Does anyone know if any of the public transport systems in the US operate in the red or black? I don't feel like looking it up right now. I am guessing that they do not otherwise someone would have pointed it out already.

Cscmc1,

No, I do not think it will be of much use to the smaller towns. I think public transport works better and is far ore efficient in dense populations. Due to the way populations are growing, mass transit will be a necessity. I still believe that we either start to make the sacrifices now or we will be forced to make them later. I also believe that the cost for those sacrifices will be less now if we do it voluntarily verses being compelled by what ever influences come about later.

When gas hit $5 a gallon, public transport ridership went up in those places that had it. Some areas were not able to keep up with demand. Should some major catastrophe happen or someone decide to do something really stupid in the ME where oil supplies are affected long term, I think it may be a bit late to start working on mass transit then.

Altruism is about the unselfish concern for others. If you do derive ANY benefit from it be it monetary or pleasure or whatever or the aim is to further yourself, how can you be said to be altruistic? Take David's example of the soldier jumping on the grenade. If it is the thought of his buddies living on that makes him happy and he "takes one for the team", isn't that a self serving purpose? He is reaping benefits from it so how is that really unselfish?

I think people are too afraid to admit it since it makes them look bad in front of others who are also playing that silly game. Much like the Emperor's new clothes. Nobody wants to admit that they cannot see the clothes. So, in that case, they rant about how good it looks. In this case, they openly show disgust at selfishness. OTOH, they will practice the same thing except in secret and hope nobody finds out.

If you really want to see mass transit developed, take steps to get rid of cheap fuel. If you increase the cost of gas/diesel (maybe double) over a decade, metro areas would pass local bonds to develop there local systems.

I would be shocked if any major urban public transit system operated in the black. I suspect they are all heavily subsidized. That's only an assumption, however.

A quick Google search revealed this:

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/02/05/an-alternative-rhetoric-on-making-transit-profitable/

When I travel I take a "Anti-terrorism" devise with me.














It's called a Nugent.

And what happens when the fund gets raped like a hottie in prison when the lights go out and the doors are open? In the meantime, what happens to the extra money that they get from the increase in cost of fuel?

In WI, the great Gov Doyle "borrowed" money from the road tax fund to do other projects. Either he didn't think about it and just took money or they took too much in taxes. Which is it? The money to pay for poor folk to have heat in the winter is now used to fund the DA's office. Why? They poor?

With this and many other incidences like it, can we afford the change? I think we should stay as we are. It might not be optimum but it sure will leave a few less avenues for them to buy votes.

Does your wife read these posts?

Lets set up a scenario: You are grilling up a couple of nice juicy ribeye steaks. You take them off the grill, put em on a plate and bring em inside. Only you trip in the door way, steaks go flying, and you are unconscious and bleeding on the floor. Where will the dogs go first? Hint: they will not be checking on how you are.

Secondly, many people give to charities because they have seen the pain and suffering caused by blindness, disease, loss of limbs, loss of a home. There are people who risked their lives serving the country who are now having a hard time taking care of their families. Alleviating the pain in some little way has nothing to do with warm and fuzzy, no more so than, say, a doctor's obligation to help his/her patients. I'm not saying this is everyone's view, but your blanket statements about people's motivations are at times insulting and misguided.

I don't really care where the money goes (let the oil companies have it, I own some energy stock); I'm just saying the only way to cause a change in behavior is to provide an economic incentive. Energy costs in the US are much too low to to encourage either conservation or the development of alternatives.

I'm agreeing with your "self-serving" model, if you want people to do something you have to provide the proper motivation. You can build all the rail lines you want, they won't be used unless they are significantly cheaper than driving.

Or you can do nothing. I'll be just fine either way.

I do not know that anyone who has sacrificed their life for another is getting anything out of it as I have never spoken with one. I do know that when I had the option of rolling over on my co-workers (for something that I still to this day do not believe was wrong) to keep my own job I did not roll. In hind sight I still would not do so even though I am pretty sure I lost my job because one of them did so on me. If piece of mind and living with my self is my 'reward' then perhaps I am not altruistic. I do not agree with that absolute definition. I believe there are certain things that fall in the 'gain' category and others that do not. Sacrificing ones life for another regardless of motive, IMO does not fall into the gain category. I did what I did because I felt it was the right thing to do. I have received no gain. I lost my job and have take well over a 50% cut in pay and benefits as a result. I have had to rely on hand outs from my dad to keep us afloat and I am trying to get out of the dead end job I am in. Right now life pretty much sucks because of my actions but I would do it again if I had to.

Just because others are only in it for them selves does not mean we all have to. Yes we are all in it for our selves to one degree or another. It's the degree that varies. I let people in front of me when I drive. It rarely happens to me but I do it for others anyway. I think it's the right thing to do so long as it does not hold up others too much. I hold the door for people who seem like they could use the help because I think it's the right thing to do. I am willing to drive my 16v less if it means we can get a public trans system to help us all out. I think it's the right thing to do.

I couldn't agree more. And rail travel alone will not replace the need for cars (and, thus, roads), so the added cost of a second infrastructure can't be ignored. I don't see a rail transit system being self-sufficient AND cheaper than using a car... at least not now. And I can't think of a less appropriate time to consider another massive subsidy for us to fund.

Let me answer that question with a story. A few years ago, we were rushing between gates in the airport. I was in the lead looking for gate K-9, IIRC. Suddenly I heard a voice saying "K-9 not cleavage". So no, she doesn't read it but she knows what I am thinking even before I think it. And yes, she is 1 of the 5.

True. But I can count on them not to "Menendez" me. I can trust they will not try to cheat me like my relatives did my uncle. I can trust that they will not ask me to divvy up my net worth and toss me out of my house like my grandfather.

And if by alleviating that suffering they benefit like they know they will, how is that altruism? If they feel good about giving to charities, how is that any different IN PRINCIPLE than me giving a hooker money to make me feel good? Either way, it is a transaction.

It MIGHT be wrong once in a while but I have found it less disappointing to bet AGAINST people than to bet that they will be good. When I was young, I was brought up with the fairy tales of how good people were. I learned that the reverse was true for the most part. Having known many people and found 5 good ones isn't very encouraging as far as betting goes.

A Nugent is a loudmouthed chickenhawk that never served his country a day in his life.

that wont do dookey for the population of the country that doesnt live in dense urban areas and has to depend on POVs for work and business. Would they pay less for their fuel?

I have no idea how it would be implemented, it's unlikely to happen by design anyway. We will just wait until the cost is driven up by outside forces, as always.

However, the cost of energy in the US is much too low; that will eventually change for everyone, either by design or not.

You may not have received financial gain and in your case, financial Dis-incentive. No doubt about that. HOWEVER, just because you receive payment in a different coin doesn't mean you didn't get paid. You got the feeling you did the right thing, kept your honor, etc, etc which is payment of sorts. The price of it is that you got to be in the unfortunate situation. You think it is worth it or you wouldn't have done it. Hence the payment part which might not be monetary.

I am very uncomfortable with degrees. Where would the cutoff be between selfish and altruistic? Kinda like the old line "What I do is ok but if you go further or to a higher degree, you are a pervert.". Also, many times I see degrees used by people to assuage themselves that they are "not so bad". To me, it feels like a cop out.