Take a look at what is happening here:

http://blogs.journalism.cuny.edu/interactive2010/2009/10/16/dollar-vans-bring-change-and-conflict-to-sunset-park/

The vast majority of the vans I’ve taken are registered and I’ve read accounts of crackdowns on those unregulated vans in the media.

I agree dollar vans could be safer, but propaganda that portrays them as an enemy to a strong public transportation system makes no sense.

Anyway, it has long angered me that the MTA is granted a legal monopoly on transit along its routes, yet is unwilling and/or unable to provide the service that people actually demand.

chriswnw,

Libertarians aren’t pro-highway, it just seems that way. The honest ones admit that highways are subsidized as much as if not more than transit. Rather, they would seek to put all the cost of any form of transportation on the user. And yes, this would eliminate unprofitable routes, to which the response is, one should have known that before moving there. It all depends on whether you believe transit should function as a sort of welfare.

Shuttle buses operate all over developed countries, but usually only serving airports or hotels. There is no good reason why their service should be restricted to only those two venues. Rather than banning them, subject them to licensing requirements and safety regulations.

Light electric vehicles and bicycles could play a much larger roll in NYC transportation, if only we redefine the uses of public space for low-power vehicles rather than high-power vehicles.

Vehicles with lower peak speeds don’t require much regulation at intersections and can operate much closer together with much lower risk of accidents.

a comprehensive network of regularly scheduled routes with modern high capacity vehicles is advanced transportation hence the fact that you dont see these kinds of operations in poor undeveloped third world countries. however you only see jitneys/guaguas/dalladallas/publicos/motoconchos in poor undeveloped third world countries.

dont get me wrong, the MTA is a dyfunctional bureaucracy and i want to see privately operated transit service again, but it has to be better than what we have now, not worse. theres a big difference between privately-operated civilized transit (like what we had 80 years ago with the BMT) and this privately-operated anarchist transit with rattletrap minivans run by minimumm wage inexperienced drivers darting in and out of traffic trying to race ahead of the other vans.

you could easily do quality private transit if the city granted a company the right to exclusive bus lanes along a route because the only way transit will make money is if it operates fast and doesnt inch along in traffic. the hourly operating costs stay the same whether or not a vehicle picks up 5 or 300 people an hour.

1) The MTA can make money too, and it used to be private as well. However, how about the “underserved by mass-transit” areas? If the MTA were to close down the unprofitable routes and concentrate on the winners it would make money.

2)By allowing the dollar vans to poach MTA riders on the high volume corridors during rush hour you are leaving the MTA to serve the outlying points, off hours, low density routes. One way that Dollar Vans self-fulfill the prophecy of MTA inefficiency.

3)The Dollar Vans clog up the MTA routes, congesting all traffic, private autos, trucks and MTA buses. Dollar vans are the chaos of production stopping for fares in the middle of Flatbush and Church and every bus pad along the way. The MTA buses are slowed and bunched as a result of the traffic chaos resulting from the Dollar Vans operations, a second way that the Dollar Vans self fulfill the prophecy of MTA inefficiency.

4) What passes for “flexibility” and how wonderfully efficient these vans are is really just an institutionalized ghettoization of transportation. Imagine the same sort of system in Manhattan, I’d love to see the Upper East Side served like this. I saw a dollar van (Liscence from some place called “Maryland”) stop at the middle of the Flatbush and Church to pick up a fare with a baby carriage, cars and trucks whizzing around.

5) Dollar Vans are the opposite of Bus Rapid Transit. BRT will die quickly if forced to “compete” with Dollar Vans.

6) Carl Kruger and I do share one thing in common. A dislike of Dollar Vans. Senator Kruger has bravely fought Dollar Vans encroaching on his constituents turf in outer Flatbush Ave. Many scorching speeches later the Dollar Van’s economic position is stronger than ever thanks to Senator Kruger’s brave fight against bridge tolls. Once again, unintended consequences wins the day.

Oh well.

great, a third world nation form of transportation.

No, motoconchos are a third-world form of transportation. Right, Chriswnw?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haTmZl1vKrs

Whatever you think about that morally, they got the math working for sure.

I’m no libertarian, despite how that paragraph might sound. All I mean to point out is that the problem here is a failure on the part of public actors, and cracking down on the private actors who come in to solve it doesn’t help anything.

Streetcars and bicycles can also be described as “third world”, given the time they were first invented. Further, the Cato Institute would be likely to use such a term to refer to them.

Nevermind that shuttle buses, streetcars and bicycles have all undergone technological upgrades since then, and can all be adaptable to modern settings.

As a person who cycles everywhere, I’d prefer shuttle buses over regular buses in cases where I cannot bike (if I’m injured or if it is snowing). Their routes are more flexible and actually get you to your destination. Further, they can more easily discriminate against problem passengers (thugs, crazies, etc), which standard city buses always seem to be full of. Lastly, they tend to be self-supporting, and don’t require the massive subsidies that public transit agencies do. With sensible safety regulations and dispatching improvements by way of cellphone and internet, they can be upgraded to the modern environment of an American city.

(I’m not a libertarian, by the way. I just happen to agree with them on this particular topic, while disagreeing with them on their pro-highway and anti-bicycle stances.)

There’s a reason these services are cheap, just like the ubiquitous jitneys in New Jersey. When you have inexpensive immigrant labor, do minimal maintenance on vehicles and stick the drivers with the rap for fraudulent registration and insurance documents, it’s no wonder it’s only a $1 fare.

The long-term downside is that by artificially undercutting the above-board transit operators, the MTA and other bus companies will ultimately opt to focus their resources on corridors where they don’t have direct, unfair competition. So just when you think the bus doesn’t come often enough and the dollar vans are everywhere, the bus will pack up and go somewhere else.

Another problem is that most of the van/jitney drivers are basically independent contractors working for themselves. They lease a vehicle and then keep the fare revenue. Thus, they’re constantly competing with each other which leads to dangerous driving and an over-supply of service- becoming a source of congestion rather than a solution.

It’s a complex issue that goes far beyond the price of the fare.