Trimet Etiquette (Tri-tiquette)

I’ve seen a lot of discussion over here on our Trimet/Max/Bus/Public Transport system over here in the last few years.

My friend Christian Bullock (who provided this earlier info for us here at MB on flexcar and mall 2005) has started a new series over on the PDX PIPELINE about Trimet etiquette issues calling it “tri-tiquette”. Here is an excerpt used with his permission:

Trimet Portland, OregonAlright folks, I’m fed up with the riding etiquette that some individuals display on TriMet’s MAX & bus services. Since I have my finger on the Trimet pulse (I do ride twice a day…), I thought I’d start a series of posts titled: TriMet Riding Etiquette. Or, as I would like to call it, a series of posts about “Tri-tiquette.”

So the first post in this series is about the priority seating area. TriMet buses have a priority seating area which is located at the front of the bus. Where is it on the MAX? Observe:

Trimet Riding Etiquette (Tri-tiquette): #1 - Priority Seating Areas, Portland, Oregon

Read his full article at PDX PIPELINE (Trimet Riding Etiquette (Tri-tiquette): #1 – Priority Seating Areas)

17 Comments so far

  1. tODD (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 8:44 am

    “Tri-tiquette”?! That doesn’t work at all. Why didn’t he go with the far more obvious TriMetiquette? Come on!


  2. JBJ (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:00 am

    Nice work, Todd —

    I was about to make the same comment, then found you had already made it.


  3. JBJ (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:01 am

    Nice work, Todd —

    I was about to make the same comment, then found you had already made it.


  4. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:04 am

    Agreed…I told him he should now officially change it to trimetiquette….


  5. Smashing. (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 9:48 pm

    When you ride the bus you get the widest variety of people. That is not always a good thing…
    Take the bus that is on 82nd ave. 90% of the people are pretty um… well.. I’m sure you know.
    If the buses and max system were private like they should be you would see a complete change in atittude and the people that ride often. Since it is city run you can’t expect much.
    My advice is to buy a car…


  6. tODD (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 10:20 pm

    “If the buses and max system were private like they should be you would see a complete change in attitude and the people that ride often.”

    Ah, of course! If only the invisible hand of Adam Smith accepted your bus fare, then poor people would magically have cars, or otherwise have no need for public transit. It all makes sense now!

    Or wait, would poor people even exist? Perhaps in your neo-randian utopia, the only action taken by the government is to outlaw poverty? And, of course, to continue to massively subsidize road construction and oil prices through tax credits and foreign policy. Which, you know, is perfectly libertarian.


  7. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:12 pm

    I gotta agree with Todd. The over-priovatization of the US will lead to it’s downfall. I say that as an MBA, MIM, and PhD in Org Theory and Strategy.

    I’m a (new-school) Libertarian, but some things have to be put to the government b/c we can’t do it alone. We can’t just get together and make a public transport system/police force/frire force/defense/public school system/health care system, etc.

    BUT, countries without these…name one that is a first or second world country without at least the above functioning to a decent degree. On top of that, the “1st world” countries with the best GDP’s, quality of life=longest life spans, etc have the vast majority of these systems socialized in some ways.

    We are the only ones taking these to the private extreme, and look at how good our health care system is (or who can afford it without fear), our public school system, our public transport system.

    These are the things that make an economy work, and we are shooting ourselves in the foot to give money to an elite few who just don’t care b/c they’ve already invested a large amount of their money in Euros, Pounds, Yen, etc where they don’t have our impending (happening now) currency crisis.

    We need Tri-Met. It can’t (like the highway system before it) be paid in only private ways. Sorry, that’s just how it is.


  8. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:24 pm

    Wow,

    I typed that in a hurry due to time-constraints.

    I do know how to use “its” in the possessive form, and I am using firefox with spell-check. The point I was going for still comes across I hope.


  9. Smashing. (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:38 pm

    Yes Tri Met could not survive if it had actually had to rely on the people that use it. Excellent point Julian. Perhaps it should move more towards that… There is clearly a market for it.
    Don’t get me wrong I like the buses much more than the trolley, max or the or the money pit that is the tram. Buses can adapt and go anywhere people need and as times change as where the trolley and the max can only go where there are tracks. How many millions does a few miles cost to build again?


  10. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 24th, 2007 @ 11:52 pm

    “How many millions does a few miles cost to build again?”

    I don’t know…but probably less that keeping up with the millions needed to increasing build larger highways that just create increased possibilities for people to drive more and then we need bigger highways and then people dri…ok, it’s a circle.

    If we were serious–I think this might be one of the only places in the US that is–it is just a bit overwhelmed at the moment due to growth and lack of a system put down (or actually put down and destroyed) while the city origninally grew.

    But, there are examples: DC, NY Burroughs, Holland, Belgium, London, Japan, etc. They do it, and when they don’t have it–they start biking or walking or figuring out another way. We are supposed to be the “home of the brave”. Be brave–bike, walk, organize a carpool.

    All I know is there is one thing that doesn’t work…doing nothing. I walk home or to work 4 to 5 miles when I couldn’t afford, or can’t get a proper public transport. Half the people I know bike even though they have cars b/c traffic is crap and so are cars when not really needed. I have a bunch more friends who work ten miles away (aka the burbs) and just bike it b/c they don’t want to buy a car and they don’t want to or cannot afford the trimet system.

    We should work to make a better one. How many millions in this city go to buy $50,000 cars and build highways for those people to use them? Well, if they can pay that for a car, here’s a $5,000 pub transit tax so the rest of us can build a top-notch transit system and they can have an open road and enjoy.


  11. divebarwife (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 10:02 am

    I know you are not actually proposing that because I drive a car (and LOVE it!) I should pay an additional tax for public transit that I use 3-4 times a year…


  12. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 10:23 am

    I don’t know…do you own a car that costs over $50,000? IF so, you would probably like to drive it without being stuck in traffic so much.

    If you can afford such an expensive car, then you can afford to pay some extra taxes for those of us using tri-met (and paying taxes for highways). I don’t have kids, but I pay taxes for school. People with (esp expensive) cars can pay extra taxes for pub transport. Probably save the extra money not burning fuel in traffic jams.


  13. tODD (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 10:26 am

    Smashing said, “TriMet could not survive if it … actually had to rely on the people that use it.”

    That’s true enough. But nor could those who use our public highways survive if there was a per-use fee in keeping with the amounts necessary to build and maintain them. (Nor would gas be so cheap if our government were truly laissez faire about it.) So perhaps we can do away with the whining about only one particular form of government transportation support?

    Along those lines, DiveBarWife, there are many of us who pay who-knows-how much in federal and state taxes for highways we don’t use all that often. But I’m happy to do so, because it — like public transit — is key to keeping our city working.


  14. divebarwife (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 12:22 pm

    Julian – that is completely ridiculous. No – my car is no where near the 50K mark – but even if it was, paying MORE taxes to fund public transit is – well – possibly one of the dumbest things I’ve heard recently.

    I don’t have issue paying my share of the taxes for public transit even though I don’t use it – because as Todd pointed out – we all pay for things we don’t use for the good of others. That’s fine. Makes sense. But to pay MORE? Dumb.

    Should we also pay extra for education because we don’t have kids and therefore aren’t doing our part to develop the future?


  15. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 3:27 pm

    “Should we also pay extra for education because we don’t have kids and therefore aren’t doing our part to develop the future?”

    Yes, and we do. I don’t have kids, but if the the US is to survive when I’m older and possibly retired, we will need an educated workforce to pay the taxes I will be drawing.

    Therefore, yes.

    But, (and thanks for calling my argument dumb), if you don’t want to pay extra taxes for tri-met b/c you are driving. Then, I don’t want to pay those extra highway taxes–therefore those highway taxes can only be funded by you drivers through $8/gallon gas and an extra tag tax, car purchase tax, etc.

    The point is not to figure out a way to segment one part or another of society to tax (except those that gain the most, have the most, and therefore can afford the most). My point was if you just want trimet payers to pay trimet and highway, then we could do the same to car drivers.

    Doesn’t seem fair to you, and you jumped on it even though it was just the exact hypothetical back to that person.

    Look, I don’t want to argue and I want campaign against your car.

    I am going to pay for highway taxes, b/c until our system falls apart by depending on oil, we’ll need these highways to support jobs and businesses.

    At the same time, I will vote and rally for higher taxes (or portion of paid taxes) going towards trimet, bike paths, flex car, “shared route” b/c we’ll need a much bigger system in place when gas does hit (and it will) $8/gallon and 100,000 people wake up in Portland and discover they can no longer afford to drive and need to use an already over-burdened, under-funded system.

    Otherwise, the economy will collapse rather astonishingly here and we’ll see out-sourcing to other countries dramatically increase when people need an extra $10,000 in yearly income to pay gas for work and live b/c they have no other option.


  16. divebarwife (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 4:10 pm

    Julian – Obviously if you ‘agreed’ with my education remark you are not understanding what I am saying. You feel you should pay more towards the education of a child then that child’s parent?

    I am not opposed to taxes going towards TriMet, etc…I am very much in support of that. It is important.

    Most of transit funding comes from payroll taxes – I work, I pay those taxes – just as you pay the ones for highways.

    If a higher percentage of taxes need to go to transit – then that may be the case (don’t know – haven’t done the research) But a higher percent of ALL our taxes, not just select groups of people.


  17. Julian Chadwick (unregistered) on September 25th, 2007 @ 5:43 pm

    I replied with a new post, since it was kind of getting off the topic of this one and now e can come back to it there.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.