Submitted by lc1138 t3_12750u8 in washingtondc
Comments
ColonialTransitFan95 t1_jectev1 wrote
I saw it was Bloomberg and went “nope don’t need to get worked over BS today”
Appropriate-Bed-8413 t1_jedcfg1 wrote
What a pile of semantical excrement.
Nobody is confused by the common usage of “public good,” regardless of the purely academic textbook definition the author cites.
By any commonly understood meaning of the concept, public transit fits as a public good. Particularly when compared to the competing source for public investment and public space usage — roads.
lc1138 OP t1_jecnfer wrote
To be clear, I think this article is bs. Since when is public transit not a public good???
GraceStrangerThanYou t1_jed2g51 wrote
Well, it's Bloomberg so I assume it's because rich people don't use it and can't be arsed to realize that it allows the poors to travel to work. And if they did think about it, they'd just expect the moochers riding transit to buy cars with their fancy coffee and avocado toast budgets.
Because the wealthy fucks that take Bloomberg seriously are delusional, out of touch wankers.
churner-burner t1_jeg0cej wrote
Since it's rivalrous (no one can sit in your seat while you're in it) and excludable (they can exclude non payers if they choose).
That means it doesn't not meet the criteria of a public good.
Disused_Yeti t1_jeclsng wrote
‘Poor people have it too good’
Goosehybrid t1_jecmyn6 wrote
Is it a public bad?
[deleted] t1_jecnbu0 wrote
[deleted]
churner-burner t1_jeg0gmt wrote
It is a private good or, maybe, a merit good.
vtsandtrooper t1_jee55qk wrote
“Roads are great buts it not a public good.”
See how dumb that is?
rolo-lolo t1_jeensym wrote
The article also says roads aren’t a public good since they don’t meet the two conditions for them to be considered such.
vtsandtrooper t1_jeercu4 wrote
Neat, lets start by tolling per mile every road. I live in a city and can walk wherever I want, good luck libertarians in Utah who live 40 miles from everything
ContentsSettled t1_jeef3tl wrote
Wow that was a long-winded "um, actually".
Kief- t1_jed9qjj wrote
Public good is a widely used economics term that refers to a good such that, once provided, the good is 1) non-rivalrous and 2) non-excludable. By this definition transit is not a public good.
Non-rivalrous basically means “your use doesn’t affect my use.” Crowding out can occur very easily in transit so it’s rivalrous.
Non-excludable basically means no one can prevent you from accessing it. We install payment systems at the entrance so we do exclude people.
Textbook examples of public goods include national defense and clean air. Public transit should be well supported and financed, but they’re right it doesn’t meet the definition.
rolo-lolo t1_jeeo4ky wrote
And it should be financed via fiscal support from the state and fees paid by users.
solidrecommendations t1_jecm35n wrote
I’m so sick of Bloomberg lol