columbus transportation (Cleveland, Republic: hotel, tax, live)

[Traveler87]

Originally Posted by otters21

There is nothing wrong with it. If you choose the drive that is your rightful choice. However it is getting more and more expensive to drive a car especially with the gas prices soaring once again and there is also monthly car payments, insurance and upkeep etc. to consider. Besides that there are traffic clogged highways and the more traffic there is ( esp. with aggressive and dangerous drivers or drivers on the cell phone or texting) the more of a risk of being in a car crash.

Isn't Columbus now the largest city in the western hemisphere without rail?

[PhillytoCincy]

As in any type of rail, yes. Light rail, no. You still have places like Indianapolis that do not have light rail.

[otters21]

Originally Posted by Traveler87

Isn't Columbus now the largest city in the western hemisphere without rail?

Unfortunately I believe so. We were in line to get rail service ( the 3 C line) but the newly elected governor shot it down.

[coach123]

Why in the world would Columbus need rail? It's such a sprawaled out city and traffic is just not an issue around here. The 3 C project was a complete joke. Why would anyone want to take the train to Cleveland from Columbus? The average speed of that train would have been 40mph, it's faster to just drive. Would would you have done once you got to Cleveland? You would need to take a cab to get to your final destination. Then you have take a cab back to the train station. When you add up all the expenses, it becomes just as much as driving but less convenient. It's like saying we need a need a taller sky scraper downtown when everyone knows that that no one would occupy it and it would be nice to look at, but a complete waste of money.

[Traveler87]

That's ok, Ohio can die. This state is such a lost cause.

[chet_kinkaid]

why would someone in cincinnati or indianapolis..or toledo or pittsburgh want to take an amtrak train?its absurd columbus isnt connected to amtrak.there would be just as many riders out of columbus as indianapolis or toledo for gods sake..you can argue than none of these cities need train service but as long as my tax dollars are subsidizing amtrak i should be able to take a train from my city.i do agree that the 3 c route wasnt in columbus best interest..it wouldnt solve the problem of columbus not being directly linked to new york and chicago by passenger rail.

[coach123]

Originally Posted by chet_kinkaid

why would someone in cincinnati or indianapolis..or toledo or pittsburgh want to take an amtrak train?its absurd columbus isnt connected to amtrak.there would be just as many riders out of columbus as indianapolis or toledo for gods sake..you can argue than none of these cities need train service but as long as my tax dollars are subsidizing amtrak i should be able to take a train from my city.i do agree that the 3 c route wasnt in columbus best interest..it wouldnt solve the problem of columbus not being directly linked to new york and chicago by passenger rail.

You hit the nail on the head. Amtrak cannot stand on it's own without your tax dollors and government subsidies. Why? Because there is no demand. Rail is dead. I just looked up a trip on Amtrak from Cinci to New York. It takes 16hrs and is $88 one way before taxes and fee's. Cinci to Chicago is a 10hr trip and is $42 one way before taxes. Why would anyone want to do that when you can fly and be there within 3hrs. You can get a round trip flight to NY for around $200 and to Chicago for around $160.

The bigger issue is why are your tax dollars subsidizing something so useless?

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by coach123

You hit the nail on the head. Amtrak cannot stand on it's own without your tax dollors and government subsidies. Why? Because there is no demand. Rail is dead.

Except along the east coast--specifically, the Bos-Wash corridor, where Amtrak is hugely popular. But that's due to a confluence of factors, including an established and built-out rail network, and a corridor comprised of dense, urban cities (DC, Philly, NYC, Boston) where getting around sans car is an option.

That's really how rail is supposed to work. The problem with the U.S., particularly the central portion of the country, is that it is very spread out and not particularly well-connected. And cities like Columbus, Indy, Cleveland et al are heavily car-dependant cities, making it more challenging to move around in once one arrives there. Honestly, that's why cities configured the way Columbus is concern me from a long-term perspective. The U.S. is in the early stages of moving away from a car-centric culture, and sprawling, car-focused metropolises stand to
absorb a disproportionate share of the negative impacts of such a societal transition. We don't yet know what the replacement will be for the gasoline-powered automobile, but denser cities with established transit infrastructure are in a better position to handle such a transition more effectively and efficiently than those without those qualities.

I'll point out that the airline industry is also heavily reliant upon government subsidies--in the form of billions of dollars in direct subsidies, bailouts when one goes belly-up, prices that are negatively impacted by domestic protectionism, and an exemption from consumer protection laws. Pretty much any form of transportation--up to and including the auto industry--is reliant upon government subsidies, bailouts and/or favorable legislation in order to operate effectively on a mass scale.

[Traveler87]

Well Ohio has abandoned rail, so once the rest of the country gets their upgrades, Ohio better damn well upgrade its highway network. That idiot Kasich better do something. The guy has done nothing yet. He becomes governor soon; I better be impressed. Let's see how far Ohio goes after this.

We better have the best F'ing roads in the country. I want people to come to Ohio and enjoy our roads.

[coach123]

Originally Posted by Traveler87

That idiot Kasich better do something. The guy has done nothing yet.

#1. He is not even in office yet.
#2. Strickland has also done nothing and he has had way more time.