Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Capadvantagetutoring t1_j7kpvlm wrote

Reply to comment by youcantfindoutwhoiam in MTA spent twice as much on Second Ave subway consultants as it did on its construction by NYY657545

Why? The NYC system covers the entire NYC not just one Borough. Paris is around 140 miles vs 7-800 miles for NYC. For the sheer size of the NYC system it’s pretty damn efficient.

 If the systems we’re self contained by borough I’m sure the Manahattan one would be pristine and the other ones would get so little funding that they would be horrible 

 I agree they shouldn’t be compared but then you say you think the Paris one is as wide or wider than the NYC one ?  That part is confusing. You can’t be saying the Paris one is bigger ?
5

youcantfindoutwhoiam t1_j7kwlff wrote

The Parisian system covers Paris AND all the suburbs.

  • NYC square mileage: 302.6
  • Grand Paris square mileage: 314.3
3

Capadvantagetutoring t1_j7kyfj4 wrote

Should we count all of the MTA system? Counting Long Island and Westchester county ? Sounds like that’s what you are doing. Subway is just one part of the whole system. Since you want to compare.
Let’s do miles of track just in the city 140 vs 250 (800 miles if you count double used tracks )just in NYC not including the rest of the system I’ll use your metric the greater nyc area is 6720 square miles. Let’s take off 60% because some of that is NJ. That’s still 2600 sq miles. Paris system is dwarfed by NYC MTA. If you compare apples to apples and even when you compare JUST NYC vs Paris city only system (not outside ) still a big difference. Nobody is shitting on the Paris one it’s just comparing the NYC one to Paris is not really relevant

1

youcantfindoutwhoiam t1_j7kz05b wrote

Miles of track:

  • NY Subway 665
  • Parisian Subway 141
  • Parisian RER 365
  • Parisian Transilien 807

Regardless, are you telling us that there's no waste in the construction of the NY system and that its efficiently run?

3

Capadvantagetutoring t1_j7l1519 wrote

Never said there wasn’t waste (tons of it ) are you saying there is none in Paris

1

youcantfindoutwhoiam t1_j7l1w4c wrote

Well, we circle back to: compare the price and time it takes to build a line in Paris vs NY...

2

NetQuarterLatte t1_j7kz1gq wrote

Compared to NYC, Paris is almost a circle.

So perhaps the solution to public transit efficiency is to change the shape of NYC so that the outer edges of the city are roughly equidistant from the center.

−2

youcantfindoutwhoiam t1_j7kzjkt wrote

I'm tired of those arguments trying to tell me that there's no corruption in the way the MTA budgets and spends and that they are only spending that much because of the rock, the mileage, the shape now apparently.... Believe what you want and refuse to compare to how other countries can maintain and expand a similar system for cheaper and faster...

3

NetQuarterLatte t1_j7l2bm1 wrote

I have no doubt there's corruption.

There's a lot of inefficiencies too.

I think you might like this article: How to build back under budget (maybe) | The Economist

>But unfortunately the agency drawing up the contract does not have enough qualified staff to conduct a full review of construction proposals. The lowest bidder wins the job, as is typically the case in America. After winning, however, the contractor quickly tacks on additional costs, and the government is again in over its head. Unable to manage such a big project, it ends up relying on contractors and consultants who botch key segments of the Wilson line, requiring expensive do-overs. Inter-agency turf battles and co-ordination problems worsen the situation.

1