[sustran] zegras-cox et.al.

[Wendell Cox]

Comments on posting by Walter Hook... from Wendell Cox

>Re: the debate of private viability and public transit,
>
>My research indicates that in the long run the level of public transit
>ridership is more substantially affected by the level of investment into
>public transit (whether it be buses or subways) than by the current level of
>subsidy.  Recent decisions as in New York to increase fares to ensure
>ongoing investment into the system, moving the system closer to being
>self-financing, has not led to a significant decline in transit ridership
>(subway ridership increased anyway), and allowed the system to continue to
>modernize (which is much more important to the system's long term cost
>competitiveness.)  Substantial levels of public investment today should make
>it possible to control costs in the future such that profitability becomes
>possible.  High subsidies and high levels of public investment is the best
>for ridership, but low fares and disinvestment into the system is more
>typical of public systems, part. those in fiscal distress, and this is the
>worst for ridership.
>
Would be interested in your research if available.

Encouraging views with respect to ridership and increased fare ratios. Don't
expect significant gains, however, in future cost control --- in a system
the size and importance of NYCTA --- and with monopoly power --- costs, most
importantly in labor, are likely to continue rising in response to the
political power of those who gain from such increases.

>I think the privatization debate needs to move beyond looking at short term
>subsidies and look rather at the effect a proposed privatization or
>'commercialization' will have on aggregate investment into public transit.
>Similarly with metro-bus debates, if the metro doesnt divert funds from
>ordinary bus operations, its less problematic, but in fact it generally
>does.  These issues will vary  on a case by case basis.
>
Since this is an international forum, we should point out that in the US we
largely use the term privatization to mean competitive contracting or
competitive tendering. While there is discussion of jitneys, etc., little
progress is being made. Virtually no privatization in the sense of UK
outside London or asset sales.

Best regards,
Wendell Cox
WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning
The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
http://www.publicpurpose.com
Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA