Posts: 24,633
Threads: 1,093
Joined: May 2025
freeradical wrote:
Another potential benefit to free public transportation for Californian's, would be that it might mean an end to our smog check system if enough people started using public transportation so that our air quality improved enough to meet federal air standards. That would mean not paying for smog checks, or even worse, having to pay mechanics to get our cars into compliance if they fail a smog check.
You think California is going to REMOVE a regulation? That's adorable...
We'll see a "per mile" TAX on every vehicle before we ever see smog checks removed. That will be in addition to more rise in gas-taxes. And rise in electricity taxes. And the creation of a special sales tax on vehicles.
And public transportation in California won't get better, despite the additional billions in revenue.
Posts: 31,861
Threads: 708
Joined: Jun 2024
Reputation:
0
The reason California switched from buses and trains to cars was due to GM buying off politicians so they could push car sales.
Posts: 2,118
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2025
Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
The reason California switched from buses and trains to cars was due to GM buying off politicians so they could push car sales.
And that was what, 70 or 80 years ago? I guess when you buy a California politician, they really stay bought.
Posts: 3,964
Threads: 629
Joined: Jul 2024
A couple of big cities in the US have tried free transit over the decades: Austin did in the 1980s. They generally found the headaches from not being able to kick the mentally ill and homeless off outweighed any ridership gains. Free transit isn't uncommon in small college towns.
Kansas City recently decided to give it a try, though. Transit advocates like me think it would be much better to use the money to increase service instead. That's the only thing with a proven record of increasing ridership.
