In defense of Alex [sustran] Re: South Africa

[Wendell Cox]

Eric... we continue to disagree... but what overgeneralizations about rail?

>
>
>I am sure that Wendell will not be surprised that I am coming
>to the defense of Alex.
>
>I think the highway lobby is still pretty damned strong in the
>US, but that is a different subject than South Africa.  I also
>disagree with Wendell's gross overgeneralizations about rail 
>transit in the US, but again that is for another thread.
>
>In South Africa, the government could in fact support transit
>more by putting higher taxes on fuels, by putting luxury taxes
>on autos, and by other means of taxing the priviledged more.
>This is what makes SA so interesting. It is far richer than most
>countries in Africa, it just has a wildly uneven distribution
>of wealth.  Eric
>
>On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Wendell Cox wrote:
>
>> Re Alex Welte Comments....>
>> >
>> >
>> >> Where have such alternatives worked?
>> >
>> >Where is the car lobby weak enough to allow mass transit to
>> >be managed properly ?
>> >
>> Are we talking about the car lobby, or are we talking about a situation in
>> which land use patterns have emerged that make the private automobile the
>> only answer to the great majority of urban (v.rural) passenger transport
>> needs. Given the current situation --- which perhaps could be reverse with a
>> century or two of public policy aimed at dismantling the suburbs and forcing
>> people back into the inner cities --- the activities of the car lobby are at
>> best a minor factor. What we have in the US and Europe is people making
>> choices about how they travel based upon where they live and where they must
>> go. For the great majority of trips no alternative form of transport is
>> reasonably conceivable --- and most certainly not the high capital rail
>> projects that are the current fancy in the US, which have proven themselves
>> capable only of moving people to downtown (which already has a high public
>> transport market share), most of whom have been attracted from buses and
>> carpools.
>> 
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps SA should ensure that it follows the US lead in auto pollution
>> >> technology for cars --- this is the only way that the pollution problem
>> >> related to cars will be solved, and it is being solved.
>> >>
>> >'this is the only way ... ' ? nothing like categorical assertions to
>> >gloss over the need for evidence.
>> >
>> Unless you have an alternative technology that will deal with a majority of
>> trips then it is the only way --- and none of the presently operating
>> technologies in the US and Europe can do the job.
>> 
>> >> >Since the policy, or lack of policy, has consisted mostly of leaving
>> >> >things to the market, and with a refusal to subsidize public
>> >> >transportation, I would like to hear whether readers agree with
>> >> >the editorial.  Eric Bruun
>> >> >
>> >> It's not such a bad thing to leave these things to the market, especially
>> >
>> >It isn't ? you been there and seen it aint so bad, or what ?
>> >
>> Yes I have been there. The taxis carry a very large market share --- larger
>> than the buses and larger than rail, and among backs, a considerably larger
>> market share than autos.
>> 
>> >> when you consider the robust kombi-taxi industry, both in terms of its
>> >
>> >'robust' ? people killing each other for more business is a robust
>> >industry ?
>> >
>> And I suppose you are going to solve this problem by US style subsidies? Do
>> you think for a minute that there is anything the government can do to drive
>> the kombis out of business. Do you think that the SA treasury can afford to
>> provide even pennies of subsidies per rider to the kombi operators?
>> 
>> >> potential to move passengers (if permitted) and the entrepreneurial path
>> >
>> >it's 'permitted' AND it's a mess - people scrape together money they'd
>> >have preferred to use for clothes and shelter so they can get to
>> >work and not starve.
>> >
>> >> that it provides to people trying to move up the economic ladder.
>> >>
>> >right out of starvation into a shanty in a squatter settlement
>> >
>> >> With all of the social needs in SA --- housing, education, jobs, etc.,
etc.,
>> >> it is not surprising, nor is it necessarily inappropriate for subsidies to
>> >> public transport to take a :"back seat."
>> >
>> >I guess by making people pay more to be less mobile,
>> >they get around to doing their homework instead of going to school,
>> >repairing their shacks instead of getting meaningful employment,
>> >etc.  Sorry I couldn't support the one about jobs - I think you're
>> >not necessarilly making sense on that one.
>> >
>> I suppose the answer is for us Americans to export our highly successful
>> public transport policies to SA --- why not --- we did it with religion not
>> so long ago
>> 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 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA
>> 
>> "To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
>> identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
>> that is no higher than necessary."
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
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 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA

"To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
that is no higher than necessary."