Public Works Not Working, Mass Transit Not Moving: A Conservative Perspective

October 14, 2009 / 9:26 am • By Dr. Melissa Clouthier

Matt Lewis writes a must-read piece about a conservative view on public transportation. I’m not going to get into the details of it, but I urge you to read it.

Here is where conservatives and Republicans need to get with the program: the government does have a role in public life. Infrastructure and defense are the two obvious roles. The problem for conservatives, is that they haven’t given enough thought to the implementation of tax dollars for infrastructure. This void has been filled with leftist fantasies. The results haven’t been effective or pretty. That is, both form and function have stunk.

I believe that it is a thoroughly conservative notion to use public monies for public purposes in positive ways. Conservatives need to give more thought to how. When conservatives get involved, their philosophy drives beauty. Since they triumph the achievements of the individual, they are more likely to prize a unique, local, and beautiful representation rather than a bland statist ideal.

Sid Burgess wrote to me on this subject. He said:

The start is making our communities communities again. Then those INDEPENDENT and strong places will create change in the government that are needed. Our founding father got it, we just forgot the purpose of local governments.

Sid also said of public transit:

As a conservative myself, I have often lamented at the wasteful and ultimately bankrupt ideas of moving hundreds of millions of people via car and highway. Until we build roads that have lifespans much longer than a decade, we must be willing to consider most financially sustainable methods.

Conservatives need to stop ceding this ground to liberals. Conservation, integrity, efficiency, and longevity are thoroughly conservative notions. It’s time to embrace them again.

Posted in America • Political Animals • Show Me The Money
Tags: • • • •

  • Bender

    Yeah, who needs or wants the FREEDOM of being able to go where you want to go, when you want to go there, as you can with personal transportation, when you can be held hostage to the government’s dictate of where you can go and when they say you can go there.

    And who needs or wants the freedom and ability to carry large loads of groceries or other goods when they can necessarily be limited to the couple of bags that they can carry at once, not to mention the many blocks that you get to walk from the stop to your home, hopefully in the rain or late at night, when you might get mugged.

    And all that with the added benefit of growth being static and stuck around super-expensive stations, rather than growth being dynamic and going where the market takes it.

    Yes, a return to the 19th century with streetcars is the answer, even though they died out for a reason. Better yet is a return to the pre-industrial age, when everyone necessarily had to work within walking distance of their homes and, hence, never travelled more than 10 miles from home their entire lives.

    No thanks. For over 10 years I did not have a car and relied exclusively on public transportation. I’ve done my part. Never did I become so free, and never did the opportunity to increase my standard of living become greater than when I finally purchased a car and got away from the liberal hell that is public transportation.

  • OBloodyhell

    > As a conservative myself, I have often lamented at the wasteful and ultimately bankrupt ideas of moving hundreds of millions of people via car and highway.

    You know, I was going to post a comment defining Sid as well meaning but ignorant, but I think Bender already said most everything I had to say.

    I’ll back him up with a specific example, though –

    In my mid-sized college town, we have a tendency towards liberal government (we are, in fact, the only county in this physical half of a fairly large state to vote for Gore and Kerry in those two elections). As you may guess, with the liberalism plus the college as a focus of peoples’ travel, there is an extensive bus system, compared to many areas the same size.

    The contiguous main city area is about 15-20 miles across.

    Now, going ANYWHERE in this town by bus requires the following amount of time:
    5-10 minutes before the bus is due to arrive.

    20-30 minutes to get to destination.

    5-10 mins walking to get to actual destination

    5-10 mins walking back to bus stop

    5-30 mins waiting for next bus

    20-30 mins back to “home”.

    Now, taking the mins, there — that means that a round trip takes not less than 60 minutes of your time, and may take as much as 120 minutes.

    Now contrast, same trip by car.

    Get in car
    10-15 mins to destination (15-25 if rush hour).
    2 mins walk from parking lot to actual destination.
    2 mins walk back to car.
    10-15 mins back home.

    So we’re looking at ca. 35 mins if not rush hour, 45 mins if rush hour.

    Want to do more than one thing?

    By bus, add not less than 15 mins, possibly up to another 50 mins depending on timing, and, uh, enjoy the struggle with your packages.

    By car, add 5 mins, tops. And have no problem with your packages.

    Starting to see a point, here?

    Add to this the fact that the buses don’t run 24/7 on many routes, so you have to be aware of when the last bus runs or else get stranded.

    I’m sorry, but the “inefficiency” lies with mass transit, Sid, not with millions of people owning their own vehicles and going where they want, when they want. The inefficiency lies with a vast array of people having to make their schedule match some arbitrary timetable set by someone else’s needs.

    I came across a dictum long ago, which I’ve always found rather profound:

    Civilization advances by increasing the number of things you can do without thinking about them.

    Mass Transit, by making you conform to someone else’s timetable, increases the number of things you must think about and thus is not an advancement.

    There are certainly places where the downside of owning a car does outweigh the benefits — but most of them are very high density areas where mass transit can be 24/7 and fairly constant and widespread routes. New York City is a prime example. Much of Europe also appears to be.

    But most of the USA is spread out with a low population density. And most people like it that way, so “all places should be like NYC” is not a suitable alternative.

    In summary — in most places and for most people, Mass Transit is a bad option, only to be taken if you’re forced to by exigent circumstances. The freedom, spontaneity, and timesaving qualities of a car vastly outweigh the downsides.