not gar, but...
part of public transit 'renaissance' in 1970s was result of growing disenchantment with urban freeway system, renewal was largely financed by federal govt't which appropriated about $89 billion between 1970-1994 for mass transit development, feds spent almost same amount between 1990-1994 on interstate highway system and estimates indicate similar amount is needed to repair about 5,000 of existing 42,500 miles of system...
cost overuns on new systems, failure to meet ridership projections, and inability to operate at a *profit* left federal mass transit funding vulnerable to budget attacks and ideological polemics, for example, low ridership (about 20% of projections) on miami's metrorail served as rationale for cutting federal subsidies and free markeeter rhetoric intended to turn people off to mass transit, but without continuing fed aid, feeder lines needed to raise ridership can't be built...
today, state (47%) and federal (9%) subsidies make up majority of public transit revenues with fares and ads contributing the rest, but operations lost money even at peak of public transit ridership in early 20th century, so to get advantages - convenience, punctuality, speed, lower oil costs, reduced pollution - it may not be possible to demand that public transit systems run at a profit (nor should they have to)... michael hoover
-------------------------------------------------------------- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.