
How the Koch Brothers Are Killing Public Transit Projects Around the Country - DoreenMichele
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/climate/koch-brothers-public-transit.html
======
rayiner
I kind of don't disagree with them. Because big public transmit projects are
so incredibly expensive in the U.S., the cost-benefit analysis is totally
skewed, and the result is quite regressive. Take the Silver Line in D.C., for
example. Nearly $7 billion of public money spent to ease the commutes of
people in some of the richest suburbs in the country. If you put that money
into a fund, you could pay every impoverished kid in the _entire state_ $1,000
per year in perpetuity.

Our insane housing restrictions compound the problem. Especially on the
Virginia side, you have to pay a lot of money to live within walking distance
of a Metro station. So money spent on the Metro tends to go to benefiting
people who are already very well off.

(And in Nashville, the transit will be paid for with a sales tax increase,
which is a very regressive tax.)

~~~
jon_richards
>If you put that money into a fund, you could pay every impoverished kid in
the entire state $1,000 per year in perpetuity.

Not saying I disagree with the rest of what you are saying, but if everyone
thought that way then nothing would ever get done. Infrastructure matters.

~~~
rayiner
Does _rail_ infrastructure matter (at the prices we pay for it)? Maybe it
would be better if these projects just never got done, because at the inflated
prices we pay there are better uses for that money.

~~~
croshan
Maybe, but it sounds like you're ignoring government inefficiency.

Tell me, how many government projects are you a huge fan of? They're not
exactly hallmarks of design or execution. But we need them, at some level, and
they're more beneficial to society as a public good, than a private good. And
we're years behind in public transport, we _are_ improving.

Besides, if you're gonna target something that gives the least tangible gain
for the cost, take a look at our monstrous defense budget.

~~~
masonic

      government inefficiency
    

A classic example: the new SF-Oakland Bay Bridge.

Original retrofit estimate: $400 million

Grandiose, craptastic new bridge cost thus far: $8 billion

But wait, there's more: defective design, construction, and materials (bad
welds in Chinese-made roadbed segments, defective, fragile rods/bolts, etc.)
resulted in a bridge that is _less safe_ than the $400M retrofit would have
produced.

------
gigatexal
That's a bummer. My wife and I moved to Germany and the public transit is so
good here that we don't need a car and without it are saving hundreds every
month. We got bikes and are generally healthier. There is at least one
downside: large grocery runs like we used to do in the states: we just do many
smaller ones throughout the week and find that we spend less on groceries, so
win-win. I'd be for more and better public transit than less.

~~~
le-mark
The other thing I found was that drinking and driving was not as much of a
problem, just take the train/bus when you're going to be drinking. It's odd
how this is never part of the discussion.

~~~
monksy
Welcome to Chicago.

------
spamizbad
These cities have been experiencing a significant population boom. If they
don't invest in infrastructure, they're going to kneecap their own economic
growth. There's a reason why the region's businesses were backing public
transit, and it wasn't out of the kindness of their hearts...

------
pianom4n
[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/01/na...](https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/01/nashville-
transit-vote-davidson-county-mass-transit/564991002/)

> Separately, a political action committee led by Americans for Prosperity, a
> conservative advocacy group funded by the conservative billionaires David
> and Charles Koch, contributed a modest sum of $10,000 for mail advertising.

------
merricksb
Previously discussed:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17346028](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17346028)
\- 142 points/168 comments

Also...

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17349025](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17349025)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17346993](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17346993)

------
Matticus_Rex
The fact that public transit projects are occasionally really good and
efficient and worthwhile and valuable does not mean that most of them
shouldn't die a horrible death, because most of them aren't.

------
Karishma1234
I totally oppose large scale public transport scams that various elected
politicians are proposing with other people's money. Most of these projects
come at serious taxpayer costs worse that money should have gone into other
basic things in first place. The California proposed world's slowest high
speed train that has not progressed an in is a good example. NY subway repairs
(estimated at $70B) etc. etc. reek of third world scams that I am used to
seeing in India.

I think NYT is simply getting personal at Koch brothers for their consistent
support for less government, more individual freedom and in general
libertarian principles. NYT in this article has lacked critical thinking
ability.

------
luka-birsa
Article is paywalled. Can somebody do a TLDR of why exactly do Kochs want to
do this?

~~~
llukas
"The Kochs’ opposition to transit spending stems from their longstanding free-
market, libertarian philosophy. It also dovetails with their financial
interests, which benefit from automobiles and highways.

One of the mainstay companies of Koch Industries, the Kochs’ conglomerate, is
a major producer of gasoline and asphalt, and also makes seatbelts, tires and
other automotive parts. Even as Americans for Prosperity opposes public
investment in transit, it supports spending tax money on highways and roads."

~~~
ars
> is a major producer of gasoline and asphalt, and also makes seatbelts, tires
> and other automotive parts

Oh please. Is that from the article or did you make that up?

They could just as easily make parts for buses and trains.

~~~
eesmith
It's an exact quote from the text.

I verified it by clicking on the article, going to "reader" mode to bypass the
blocker, and doing a text search for "asphalt."

The next sentence is "Even as Americans for Prosperity opposes public
investment in transit, it supports spending tax money on highways and roads."

