http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/nearly-30-years-after-ada-nations-transit-agencies-report-successes-and-shortfalls/2020/06/25/76e102d8-af22-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html
Nearly 30 years after the ADA, the nation’s transit agencies report successes and shortfalls
.
Most large US cities have bus and subway systems. In response to lawsuits about equal accommodation for disabled riders, bus fleets started to incorporate buses with wheelchair ramps, "kneeling" capability, and other fixes. More and more subway stations started to add elevator access to below ground or elevated subway platforms. In many cities, the entire fleet of buses now has one or more ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) accommodation. The Boston MBTA has a fleet of 1100 buses, not including the fleets operated by surrounding counties and communities. The NYC MTA bus fleet has over 5700 buses, the largest public bus fleet in the US. In addition, the Westchester, NJ, and Long Island bus systems feed passengers into the NYC system.
.
The wheelchair buses are more expensive to buy and more expensive to maintain. The ramps break, the ramps get stuck in the open position requiring that all passengers switch buses and that the bus get towed back to the shop for repair. The "kneeling" mechanisms can fail in the "down" position requiring a tow. Bus stops have to be moved and rebuilt (ramps or no curbs) and maintained to allow wheelchair access. And so on.
.
The Boston MBTA also operates a small fleet of handicap / wheelchair accessible vans. [Oops. "The Ride" is outsourced to private operators whose vehicles carry the MBTA logo and "The Ride" signage.] Handicapped riders can call for a door-to-door ride to get to (and from) their destinations, at a low but non-zero cost.
From 2012: http://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2012/07/29/passengers-on-the-mbtas-the-ride-feel-the-pinch-of-higher-fares-2/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ride_(MBTA)
.
******** Many years ago, there was a study of the Boston MBTA system that concluded that the MBTA could save MANY millions of dollars per year by operating a fleet of cheaper, more reliable, and cheaper to maintain "regular" buses and providing increased van service to the wheelchair bound and otherwise handicapped riders. The proposal to implement such a plan was not approved. One argument was that it stigmatized the handicapped riders and denied equal access to public transit. And that it violated the ADA. ********
.
I don't know the percentage of ridership that needs wheelchair or similar access, but the current system requires that 100% of the buses remain handicap accessible for 1%? 2%? of the ridership.
.
When I'm in downtown (Boston, NYC), I'm a big user of the buses and subways. (I grew up riding the buses and subways as a kid so I'm really comfortable and know the ins and outs.) If I needed special access, I'd want to ride an accessible -- and anonymous! -- public transit system. I wouldn't want to have to call the day before to arrange a special ride and have to tell the driver, "You're late! You have to get me to K-town ASAP! I have 3 PM with Coco and she hates it if I'm late!" (And then have the driver tell me, "Coco is sweet. Tell her Vinny the Van guy says hello. But I prefer Hana. You should check her out the next time.")
.
Social Imp says, "Equal access for all!" Economic Imp says, "An extra $50 million per year for handicap buses that get used, on average, for 2 rides per year? That's nuts! Use it for a bunch of dedicated handicapped door-to-door vans and subsidized Lyft / Uber cards for the handicapped. It will cost a LOT less than $50 M."
.
What say the rest of you?
.
Well, it's Thanksgiving Day and I am thankful that I don't need handicapped access to the MBTA, MTA or anything else at this time. And I hope it stays that way for a long time!
Posted By: lester_prairie
Re: how we got here
The identity stuff is pernicious because it exploits centuries of the application of infrastructure efficiencies. Individualized accommodation for privacy and physical differences is more expensive and resource intensive than for groups. For instance a ladies room with four stalls is more efficient than four single person bathrooms.
.
So we have centuries of accommodations designed around a minimalist set of categories -- biological gender. Basically if you had a dick you were excluded from certain areas.
.
Who did this really offend? Heteros seemed okay being grouped with their own gender. And gay/lez hardly had a complaint being grouped with those they are attracted to. So who were the losers?
.
Only insane people. We are stuck with billions of dollars of infrastructure that managed to accommodate like 99.9% of humanity and now insane people want to use their particular brand of victim insanity to violate the privacy of normies. They know it would take decades to restructure the physical facilities to regain the lost privacy (individual use facilities to accommodate the 99 genders.) So now they have an excuse to creep their way into the ladies areas.
.
There is no sane person who needs to redefine gender private areas. It's only crazies and bad actors.
I've been posting about the Kinsey Report and the SPECTRUM of hetero- to homo- sexuality for years. Here are a few links:
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/ter-general-board-12/kinsey-report-and-the-spectrum-of-homo-hetero-858933 http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/ter-general-board-12/in-the-general-population-there-is-a-sliding-scale-that-changes-over-time--937981 In the General Population, there is a sliding scale that changes over time.
-- Modified on 11/25/2021 9:19:03 AM