Mr. Wisenbaker's chief beef it seems from what he wrote, is that it would
...expand the size and scope of government, [and] justify a multi-million dollar taxpayer subsidized public transportation system.
First, we already have a multi-million dollar, taxpayer funded transportation system that Mr. Wisenbaker uses every day without even thinking about it. It's our roads and streets. To Mr. Wisenbaker, and many that are still stuck in their thinking in the middle of the last century, when they think of transportation, they only think of their own transportation pods, i.e., cars. They want to get get from point A to point B as fast as possible in their cars, and they have no problem with taxpayers picking up the tab for that.
Our cities, Valdosta and Lowndes County included, have been built over the last fifty to seventy years to be auto-centric, not people-centric. This approach was pushed from the federal and state level, with easy money to be had by the local governments. It was easy money that financed new construction, but none for maintenance and rebuilding. It would produce some short term gains in growth and revenue, but it left the local governments with long term liabilities, on the tab for maintenance and replacement when the lifetime of the road wore out in about twenty five years. Many cities got themselves in financial trouble trying to merely keep up with what they had built this way. In fact, they couldn't keep up, and found themselves in real financial trouble. StrongTowns.org calls this a Ponzi Scheme.
Underlying Mr. Wisenbaker's argument is that he would require every resident of Valdosta to own a car. I assume that Mr. Wisenbaker is pretty affluent, and is quite able to handle the cost of auto ownership. He may not even personally know someone who can't afford the cost of owning an automobile. Yet there are many residents that are exactly in that position. Mr. Wisenbaker's solution is for them is to impose upon their family or friends for a ride to take them where they need to go. "If one doesn't own a car, they know someone who does," just doesn't cut it. This is especially true for people trying to claw their way up from the bottom of the economic ladder.
He argues, "Overall, labor availability (transportation) was not seen [by companies] as a concern - relatively easy to identify and hire labor for most common needs," especially since employers ask if one has reliable transportation. It weeds out those that don't at the very beginning. On the other hand, companies have been saying for years they want a transportation system.
I would wager, Mr. Wisenbaker has never lived in a city with a public transportation system, and has never used one for him to write what he has written. I grew up in a city with an extensive bus system. My mother road it for years to her job at the National Bank of Detroit. When I was thirteen, I got on the bus, and road it downtown to see the President of the United States come to Detroit to kick off his presidential campaign. I positioned myself next to the entrance of the Sheraton-Cadilllac hotel where I read he was coming and got to shake the hand of LBJ. Pretty cool for a thirteen year old. I have lived in New York, Boston, and Chicago, not to mention Atlanta, along with several cities in Japan, including Tokyo, and used public transportation extensively.
It's about choices. Mr. Wisenbaker wants to leave us with one: own and drive a car. I believe we should have choices: walking, bicycling, public transportation, or a car, and that all choices should be allowed, thought of, and built for.
No comments:
Post a Comment