There is a problem: it is called traffic. It’s getting worse and something has to be done otherwise the whole I-66 and western Beltway corridor is going to be jammed 18 hours a day within the next 15 years. Just so you know, some of the other alternatives to ease congestion on the Beltway that have been discussed in recent years relates to fluctuating tolls on traffic, electronically enforced, so that during peak hours, drivers will pay higher tolls to use the Beltway. That’s the size of the problem we’re talking about here.
And as far as “limited in usefulness,” may I say that I (and most others here) usually have a fucking clue as to what we’re talking about before weighing in on the problems of land use in places where we don’t live? You seem to be laboring under the impression that the $5 billion is to build a subway that goes only to the airport. While that makes it worth it for me, the areas around the airport are a high-tech corridor that may be the biggest concentration of non-governmental jobs anywhere in the greater DC area. The line would link to Tyson’s Corner, which is not only another heavily developed office-park type area, but also home to the largest suburban shopping mall in the area. It would also go to areas which are very quickly growing residential areas, which, if I had to guess, have probably doubled or even tripled in population over the last ten years.
Limited utility? You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. We’re talking about many tens of thousands of new Metro riders each who right now have to drive everywhere. And so you know, there’s been analyses done on whether buses would be more efficient, and the answer has come back that Metro ridership would be far greater than bus ridership. Because people here almost all like the Metro, but a bus is just a bus. And there already is a bus from a faraway Metro station to the airport, and it sucks because IT’S FUCKING STUCK IN TRAFFIC ALL THE TIME!
What my solution would be is to build an express way JUST FOR THE BUSES. In case that wasn’t clear up till now. You can use the same real estate that the tracks would take up. The difference with buses is that they can change with the times (you can evolve the engines to make them more fuel efficient far easier than the rail car engines). You can also have them go where the people are, not like the train which the people have to come to. The bus can re-route, detour, and go into the city to get people from A to B. And you have no idea what the socio-economic climate of the city and surrounding areas will be like in 15 years from now. A more flexible means of transportation would seem like the way to go. That’s why I’m in favor of the bus.
BTW, we shot down a rail system here a few years back. It was to connect Milwaukee with Kenosha. The idea of a rail/commuter system is not entirely foreign to me.
In that case, why would it be any cheaper than a rail system? It’s not the train cars themselves that cost big bucks, it’s the real estate. And construction too, although I imagine that too would be comparable (paving a road isn’t cheap, and you’d have the same number of bridges, tunnels, etc).
Trains already run on electricity. When renewable energy sources become more widely available, all we have to do is hook it up to the power grid. You can use any energy source, not just those that fit in an onboard fuel tank. If you try to run busees on wind or nuclear power, you have to go through some inefficient steps to make the energy portable (e.g. charging batteries).
I made this school taxes comment earlier to highlight the usefulness of everybody contributing to the general public infrastructure tax pool, though I didn’t state that directly.
I have no kids but think it would be ridiculous to even dream of protesting contributing to things that benefit society in general.
And why doesn’t catsix see a car is private property and a bus is public property, and citizen-financed highway is a means for both to travel about?