this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023

47 points (91.2% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26701 readers

1160 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics.

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Is public transport in the USA owned by car makers? (lemmy.world)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I once heard that in the middle of 20th century, public transportation in the USA was widely privatized and bought by automotive manufacturers, and then wilfully left to rot, so that people would buy more cars.

However, I can't find anything backing that up. Do you know whether that's true, and where I can find some sources for that?

all 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 36 points 11 months ago

If I understand correctly, the old streetcar companies weren't "privatized" (i.e. government-owned assets that were sold off); they were for-profit companies to begin with.

Aside from that quibble, it was true, but then the "willfully left to rot" part kicked in and those transit subsidiaries went bankrupt and ceased to exist. Any rail transit that exists today is either a system that got saved from GM's plot by being bought by the government (e.g. New York's subway system), or a government-run system founded more recently (e.g. Washington DC's subway system).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Well, if you can't find anything to confirm your bias, then it is probably wrong. Public Transit often loses money and is owned and operated by government.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It is worth noting that “loses money” and “costs money” are generally just differences of perspective. For many, public services don’t necessarily need to be profitable monetarily to be worth their cost.

eta: I would like to clarify that this is in no way disagreement. More of a yes-and, than a but. I agree with you completely.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I love that distinction. And where does the money go? "Lose money" implies it vanishes, which isn't the case. It goes to companies that then pay their workers. It circulates which should be the point.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's like saying the Department of Transportation loses billions of dollars annually to build roads for individual vehicles. People find the craziest arguments to fight against anything that benefits the public.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

The military budget alone is in the trillions and they've apparently never "wasted" or "lost" a cent.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Public transport almost never runs a profit on it's own, but if you manage it through the government, then the added tax income from vastly more people being able to work better jobs, more than make up the shortfall.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

It was not built by government though. Railways, streetcars, etc. were private for profit enterprises, that later were acquired by governments.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Public transport is mostly going to be owned by local, state and federal agencies. I’d be willing to bet that what you read was written by someone that likes to make shit up.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It did happen: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yea I'm pretty sure this is what OP heard about, it's a common tidbit that gets shared

Ownership wasn't secret then, and it's not secret now. What happened then was that they bought transit things and shut them down. That COULD happen now too, but it would happen pretty publicly

They do lobby governments though

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

This is what I had heard of ages ago, thanks a lot!

If I understand this correctly, GM conspired to undermine public streetcars not to sell more private cars, but to sell public buses and supplies for them?

So I guess the part about selling cars that I heard was a myth, or at least not supported by evidence. Who knows what really went on in the GM executives' minds, though?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 11 months ago

No, that is not true.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 11 months ago

Public transit, in the United States, is primarily owned and operated by various government agencies.

What you are describing fits into the conspiracy theory that automobile manufacturers "lobbied" politicians to pass laws, subsidies, zoning regulations, public transit expansion plans, etc that would favor / encourage car ownership while limiting the growth of public transit. I believe that there where some trials involving auto manufacturing executives, which support at least part of this theory, but I don't know those details.