tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post425436655787245957..comments2008-08-11T23:11:47.698-04:00Cap'n Transithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17057887736728828646noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-19764494556267628872008-08-11T23:11:00.000-04:002008-08-11T23:11:00.000-04:00

It's a good question, Michael, but you assume that transportation agencies should use the more "profitable" routes to subsidize the ones in less demand. If I'm paying a premium for transit, I'd prefer that that premium go to subsidize other people's rides than to investor dividends, but I think we should be up front about what we're doing. Some people may not agree that it's fair.<BR/><BR/>The

Cap'n Transithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17057887736728828646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-78192918870743355522008-08-11T08:49:00.000-04:002008-08-11T08:49:00.000-04:00

Forgive my relatively uninformed comment, but doesn't that mean that for-profit carriers will pick off the most profitable routes and customers, leaving the government with an even less profitable transit system and fewer resources to move customers?<BR/><BR/>I think I read that in London they handle this by having "reverse auctions" for entire transit routes, specifying the service requirements

Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15057113283154126104noreply@blogger.com