Does public transportation carry a social stigma in your city?

[kendallf]

I rode the bus to work yesterday.  I ride a bike to work quite a bit and I would like to have an option for bad weather days, days when I just feel lazy, or whatever.

I posted about it on FB and was amazed at the instant and total stigma revealed.  It was hilarious and also sad.  A sampling of comments:

"Scary!  LOL"

"I hope you have a CWP" (Concealed Weapons Permit)

"Might want to wear some Kevlar"

Of course, this is not a random opinion sample, but a huge number of my friends are avid cyclists who A) never ride other than recreationally and B) apparently have never and would never ride the bus.   :-)

Just for the record, I had a great conversation with the first driver on my (nearly empty) bus, and when I transferred to a shuttle for the second leg of the trip people were pleasant and the ride was uneventful.

What's the perception of public transportation where you live?  Radically different?

[BPA]

Older people often assume I am poor single mother on welfare, but younger people just assume I'm an environmentalist.  Many who know that I am not poor have said, "You must save a lot of money not having a car."

[Tai]

I think it carries a bit of one in Toronto. Many people use the transit system to commute, but there are some people who wont use public transit. I see more young people, women, and seniors than middle aged men on the bus. I suspect that it's a status/ego thing for some people.

But here's my question, we went to NYC last summer. We bought unlimited transit passes and hopped all over Manhattan on the subway. We took a long ride on the 5th Avenue bus too. There was a woman in the hotel (from Oklahoma) who said that she took taxis everywhere and she seemed shocked that we used the subway. I thought it was just her but when I got back home someone else told me that despite repeated trips to NYC they had never used the subway. Were we crazy to use it? It seemed safe enough and there were uniformed transit officers visible at many stations.

[Meggslynn]

In our city the public bus system does. Those who have never rode it find it scary (which as someone who used it for two years in college can say on the rare occasion it definitely is). The public rail seems to have less of stigma as there is little parking in the downtown core so lots of professionals park and ride the rail.

For the most part I enjoyed my experience on the public busses during college. It dropped me off right at the door to the campus rather than walking 15 blocks from the parkade which in the frozen north is a big plus. I didn't have to worry about my car starting on cold days. I could read or study all the way to school in back. However, I did see some things I would of preferred not to or felt vulnerable on more than a handful of occasions.

[skyrefuge]

In Chicago, the stigma is specifically confined to the buses. Taking 'the L' (rail) is much more socially-acceptable.

This is not completely irrational, as the L is generally much more efficient than a bus. Most trips on a bus are less efficient/convenient than using a car (or even a bike) to make the same journey, while most trips on the L are more efficient/convenient than taking a car. So people riding the bus are riding it because they're "too poor to have a car (or even a bike)" while people riding the L are "smart enough to not need/use a car".  Stereotypes, sure, but there's some truth to them.

[Jouer]

I've seen that stigma in a few cities, mainly ones with not-so-great transit systems.

As for NYC, not only are the subways safe, they are faster than taking a taxi. This isn't 1978 or something. I've taken the subway all over Manhattan, over to Brooklyn and even to the Bronx at night.

[Louis the Cat]

Speaking for the woman from Oklahoma: I grew up in Oklahoma City and no one I know would EVER ride the bus there. I don't know if the reputation is well founded but the bus system there is definitely known for being dangerous. You only ride the bus if you absolutely have to (ie, very poor). However, now that I'm thinking about it, the problem may start with the system being so badly designed that you only rode it if you were desperate which will, of course, self select for desperate people.

Where I currently live (Front Range area of CO) the bus system is very well used. I will admit I have only ridden the bus here a couple of times but some friends of mine use the bus so they can get trashed in Denver and then get out to the burbs without endangering themselves or others.

[frugalnacho]

Yes it does.  The bus is for poor people, and people that have made a series of very poor life choices.  I'm sure it's not the same everywhere (i'm in detroit), but I don't want to associate with that riff raft. 

And if you haven't made a series of poor life choices that has forced you to ride the bus, and you do it voluntarily for economic reasons then you are an idiot that can't do basic math and/or don't value your own time (a 20 minute car ride is equivalent to an hour and half bus ride, IF the bus runs on time).

[EDIT: Also you don't have your choice of when to leave.  If you have to arrive at work at a certain time, or you get off at a certain time you will spend an extra 20-30 minutes waiting for the bus (and possibly for your various other transfers) since you can't just start your bus ride at any time you want and you have to wait for their schedule]

[Zikoris]

Not really in Vancouver, especially for people who live or work in the downtown core. Heck, it's SUPER common for people who have cars to take transit to work if they work downtown because the traffic and parking situation can be such a nightmare in the core.

[socaso]

In Chicago, the stigma is specifically confined to the buses. Taking 'the L' (rail) is much more socially-acceptable.

This is not completely irrational, as the L is generally much more efficient than a bus. Most trips on a bus are less efficient/convenient than using a car (or even a bike) to make the same journey, while most trips on the L are more efficient/convenient than taking a car. So people riding the bus are riding it because they're "too poor to have a car (or even a bike)" while people riding the L are "smart enough to not need/use a car".  Stereotypes, sure, but there's some truth to them.

That was true 10 years ago when I lived there! I found that I wasn't using the transportation very efficiently until I started using bus/train combos to get around.

In LA people just love to gripe about the public transport. I think the only stigma about it is that it is only convenient for limited amounts of people. Lots of people I know say they would happily use public transport more if it went where they needed to go. LA is so spread out it's a miracle anyone can get any use out of the trains at all. They are expanding, though.

[seattlecyclone]

All types of people ride the bus in Seattle. There's no real stigma to it at all. The tech companies tend to give free/subsidized bus passes to their employees. These benefits are well used, especially among the younger crowd.

[Albert]

Obviously not, but I live in a very different part of the world. Very few of my friends (mostly upper middle class) living in the city or nearest suburbs have cars and most of those who do move around the city with public transport anyway. I have never been to a place with a more efficient public transport system. Our tram system is particularly good. On the other hand driving in the central part of the city is complicated and parking expensive and/or difficult to find.

[prof61820]

In Chicago, the stigma is specifically confined to the buses. Taking 'the L' (rail) is much more socially-acceptable.

This is not completely irrational, as the L is generally much more efficient than a bus. Most trips on a bus are less efficient/convenient than using a car (or even a bike) to make the same journey, while most trips on the L are more efficient/convenient than taking a car. So people riding the bus are riding it because they're "too poor to have a car (or even a bike)" while people riding the L are "smart enough to not need/use a car".  Stereotypes, sure, but there's some truth to them.

I live in the City - this view is a little antiquated.  With the CTA's "tracker" system bus riding is easier, very predictable and more efficient.  More and more hipsters are riding buses and often you can spot an up and coming neighborhood by who gets on the bus ahead of you.

There is a little bit of snobbery still left but it's entirely dependent on the bus line and your neighborhood.  Most of it is from folks who don't use any form of public transportation ever.

No one looks down on the commuters that take an "express" bus in to the Loop down Lake Shore Drive or a "regular" bus from Lincoln Park, Old Town and Lakeview if the bus is more convenient than the train.

[kendallf]

the bus system there is definitely known for being dangerous. You only ride the bus if you absolutely have to (ie, very poor). However, now that I'm thinking about it, the problem may start with the system being so badly designed that you only rode it if you were desperate which will, of course, self select for desperate people.

This is of course key, and judging from the sampling of responses so far, it seems to hold true.  Jacksonville has a huge sprawl (we're the largest city in the US, since the entire county is "the city of Jacksonville"), the buses run only once per hour typically, and the routes don't transfer to another route except at one downtown hub.  My admittedly n=1 experience would indicate the bus riders here are economically disadvantaged or unable to drive for other reasons (DUI, etc.).

If you live in a city with a well designed bus/rail system and/or a city with significant congestion and parking problems for cars, then the usage goes up and the stigma disappears. 

Yes it does.  The bus is for poor people, and people that have made a series of very poor life choices.  I'm sure it's not the same everywhere (i'm in detroit), but I don't want to associate with that riff raft. 

And if you haven't made a series of poor life choices that has forced you to ride the bus, and you do it voluntarily for economic reasons then you are an idiot that can't do basic math and/or don't value your own time (a 20 minute car ride is equivalent to an hour and half bus ride, IF the bus runs on time).

EDIT: Also you don't have your choice of when to leave.  If you have to arrive at work at a certain time, or you get off at a certain time you will spend an extra 20-30 minutes waiting for the bus (and possibly for your various other transfers) since you can't just start your bus ride at any time you want and you have to wait for their schedule

That's "riff raff".  :-)  The time cost is real, but I would argue that it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.  You can relax, read, do other things you couldn't do while driving.  You can put your bike on a rack at the front of the bus and ride part of the way, or ride between connections to speed up transfers.  At $50/mo for a pass here, the economics would appear to be a huge win over a car.

Having said all that, yes, I have multiple cars, a motorcycle, and wayyy too many bicycles.  I'm just trying to add another option, and wondering why it's so negatively perceived. 

[mxt0133]

Yes it does.  The bus is for poor people, and people that have made a series of very poor life choices.  I'm sure it's not the same everywhere (i'm in detroit), but I don't want to associate with that riff raft. 

And if you haven't made a series of poor life choices that has forced you to ride the bus, and you do it voluntarily for economic reasons then you are an idiot that can't do basic math and/or don't value your own time (a 20 minute car ride is equivalent to an hour and half bus ride, IF the bus runs on time).

[EDIT: Also you don't have your choice of when to leave.  If you have to arrive at work at a certain time, or you get off at a certain time you will spend an extra 20-30 minutes waiting for the bus (and possibly for your various other transfers) since you can't just start your bus ride at any time you want and you have to wait for their schedule]

Did you forget to include a <SARC>?

In the event the you are serious, so you wouldn't associate with an teenager that takes the bus because he has made poor life choices and immediately consider them riff raft?

As for voluntarily riding the bus instead of driving a car, i'm sure you can find many circumstances where it is still more economical to ride the bus due to cost of owning and mainlining a car, frequency to trips, ect.

But the OP is right, the social stigma is strong in some areas.

[Zikoris]

Obviously not, but I live in a very different part of the world. Very few of my friends (mostly upper middle class) living in the city or nearest suburbs have cars and most of those who do move around the city with public transport anyway. I have never been to a place with a more efficient public transport system. Our tram system is particularly good. On the other hand driving in the central part of the city is complicated and parking expensive and/or difficult to find.

I was a HUGE fan of the Zurich trams - the nicest, cleanest, most comfortable transit rides I've ever had. And surprisingly affordable, considering Switzerland.

[skyrefuge]

I live in the City - this view is a little antiquated.  With the CTA's "tracker" system bus riding is easier, very predictable and more efficient.  More and more hipsters are riding buses and often you can spot an up and coming neighborhood by who gets on the bus ahead of you.

There is a little bit of snobbery still left but it's entirely dependent on the bus line and your neighborhood.  Most of it is from folks who don't use any form of public transportation ever.

No one looks down on the commuters that take an "express" bus in to the Loop down Lake Shore Drive or a "regular" bus from Lincoln Park, Old Town and Lakeview if the bus is more convenient than the train.

Oh, yes, I completely agree. My post was not so much "antiquated" as it was a generalization. My hypothesis is that "stigma" most-closely correlates with "lack-of-efficiency", and secondarily, "lack-of-efficiency" correlates with buses more than trains (at least in Chicago). But of course there are exceptions in both directions. My girlfriend takes those Lakeview<->Loop buses to work every day (or at least she did before she started Divvying instead). Due to their superiority over traveling the same route by car (and to their proximity to lots of high-income neighborhoods), they're equivalent to the L in terms of lack-of-stigma. And are quite a different story than many of the East-West buses that travel through less-dense areas.

And yes, the existence of Bus Tracker improves the efficiency of bus-riding, but calling it "very predictable" might be a stretch. :-) And it only helps if the bus is your first or only leg of your public transit journey. If you want to go from Rogers Park to Logan Square, transferring from the Red Line to the bus adds a good bit of uncertainty, and the trip will take more than twice as long as driving.

[NoraLenderbee]

Yep. Buses are for poor people, kids, and students. Trains and light rail--where they exist--are high-class. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

[Beric01]

In my area - Silicon Valley where everyone owns a car, it's definitely stigmatized. I mentioned a couple public transportation options to co-workers that would be both faster than driving AND cheaper, and there was no way they were going to take them.

A lot of it is the crowd that frequents the buses, trains, etc. In Japan basically everyone takes the train, regardless of social status. At least in my area of California, the people who take the bus/train are frequently low-income, often shabbily-dressed. I seriously feel a little out-of-place when taking public transit, and I don't care about social status at all.

And that's not even talking about the Greyhound buses or other such means. For me, all I want is the cheapest seat from one place to another- I'm not particular about comfort or even cleanliness. Usually that's my bike, while other times I'll use different forms of public transportation.

[kathryn1029]

Tai- No, it completely made sense for you to use the subway/bus system in New York. The person who was shocked that you did was... not from here. The only time people visiting me use taxis is when my grandmother is one of them-- otherwise we use public transportation.

[Albert]

Obviously not, but I live in a very different part of the world. Very few of my friends (mostly upper middle class) living in the city or nearest suburbs have cars and most of those who do move around the city with public transport anyway. I have never been to a place with a more efficient public transport system. Our tram system is particularly good. On the other hand driving in the central part of the city is complicated and parking expensive and/or difficult to find.

I was a HUGE fan of the Zurich trams - the nicest, cleanest, most comfortable transit rides I've ever had. And surprisingly affordable, considering Switzerland.

Zurich trams are indeed excellent, but trams in Basel where I live are not any worse. :)

[Villanelle]

I live in Europe, and prior to that I lived in Japan.  Public transportation was well-accepted, to say the least.

[Beric01]

I live in Europe, and prior to that I lived in Japan.  Public transportation was well-accepted, to say the least.

Yeah, I was in Japan at one of our overseas offices this year. We took the subway to and form the office on one of our nights out. Trains are very popular for transportation to and from nights out in Japan. The other interesting thing is how you aren't supposed to talk at all on board! I would be standing on a train with a thousand people on board and it was dead silent. Public transportation carries a totally different cultural expectation compared to the US.

[skyrefuge]

Yep. Buses are for poor people, kids, and students. Trains and light rail--where they exist--are high-class. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

No, it makes quite a bit of sense. Poor people, kids, and students tend to be people who are willing (or forced) to value money over time. Buses in most cases require more time than other forms of transportation, so for people who value time over money (generally people who have more money), buses are not preferred.

Trains themselves are high-class in terms of the transportation network. Unlike buses, they have their own "roads" created for them and them only, and in the rare places where they intersect with the street network, the trains say "screw you, we're going through whenever we want to, and you have to stop!" That priority is what gives them their speed and predictability, and that's what makes them attractive to people of all wealth levels.

Certainly there are some people who would irrationally avoid an efficient and predictable bus just because "it's full of poor people", but for the most part, it's rational responses to the transportation mode itself that determines its ridership. Make it more efficient and rich people will be less likely to shun it.

[Timmmy]

Yes it does.  The bus is for poor people, and people that have made a series of very poor life choices.  I'm sure it's not the same everywhere (i'm in detroit), but I don't want to associate with that riff raft. 

And if you haven't made a series of poor life choices that has forced you to ride the bus, and you do it voluntarily for economic reasons then you are an idiot that can't do basic math and/or don't value your own time (a 20 minute car ride is equivalent to an hour and half bus ride, IF the bus runs on time).

[EDIT: Also you don't have your choice of when to leave.  If you have to arrive at work at a certain time, or you get off at a certain time you will spend an extra 20-30 minutes waiting for the bus (and possibly for your various other transfers) since you can't just start your bus ride at any time you want and you have to wait for their schedule]

Did you forget to include a <SARC>?

In the event the you are serious, so you wouldn't associate with an teenager that takes the bus because he has made poor life choices and immediately consider them riff raft?

As for voluntarily riding the bus instead of driving a car, i'm sure you can find many circumstances where it is still more economical to ride the bus due to cost of owning and mainlining a car, frequency to trips, ect.

But the OP is right, the social stigma is strong in some areas.

As someone who occasionally takes the buses he's talking about...  I don't think there is a bit of sarcasm. 

San Francisco is not Detroit.

Our public transit here is worthless.  It's rarely on time, it takes horribly inefficient routes to get places, it's costly to use and it generally has a funny smell. 

My wife works less than 20 miles down a major thoroughfare from our house.  If she wants to take the bus and arrive by 9am she has to leave the house at 6:30 in the morning.  This includes a 40 minute "layover" in the ghetto which is in preciously the opposite direction.

If she wants to arrive at work by 8:30 she can leave the house at 6am and, because of timing issues, avoid the ghetto stop and arrive at work at 7:45.  45 minutes early for work. 

[kendallf]

I just applied for our TIP (Transportation Incentive Program) which will reimburse me the $50/mo fare card.  My boss is going to be wondering "What the hell?" when he gets the review email.. I am virtually certain that I'm the only person in the 10 years or so our office has been out here to use the bus.  :-)

It's OK, I'm already one of two people who regularly commute via bike.  They all think I'm insane for that already; I work on the outskirts of the city at a former Navy base.  For most people it's literally an inconceivable bike ride to the nearest amenities, let alone 40 miles across the river where most of them have chosen to live.

[frugalnacho]

That's "riff raff".  :-)  The time cost is real, but I would argue that it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.  You can relax, read, do other things you couldn't do while driving.  You can put your bike on a rack at the front of the bus and ride part of the way, or ride between connections to speed up transfers.  At $50/mo for a pass here, the economics would appear to be a huge win over a car.

Having said all that, yes, I have multiple cars, a motorcycle, and wayyy too many bicycles.  I'm just trying to add another option, and wondering why it's so negatively perceived.

Yes riff raff.  It's a deal breaker to me.  I can relax and read at home with all the free time I have from not waiting for a bus, plus I can do it on my own schedule rather than being forced to do it in the rain.  I wouldn't use the detroit bus system even if it was free.

Did you forget to include a <SARC>?

In the event the you are serious, so you wouldn't associate with an teenager that takes the bus because he has made poor life choices and immediately consider them riff raft?

As for voluntarily riding the bus instead of driving a car, i'm sure you can find many circumstances where it is still more economical to ride the bus due to cost of owning and mainlining a car, frequency to trips, ect.

But the OP is right, the social stigma is strong in some areas.

No i'm dead serious.  Yes I have associated with people who ride the bus, and eventually we end up not associating with each other.  It's not entirely due to them riding the bus, but due to the choices that led them to riding the bus.  Much the same way I won't unfriend someone that rents-to-own furniture, but the type of person that has the mentality to rent-to-own their furniture, and has made a series of bad decisions that have culminated in them renting-own their furniture - well...I find that i'm just not that compatible with people that make those type of choices.

I'm sure if you go outside the metro detroit area the public transit system is completely different.  It is an absolute joke here though.

[frugalnacho]

As someone who occasionally takes the buses he's talking about...  I don't think there is a bit of sarcasm. 

San Francisco is not Detroit.

Our public transit here is worthless.  It's rarely on time, it takes horribly inefficient routes to get places, it's costly to use and it generally has a funny smell. 

My wife works less than 20 miles down a major thoroughfare from our house.  If she wants to take the bus and arrive by 9am she has to leave the house at 6:30 in the morning.  This includes a 40 minute "layover" in the ghetto which is in preciously the opposite direction.

If she wants to arrive at work by 8:30 she can leave the house at 6am and, because of timing issues, avoid the ghetto stop and arrive at work at 7:45.  45 minutes early for work.

Yes that is exactly what i'm talking about.  Every time a friend or coworker has resorted to riding the bus I have done the math and come to the conclusion that that particular coworker/friend is either retarded for voluntarily taking the bus, or has made a series of bad (ie retarded) decisions that have forced them to be in their current position of taking the bus.  It's usually the latter, because even most dumb people realize how inefficient our system is.

[Silvie]

In Holland everyone bikes. As soon as you can walk, you learn how to bike. From toddlers to grannies, everyone does it. Even when it rains. Cars are for lazy people.

[Beric01]

In Holland everyone bikes. As soon as you can walk, you learn how to bike. From toddlers to grannies, everyone does it. Even when it rains. Cars are for lazy people.

I seriously want to spend some time in the Netherlands. Maybe when I FIRE and slow-travel... A culture based around bike transportation sounds badass.

[kathryn1029]

As someone who occasionally takes the buses he's talking about...  I don't think there is a bit of sarcasm. 

San Francisco is not Detroit.

Our public transit here is worthless.  It's rarely on time, it takes horribly inefficient routes to get places, it's costly to use and it generally has a funny smell. 

My wife works less than 20 miles down a major thoroughfare from our house.  If she wants to take the bus and arrive by 9am she has to leave the house at 6:30 in the morning.  This includes a 40 minute "layover" in the ghetto which is in preciously the opposite direction.

If she wants to arrive at work by 8:30 she can leave the house at 6am and, because of timing issues, avoid the ghetto stop and arrive at work at 7:45.  45 minutes early for work.

Yes that is exactly what i'm talking about.  Every time a friend or coworker has resorted to riding the bus I have done the math and come to the conclusion that that particular coworker/friend is either retarded for voluntarily taking the bus, or has made a series of bad (ie retarded) decisions that have forced them to be in their current position of taking the bus.  It's usually the latter, because even most dumb people realize how inefficient our system is.

Please know that way you used the word "retarded" is highly offensive. I may get flamed for this, but that just boils my blood. I don't mind the cursing on this site, but that's just unacceptable.

[Beric01]

Please know that way you used the word "retarded" is highly offensive. I may get flamed for this, but that just boils my blood. I don't mind the cursing on this site, but that's just unacceptable.

Sigh. More political correctness/censorship because Americans are the most easily offended people in the world. I know even MMM is offensive to a lot of people! I've never used the word "retarded" myself, but isn't it so much more freeing not going around being offended by everything? If you see see injustice against people, take action to fix it. We're not going to help people by banning words that are "offensive", we're going to help them by solving their issues. Actions speak louder than words.

Stop being offended.

[frugalnacho]

Please know that way you used the word "retarded" is highly offensive. I may get flamed for this, but that just boils my blood. I don't mind the cursing on this site, but that's just unacceptable.

Why is it offensive to accurately use a word?  Or is that word simply offensive to you in any context?

[kathryn1029]

Please know that way you used the word "retarded" is highly offensive. I may get flamed for this, but that just boils my blood. I don't mind the cursing on this site, but that's just unacceptable.

Sigh. More political correctness/censorship because Americans are the most easily offended people in the world. I know even MMM is offensive to a lot of people! I've never used the word "retarded" myself, but isn't it so much more freeing not going around being offended by everything? If you see see injustice against people, take action to fix it. We're not going to help people by banning words that are "offensive", we're going to help them by solving their issues. Actions speak louder than words.

Stop being offended.

Listen, I hear you. But there are some words that are so insensitive, especially when used the way frugalnacho did, that I can't just sit idly when they're used.

Frugalnacho, you did not accurately use that word, and I'm not sure why you think you did. That word used to refer to people with intellectual disabilities. It no longer is used that way, but it has never been used "accurately" to desbribe someone who's stupid, and idiot, etc. Which is the way you used it. The only reason I said something is because I would love if just one person stopped using that word the way you did.

[OSUBearCub]

frugalnacho: You didn't use it accurately.  Unless you meant "delayed" - which by context you didn't.  People with intellectual disabilities are still people and deserve respect - many can't speak up for themselves. 

Back on topic:  Here in Orlando the bus system is pretty crummy.  There's definitely a stigma.  Our new commuter rail system "SunRail", however, seems more socially acceptable...when it's not accidentally clipping cars at intersections ha ha.

[arebelspy]

The word retarded has been extensively discussed on these forums previously.

http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/that's-retarded/
http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/off-topic/'that's-retarded'-revisited/

Please refrain from taking this thread further off topic.

Thanks!

[zinnie]

HUGE stigma to the bus in San Diego. People have told me it's dangerous and we get a lot of funny looks when we take the bus from our acquaintances and co-workers--sort of a "why are you doing something that is for a lower class of society" type of judgment. It is crazy to me how blatant some people are about this. But the bus here is actually really nice, clean, and they just added a ton of new routes with express buses that make it a much more efficient way to get around than it used to be.

I see a lot of reasons to go bus over driving, even though it usually takes longer (but only when there is no traffic--the buses have special lanes and lights so when there is traffic we fly by everyone else most of the time)
-Costs less than driving
-Safer than driving
-Can go out for happy hour or home from a night out without needing a designated driver
-It helps me make time to read every day--which I much prefer to driving. I've been flying through books since taking the bus.
-More walking in my day
-Being out in the world and seeing people in it. I really enjoy this part and hate being locked up in cars that just get you from place to place. You miss what is in the middle, and I think that is kind of tragic. It is similar for biking, of course.
-It makes it easier to run errands on the way home. If I get off at a stop a half mile from my house I can stop by the library, a butcher, my alterations place, Sprouts, my veterinarian, Albertson's, or a liquor store. I don't drive to a lot of those places because there is no where to park. And it is just so nice to have an errand be part of the walk home instead of having to get the motivation to walk ten minutes to the store after work when it is late.

[frugalnacho]

frugalnacho: You didn't use it accurately.  Unless you meant "delayed" - which by context you didn't.  People with intellectual disabilities are still people and deserve respect - many can't speak up for themselves. 

Back on topic:  Here in Orlando the bus system is pretty crummy.  There's definitely a stigma.  Our new commuter rail system "SunRail", however, seems more socially acceptable...when it's not accidentally clipping cars at intersections ha ha.

Retarded has multiple meanings in addition to "delayed".  What I meant is that they have displayed a deficiency in cognitive faculties, intellectual abilities, and reasoning.  It was absolutely used correctly.  What you disagree with is me classifying their decisions as retarded.  It was not used to be offensive to you, or anyone.  I am equating their decision making process to that of an actual retarded person, which I feel is accurate. 

Note: I don't think all people that use the bus are (retarded), just the select few people (I have 3 particular in mind) I was referring to in my example.  I think there is definitely something wrong those 3 people, and I feel bad for them because they made multiple life decisions that I can only classify as retarded. 

EDIT: sorry to keep foaming off topic, but do you think the word itself should be removed from the language, or is it still acceptable to accurately use the word to describe a human being with intellectual disabilities?  Is it because of the connotation of the word that you want to end all use in referring to people because you think it somehow dehumanizes a person with intellectual disabilities?

[Albert]

You know what's the first sign of a decent public transport system? People who own cars or could easily afford them use the system as well.

[oldladystache]

Suburban Los Angeles area here. Whenever I mention to a neighbor that I'm taking the bus to the Los Angeles airport they are astonished. Never heard of such a thing.

They get a friend to drive them, take a cab or shuttle, or drive to the airport and leave their car in the expensive lot.

I pay 25 cents (senior fare) and get taken right to my terminal. The bus comes by every 20 minutes and it's a 5 minute walk to the stop. It takes me maybe 20 minutes extra to take the bus.

I've explained to several people how it's done but so far I don't think any of them have tried it.

It does seem to be mostly poor people on the bus, but who can tell. Seems safe enough to me.

[aschmidt2930]

Those comments are unsurprising and typical.  As much as I love my country, us American's are seriously neurotic.  A mugging on a bus makes the national news and people go nuts.  A biker gets hit in an intersection and all of a sudden it's akin to strapping yourself in the electric chair to ride your bike to work downtown.

Meanwhile, statistically, you're much more likely to die barreling down a freeway with hundreds of daydreaming drivers.  I suppose the notion of control makes people feel more secure? 

[RFAAOATB]

Those comments are unsurprising and typical.  As much as I love my country, us American's are seriously neurotic.  A mugging on a bus makes the national news and people go nuts.  A biker gets hit in an intersection and all of a sudden it's akin to strapping yourself in the electric chair to ride your bike to work downtown.

Meanwhile, statistically, you're much more likely to die barreling down a freeway with hundreds of daydreaming drivers.  I suppose the notion of control makes people feel more secure? 

That and the notion of being trapped in a tube with loud children and hobos.  At least the proliferation of smartphones and mp3 players means more people mind their own business or are able to zone out.

The bus system here isn't that bad, but this is a small sparsely populated city.  I could see it being much worse in a rather large city.

[rocklebock]

In my city, driving has the worst social stigma. I don't have a car and am often congratulated for it. Biking is considered the most awesome form of transportation, followed by walking and then public transportation. But people who live in the suburbs immediately nearby tend to think our public transportation is scary/dangerous.

[Eric]

Those comments are unsurprising and typical.  As much as I love my country, us American's are seriously neurotic.  A mugging on a bus makes the national news and people go nuts.  A biker gets hit in an intersection and all of a sudden it's akin to strapping yourself in the electric chair to ride your bike to work downtown.

Meanwhile, statistically, you're much more likely to die barreling down a freeway with hundreds of daydreaming drivers.  I suppose the notion of control makes people feel more secure? 

That and the notion of being trapped in a tube with loud children and hobos.  At least the proliferation of smartphones and mp3 players means more people mind their own business or are able to zone out.

The bus system here isn't that bad, but this is a small sparsely populated city.  I could see it being much worse in a rather large city.

I'd think it'd be the opposite.  The larger the city, the denser the population, the harder it is to drive anywhere.  This pushes more people towards public transit, including buses.  The more people who can afford to drive but choose the bus instead, the nicer the ride generally would be.  At least it decreases the proportion of hobos and loud children.

[justplucky]

When I lived in Seattle, no. Many different types of people ride the bus in Seattle.

In the current metro area I live in, yes. I think this is likely because the area's largest employers are outside of the bus service area. The system is also so inefficient and infrequent that if you have anything resembling normal work obligations, not having a car and using mass transit adds hours to your commute unless your work and home are magically on the same bus route and you can catch the bus that comes once an hour.

[falcondisruptor]

I live in a city with pretty good transit and cycling.  It's common for government employees and other commuters to use transit.  But, there's is still  a bit of a stigma if you rely on transit as your only form of transportation. 

I can only think of one route where I'd expect to meet someone exceptionally interesting.

[prof61820]

Yep. Buses are for poor people, kids, and students. Trains and light rail--where they exist--are high-class. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

I think people prefer trains because they don't "bunch" up - like a buses do (http://www.wbez.org/tags/bus-bunching) and waiting for a train is a little more pleasant than waiting for a bus at a bus stop - especially on a cold day (although the GPS "tracker" helps because you can alter your route or run an errand if you have a 15 minute wait).  Another advantage of a train is that you can change cars if someone on your car has chosen not to take their medication and is acting erratically or worse is just disgusting (it happens on rare occasions) although I've eavesdropped on many wonderful "only in Chicago" conversations over the years.  Generally, my worst gripe on a normal day is the knucklehead who refuses to take his backpack off on a crowded bus or train and takes up space that would fit two people and looks annoyed anytime someone bumps into his backpack. 

Public transportation needs middle class support to obtain the proper funding to operate as a professional, efficient system.  To attract middle class support, a system's buses and trains need to run on time, run frequently, be clean, safe and generally user friendly.  In Chicago, they generally meet these standards so everyone uses them.  In other City's, they don't so most of the middle class drives.

[Trimatty471]

Even though I live in a city with good public transportation, it does carry a stigma.

[ScienceSexSavings]

You know what's the first sign of a decent public transport system? People who own cars or could easily afford them use the system as well.

This right here! While Montreal certainly has a high volume of traffic, transit is very, very normal. It's also among the best systems in North America :)

[alice76]

I live in NYC, and everybody takes the subway and bus. While wealthier people may also take taxis, there is no public transportation stigma, even among the Park Ave. set. Public transportation is often the quickest route from A to B. Also, parents of young children often prefer public transportation because you don't need to schlep a carseat around.