[milwaukee-electric] Re: Vote in this poll on commuter rail:

[Y Marti]

Yes I understand the question and it's a pointless question or at best  
it is very poorly worded. When everything else is considered what  
would be the primary criteria of justifying an expenditure for a new  
transportation system? Obviously ridership. The question answers itself.

FYI, "ridership" is the quantity of riders. Any transportation system  
will have a ridership, it could be 100,000, it could be 1,000,000.  
There is a quantity where the ridership could justify the construction  
costs. There are several studies which quantify the ridership  
necessary to recoup construction costs from a pure economic analysis.

Of course, looking at government subsidized infrastructure alone,  
there is almost never an expectation to recoup those costs. Does a  
city decide not to build a road because they will never recoup the  
costs? In some cases, maybe but in general, no. The road is built to  
provide an economic benefit to the community. It is a conduit for  
people and products. Commuter rail offers the same options.

Quoting Y Marti <yance at oldmilwaukee.net>:

> God, that is a silly question. Ridership is obviously the end-all of
> justifications.
>
> Quoting mrcooby <x779 at webtv.net>:
>
>> They ask if ridership would justify it.
>> http://www.dailyreporter.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>