I Should Have Told You People To Vote Down The Props

AAAARGH.

Oh, Ahnuld, you IDIOT. You’re taking away the money that the people entrusted you with, that we were told would make traffic better, and putting it to a use that will not accomplish that end. I’m talking about the Governator’s decision to take the $100M that Metro was supposed to get to wipe out its deficit and USING IT TO BUILD FREEWAYS.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: freeway congestion is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. Building more freeways makes the traffic better for about five minutes until they fill up again. Putting money into public transit, however, starts getting cars off the roads, and reduces the traffic issue more and more over time. Can someone please tell our esteemed state ruler that taking $1.1 BILLION away from transit and putting it into roads is kind of like taking NyQuil and expecting it to actually cure your cold?

Where will the MTA get the money? Fare hikes, toll roads, who knows? Now, I know that I should check my voter info booklet to see what the breakdown was for all those props (remember 1A, 1B, 1c, etc?) from the November ballots, but I can’t find it, so I’m not sure exactly how much of the state voters’ trust is being horribly, horribly abused. But I’m pretty sure that when the voters agreed to go thirty billion dollars into debt in state bonds, they actually expected real change for their money – not just more dollars poured into a system that doesn’t work.

Related links:
The Daily Breeze: MTA fare hike likely in light of red ink
MetroRiderLA: Expect fare hikes

5 Replies to “I Should Have Told You People To Vote Down The Props”

  1. Ahhhnold is just a bitch to the oil companies as is the rest of his crew (i.e. the republicans). All they want to do is pollute the environment by making it easier to drive than to take public transport. This not only pollutes the environment, increases the green house gases but also funds Arabs which then fund the crazy ass terrorists cause we all know where the terrorists come from. And if anyone thinks that the oil money doesn’t directly or indirectly fund those crazies then they have been living in la la land way too long. But anyway…..it’s cause someone is making money from the oil…that’s what all this is about. Money in someones pocket.

  2. “The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York” – read this for proof of how more roads only makes for more cars. It’s not a solution.

  3. Some research has been done on the actual movement of congestion, and there’s a theory that congestion can’t be built away.

    It’s been referred to as the “gas theory”. Much of road planning and engineering has operated under the assumption that increasing capacity also increases throughput. This is the “liquid theory,” where increasing the size of the container increases the volume.

    Think of how installing a larger pipe lets more water flow.

    The “gas theory” of congestion, though, examined the behavior of individual vehicles and posited that the movements are not liquid, but more irregular and random, like gas molecules.

    Highways move more fluidly, in theory at least. But any break in fluidity results in slower speeds, and in turn, congestion. For instance, cars need to get up to speed by the time they clear the onramp. When they don’t, cars on the freeway slow down. And slowing down leads to a chain reaction, where every car behind applies the brakes slower and lets off the brakes sooner. Every brake light pushes congestion to the end of the chain.

    The gas theory is very evident on arterial roads, as the interactions are far more chaotic. It involves through-traffic, left and right turns, traffic signals, as well as parallel parking and pedestrian activity. Reducing congestion is much harder on surface streets.

    The research on this is still very much divided, and the camps split along political lines as well. Conservatives and libertarians mostly adhere to the liquid theory, while liberals and environmentalists are more likely proponents of the gas theory.

Comments are closed.