What would happen if your city, in the name of progress, started giving poorer residents vouchers for landline telephones rather than smartphones? Or if, rather than stocking public libraries with computers, so that people could write emails, your city installed fax machines? You would consider these unnecessary expenditures on outdated technologies. Yet when it comes to public transit, many cities splurge on modes designed for a different time and place—namely light rail.
http://www.forbes.co...e/#1bccfa6e432d
The writer is using an invalid analogy to make his point. Rather then debunk his examples, I'll say what all of us on this board know that rail transit is a public service designed to serve the taxpayers. And of course the writer cites Randal O'Toole who is America's hater of anything rail transit.
Sloan