Korean Confucius. I pick them among many because I guess you will have read them as well. I know quite a number of North Americans who have read or know much of the reading of all of these men, many say that they admire them, but when I get into the nitty-gritty of actual doing what they preach, much like the follower of Jesus in America, they see such things as not of this world, hidden gracefully in the distant miles. It's a long winded way of saying America made it's bed, and likes sleeping in it so much they try to force the rest of the world on to their Procrustean couch. Hence recent events in South Korea.
Glad to have you back in the saddle! I'm going to have to re-read this tonight, it's good and lots of items that need contemplation.
For now I'll just say Empires in the end always turn on themselves. The luckiest thing to happen to the people of Japan, was the USA forcing it off the path of it's Empire, but it does come with the horrible baggage of being a proxy, if at times, an unwilling proxy.
Thank you for reading and commenting, as always! Always appreciate your patronage.
It took longer than a night, but thankful for the comment about "not needing to be political" by one of the commenters. I think it's all political in the end. The best transport systems come about in societies which at the time also had the best medical care, low to no unemployable (vs. employed), and a concept that every citizen counts. The redistribution of the common weal to bring a fair and improving quality of life to all residents. It's when Capitalism gets a hold of a system and begins to extract that it all falls away.
Transit in the US is not a "thing" because it largely fails to support the FIRE sector (finance, insurance, real estate). Because land is a consumable in the US, the economic machine is fueled by automotive-centric development. Things like big box retail, Amazon warehouses, McMansion enclaves, low-rise office parks, drive-thru fast food, free parking, etc, etc simply couldn't exist in the absence of cars. Transit simply doesn't support these post 1960s type things. Interstate highways and freeways are the infrastructure that the FIRE sector requires. It further has allowed for the hollowing out of urban cores. Didn't Cheney say the American way of life is non-negotiable? We have gasoline at the same price as 1980.
S.Y. Lee's examples of Japan or France or Korea are valid... but those robust transit systems operate in geographically constrained areas and have a legacy of state centralized planning. Plus the FIRE sector thrives with highly restricted zoning which results in redevelopment of urban cores. Even so, there is no shortage of highway building in a place like France and the low density development on the periphery.
One of the few examples of successful passenger rail is Brightline... but they've also gotten boatloads of public money and bonding to develop infrastructure. Most importantly, they own the land around which stations have been located, so even if it loses money the corporate structure still wins. Of course SE Florida is choked with traffic.
California HSR is an unfortunate mismanaged mess... i don't know how hourly service from Merced to Bakersfield with bus connections to the Bay or LA can ever work out. The connections to the final end points are huge engineering and management challenges, and the Central Valley slo-mo construction provides zero encouragement for completion. It has been a cost-plus contractors' grift.
Lack of connectivity and balkanization as cited is a huge barrier. Places like NY Penn Station epitomize the problem with no run-throughs to different systems or states. Connecticut doesn't want to spend money that benefits New Jersey. DC is that same way with the commuter rail systems or Virginia and Maryland. Thus, the terminals are clogged. Boston can build the Big Dig for cars but can't manage to do the same for rail.
Transit and passenger rail were hopeless under democrats and is only slightly more hopeless under Trump.
Canada likely wouldn’t even exist in its current form without the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway between 1875 and 1885. It’s difficult to imagine us summoning the political will to duplicate that massive effort in these benighted neoliberal times.
Privatization is looting of the public commons, much as the original enclosure movement in the UK. Brett Christophers does great work on the modern scourge of privatization in the UK in “The New Enclosure: The Appropriation of Public Land in Neoliberal Britain” and “Rentier Capitalism: Who Owns the Economy, and Who Pays for It?”
Thanks for the Brett Christophers s/o. I will check him out.
And I hope you may check out my series on the privatization of the Japanese National Railways, if this is a topic you are interested in (and sounds like you may be): https://www.substack-bahn.net/p/aura-of-success-the-first-years-of
Great article. I enjoyed reading it very much, and I agree on many (many many!) points you've made. So many, I can't even list them.
I do think, however, there's one very important consideration here: By some measures, if California were a country, it would have the 5th largest economy in the world—roughly in line with Japan. Similarly, South Carolina has a population and GDP roughly equivalent to Finland. Both countries manage incredible public services, including transit.
Which is to say: federal cuts are appalling, but what they really do is highlight the absolute neglect of our state and local political leaders. States and cities absolutely have both the means and the authority to fund and operate transit without federal help (although federal help would be amazing!). But state and local politicians lack the courage to do it, because it would require raising taxes. (#TaxTheRich!)
That's all! I'm solidly middle-class, but I'd personally be thrilled to redirect the money I pay on a bank note toward a slightly higher tax payment (say, $200-$400/month?!) if the result was convenient, safe, reliable, and comprehensive state and regional transit networks. But I realize I'm probably a minority in that...
Hi Peter, thanks for writing. I focused on the federal/national level in this article because as you kind of inferred there are so many multitudes in how cities and states in the United States choose to prioritize transit. And that in itself is a problem; very few countries operate such a balkanized governance structure to its public transit and mobility like the US. For most countries, transportation is a national interstate issue -- and we have a federal government. Considering the Biden administration was at least willing to pump money into a beleaguered public transit industry during COVID, the stark contrast of the Trump administration compelled me to write this.
Tiniest little correction: the Middlemarch character you quote is Caleb Garth, not Caleb Vincy. I only know this because I'm just finishing up reading it (upon a mention of it on Sandy Johnston's Bluesky)! Amazing how current a lot of the book still is, considering it's 150 years old!
This is the most brutal correction I have ever received. I've been slowly making my way through Middlemarch myself. Thanks for the correction!
If you're using this chart https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2024/comm/largest-gaining-cities.html
Fort Worth, Charlotte, Atlanta, Denton also have rail transit. OKC and Jacksonville have gadgetbahns.
Thank you for reading, Emily. You are correct. I decided to delete that sentence outright. Apologies for the mistake.
I am German (spent part of my youth in the US) and I am a great fan of public transport. When I was 13 I admired the Bart and later discovered the NYC transit system. To my mind it is by conception (express lines and local lines) still the best designed system I have seen anywhere in the world. Pity that it is so run down and starved of funds. I wholly and totally agree that privatisation is the most stupid idea anybody could come up with. I remember the fight that Ken Livingston fought and lost in London and what disaster privatisation was.
But here's the but: the people who are on our side suffer from stupidity and ideological blindness. To wit: why drag carbon reduction, LGBTQ, mass immigration and other assorted madness into the whole thing? All this ideological nonsense by people who are on our side -at least theoretically in reality they often team up with the money people - repels the common people who need and often love public transport. In reality the problems of public transport are completely beyond left and right it is all common sense. Anyhow love to hear you worked on the Bart. And you should have mentioned the Washington DC metro. In its Darth Vater design and spooky public announcements it is certainly one of a kind. Still I rate it highly as well.
For me, the connection between social issues and transit is intuitive, if not immediately obvious. They're all related in prioritizing more people--of every kind--over fewer. Ultimately, as a self-proclaimed leftist and socialist, that's my perspective: the world is better when there are more people in it, not fewer. However those people define themselves and where they come from--straight, gay, cis, trans; native, immigrant--is irrelevant, at the end of the day.
In order to provide a good quality of life to as many people as possible without inviting ecological catastrophe, it certainly seems to be that Earth cannot sustain everyone having equal access to a car. Ergo, good transit--good urbanism--is required to provide a good quality of life to the largest number of people possible. (There's also just the geometric problem of car ownership in very large cities. The space for a car-dependent Manhattan would mean that Manhattan couldn't exist as it is; you'd have to level the whole thing for parking. And how is e.g., Lagos supposed to modernize without in essence dissolving itself, unless it builds a massive rail network for transportation?)
You're right that transit doesn't need to be politicized. In fact, I'd argue that the invisibility of car ownership in the American context proves that it isn't, really; it's still a very niche concern among members of the Democratic party. I think that's in part because no one disagrees that transportation--i.e., travel--is a good thing. What so many of us Americans are blind to are the barriers to travel that car dependency puts up, even to those of us who have it.
“We have just dined, and, however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity.”
S.Y., I'm a great fan of both Ha-Joon Chang and Byung-Chul Han, along with the honorary Korean Confucius. I pick them among many because I guess you will have read them as well. I know quite a number of North Americans who have read or know much of the reading of all of these men, many say that they admire them, but when I get into the nitty-gritty of actual doing what they preach, much like the follower of Jesus in America, they see such things as not of this world, hidden gracefully in the distant miles. It's a long winded way of saying America made it's bed, and likes sleeping in it so much they try to force the rest of the world on to their Procrustean couch. Hence recent events in South Korea.