Taxes Subsidize 6.9m Mass Transit Riders; Most Poor People Drive to Work

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

Despite the billions in federal and state taxpayer dollars poured into mass transit programs, only 6,908,323 working Americans take advantage of the subsidized service, according to US Census Bureau data released yesterday. The agency’s American Community Survey, a questionnaire mailed to three million households, found that 121,248,284 workers over the age of 16 regularly commuted to work by personal automobile or carpool last year. Despite the comparatively small number served by buses, subways and rail, the Obama Administration has made expanding mass transit a top priority. “President Obama’s vision of robust, high-speed rail service offers Americans the kind of travel options that throughout our history have contributed to economic growth and enhanced quality of life,” Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in April. “We simply can’t build the economy of the future on the transportation networks of the past.”

The stimulus bill poured $8 billion into the president’s proposed expansion of rail. Another $8.4 billion in taxpayer funds have been directed to “stimulate” mass transit on top of the existing federal money set aside for such programs. The president’s 2010 budget sought $42 billion for highway spending compared to $10.3 billion for mass transit programs that serve just five percent of the working public. The president strongly defended his priorities.

“Investing in mass transit and high-speed rail, for example, doesn’t just make our downtowns more livable; it helps our regional economies grow,” Obama explained in a July speech at an urban policy roundtable. “So you take an example like… Kansas City. One idea there focuses on transforming a low-income community into a national model of sustainability by weatherizing homes and building a green local transit system.”

The combined federal spending on transit this year represents a $2300 subsidy for each passenger, not including local and state funds devoted to such programs. Taxes on motorists, including a direct 2.9 cent per gallon federal levy on gasoline, are the primary source of funds for subway, bus and rail systems.

The census survey also showed that greater numbers of the working poor used cars and carpools to get to work than transit. A total of 17 percent of transit users reported incomes over $75,000 per year in income while only 10.6 percent fell below the poverty line.

A copy of the census results can be found in a 1.5mb PDF file at the source link below.

Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics (US Census Bureau, 10/27/2009)

[courtesy of thenewspaper.com]

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 35 comments
  • Criminalenterprise Criminalenterprise on Oct 29, 2009

    geeber: When heading into Philly, I take the train, which takes slightly longer and is surely more expensive (for me) just to avoid the Sure-Kill. It's typically worse than L.A. traffic. Going to D.C. can be silly. The beltway routes are more jammed shut than downtown, and using the Interstates that take you within blocks of the White House is faster than fighting the daily suburban transhumance. I'm happy to pay for mass transit systems. It frees up the roads and gives me some options (some times). If we're worried about highway maintenance we need to have a different conversation, one about heavy multi-axle trucks, since they are responsible for nearly all surface wear.

  • Tenmiler Tenmiler on Oct 30, 2009

    @FreedMike, My only beef with your otherwise dead-on post is your city size estimates. Seattle isn't "twice the size" of Denver. ;) Good post. And for the guy who says Fed money isn't used for highways outside of the stimulus, you'd be wrong.

  • Alan Years ago Jack Baruth held a "competition" for a piece from the B&B on the oddest pickup story (or something like that). I think 5 people were awarded the prizes.I never received mine, something about being in Australia. If TTAC is global how do you offer prizes to those overseas or are we omitted on the sly from competing?In the end I lost significant respect for Baruth.
  • Alan My view is there are good vehicles from most manufacturers that are worth looking at second hand.I can tell you I don't recommend anything from the Chrysler/Jeep/Fiat/etc gene pool. Toyotas are overly expensive second hand for what they offer, but they seem to be reliable enough.I have a friend who swears by secondhand Subarus and so far he seems to not have had too many issue.As Lou stated many utes, pickups and real SUVs (4x4) seem quite good.
  • 28-Cars-Later So is there some kind of undiagnosed disease where every rando thinks their POS is actually valuable?83K miles Ok.new valve cover gasket.Eh, it happens with age. spark plugsOkay, we probably had to be kewl and put in aftermarket iridium plugs, because EVO.new catalytic converterUh, yeah that's bad at 80Kish. Auto tranny failing. From the ad: the SST fails in one of the following ways:Clutch slip has turned into; multiple codes being thrown, shifting a gear or 2 in manual mode (2-3 or 2-4), and limp mode.Codes include: P2733 P2809 P183D P1871Ok that's really bad. So between this and the cat it suggests to me someone jacked up the car real good hooning it, because EVO, and since its not a Toyota it doesn't respond well to hard abuse over time.$20,000, what? Pesos? Zimbabwe Dollars?Try $2,000 USD pal. You're fracked dude, park it in da hood and leave the keys in it.BONUS: Comment in the ad: GLWS but I highly doubt you get any action on this car what so ever at that price with the SST on its way out. That trans can be $10k + to repair.
  • 28-Cars-Later Actually Honda seems to have a brilliant mid to long term strategy which I can sum up in one word: tariffs.-BEV sales wane in the US, however they will sell in Europe (and sales will probably increase in Canada depending on how their government proceeds). -The EU Politburo and Canada concluded a trade treaty in 2017, and as of 2024 99% of all tariffs have been eliminated.-Trump in 2018 threatened a 25% tariff on European imported cars in the US and such rhetoric would likely come again should there be an actual election. -By building in Canada, product can still be sold in the US tariff free though USMCA/NAFTA II but it should allow Honda tariff free access to European markets.-However if the product were built in Marysville it could end up subject to tit-for-tat tariff depending on which junta is running the US in 2025. -Profitability on BEV has already been a variable to put it mildly, but to take on a 25% tariff to all of your product effectively shuts you out of that market.
  • Lou_BC Actuality a very reasonable question.
Next