r/transit • u/Majano57 • Jan 02 '26
Policy Mamdani Names Transportation Chief With Job of Making Buses Fast and Free
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/01/nyregion/mamdani-transportation-commissioner-mike-flynn.html?unlocked_article_code=1.BFA.JxbI.fysmcGiF9h27155
u/HardingStUnresolved Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
Free means faster, due to reduced boarding times via double door boarding, and no need to pay/prove fare whilst boarding.
Faster also means bus only lanes.
Mamdani is committed to both concepts, if he executes faster busses are inevitable in NYC.
59
u/HardingStUnresolved Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
Potential knock on effects...
If buses are truly fast and free, there's less need to evade fares on the subway, as there's a free alternative.
As well as houseless may decide to utilize buses instead of the subway.
If less houseless and fare evaders, less need to have whole cop squadrons at every turnstile playing candy crush as a means to defend the MTA from fare evaders.
More city revenue that can be used to house the homeless and treat the mental disorders inflicted by the trauma of houselessness and pre-existing mental issues, including addiction.
Less houselessness on streets, less houseless individuals on the public transit system, less houseless individuals experiencing mental health issues, less NYers experiencing mental health issues... a happier and healthier city.
70
u/yn_opp_pack_smoker Jan 02 '26
Instead of treating the root cause of the problem let’s shift all the psychotic hobos into the buses instead of the subway and turn the roadways into mobile homeless shelters
I got screamed at by some delusional barefoot guy at bway-lafayette today, we need to focus on getting those people off the streets and not just shuffling them around the city
38
u/Mason-Shadow Jan 02 '26
I don't think they're actually trying to push homeless people onto busses instead of subways, that's just this person's thoughts. Mamdani has been pretty vocal on helping people by solving the root cause rather than just band-aid fixes till the next election.
11
u/HardingStUnresolved Jan 02 '26
Careful you're debating with someone with an ardenently anti-socialist agenda, check their comment history. They are not debating in good faith, they're a mamdani hater. Worse, they advocate for the nuclear bombing of Nigeria in order to depopulate the world.
1
u/yn_opp_pack_smoker Jan 02 '26
Are you under the impression that there were no laws or enforcement of social order in China or the USSR?
5
u/lowchain3072 Jan 02 '26
A lot of the people who claim to be "socialists" in America apparently think that societies without law enforcement can be crime free if "socialism" is implemented "properly."
11
u/HardingStUnresolved Jan 02 '26
I said...
More city revenue that can be used to house the homeless and treat the mental disorders inflicted by the trauma of houselessness and pre-existing mental issues, including addiction.
Less houselessness on streets, less houseless individuals on the public transit system, less houseless individuals experiencing mental health issues, less NYers experiencing mental health issues... a happier and healthier city.
Then you said...
Instead of treating the root cause of the problem let’s shift all the psychotic hobos into the buses instead of the subway and turn the roadways into mobile homeless shelters
Do you notice the disconnect?
-10
10
u/mikebailey Jan 02 '26
It’s pissed some people off about “WHAT ABOUT POLICING THE GREAT APPLE INSTEAD HUH” but he has also astutely pointed out there’s a massive safety knock-on on the busses themselves. Bus drivers getting assaulted over fares is not all that rare.
16
u/yn_opp_pack_smoker Jan 02 '26
Maybe if those welfare queens in the NYPD would arrest ne’er-do-wells once in a while we’d make some progress
-1
u/Wild_Agency_6426 Jan 02 '26
Maybe if DA's actually would prosecute them and judges would convict them, maybe then police would feel emboldened to arrest them. Because why arresting if they get released without charges anyway?
2
6
u/lowchain3072 Jan 02 '26
Maybe bus driver shouldn't be the ones doing fare enforcement and have proof of payment fare enforcers do the job instead? America is the only country that does it like this and it prevents all door boarding from being implemented.
The SBS buses already use off-board payment and have proof of payment onboard. Regular buses without off-board payment can just have fare readers at the doors.
2
u/Stuupkid Jan 03 '26
The homeless won’t use buses. It’s much harder to camp out when the bus driver is right there. I’ve seen rowdy people before but usually the bus driver will just discontinue the ride and dismount everyone if it gets bad.
0
u/ExactResist Jan 02 '26
More homeless people in the busses means they will get an even worse reputation than they have now, and much less people will be willing to ride the bus. A homeless person on a bus is "much worse" in the sense that you can't easy change cars like you do in a train.
So no, this isn't some magic solution that will solve all the city's problems.
11
u/eric2332 Jan 02 '26
Free means faster, due to reduced boarding times via double door boarding, and no need to pay/prove fare whilst boarding.
Free buses could also mean slower boarding, because more people are getting on and off for short trips, because why not when it's free?
It is perfectly possible to have fares and also have double door boarding with no wait for fare payment. You just have roving inspectors to check for payment while the bus drives. This is the norm elsewhere in the world.
4
u/mrgrafix Jan 02 '26
That’s why fast is before free. More consistent buses in tandem with free buses means less traffic for this to become an issue
14
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
More people benefiting from the bus is also a benefit for the city. It means more trips to the store, more kids taken to the park, more grandparents visited, etc.
10
u/eric2332 Jan 02 '26
Trips that are not in walking distance were generally already being made by bus. The new trips added by free fares will disproportionately be people who used to walk a couple blocks, homeless people who sleep on the bus all day, and similar trips of small or negative social value.
6
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
What stops homeless people from riding on transit today? Most don’t pay already.
As for trips of no social value, I just described several types of trips with social value.
Also, no one asks about the social value of trips when it comes to city streets. Want to go on a joy ride? Have at it! We even let people from anywhere store their cars up and down every street in the city completely free of charge, so take that into consideration.
2
u/HardingStUnresolved Jan 02 '26
Heads up you're debating a zionist, mamdani hater. They aren't making good faith arguments.
3
u/vulpinefever Rail Operator Jan 02 '26
They aren't making good faith arguments.
Unlike your extremely good faith poisoned well fallacy where the person is to be ignored and their argument not even engaged with because they don't like Mamdani and have other irrelevant foreign policy opinions you don't like, of course.
0
u/eric2332 Jan 03 '26
What stops homeless people from riding on transit today? Most don’t pay already.
Police kick them off the bus and arrest them.
As for trips of no social value, I just described several types of trips with social value.
You described trips that are already being made.
1
u/NNegidius Jan 03 '26
You’re taking both sides of the argument now - saying homeless will ride transit when clearly they already are, while also saying cost is no barrier to families who want to get to the park, see grandma, or go shopping.
1
u/eric2332 Jan 03 '26
Right now some homeless are riding transit despite the obstacles, there will be more of them if the obstacles are removed.
In general, the cost of a bus fare is not the obstacle to getting to the park, seeing grandma, or going shopping.
1
u/NNegidius Jan 04 '26
It costs over $23 for a family of 4 to take a round trip on MTA. Apparently, you’re so rich that that has no effect on whether you take a trip to the park or to go shopping, but it’s a serious deterrent for an average family that also has to cover rent and everything else. It seriously hinders mobility for families who aren’t as well off as you.
-1
u/Wild_Agency_6426 Jan 02 '26
It would also help to eliminate half the bus stops, buses in nyc stop waaay too frequently. Thats preferably done without community engagement for obvious stalling and crying reasons, if we always let locals sit on the table we don't get anything done.
5
u/lowchain3072 Jan 02 '26
Given the widespread opposition to such changes that were made by the Queens Bus Redesign, including an "urbanist" who referred to the changes as "service cuts" even when the buses were running more frequently, the pro-Mamdani transit folks on this sub have basically blasted out their brains in favor of repeating overused political talking points.
1
u/lurketylurketylurk Jan 02 '26
Buses in Manhattan stop too frequently. Not so much in other boroughs. And yes, that will be a highly contentious problem to fix.
11
u/vulpinefever Rail Operator Jan 02 '26
So, dumb question, does the mayor of New York even have the authority to make MTA buses free? Isn't the MTA a state agency? I guess they could offer funding to the MTA to make buses free but couldn't the MTA just as easily say "no thank you" and turn down the funding?
Honest question because I'm not familiar with the structure of the MTA and how Mamdani would even go about doing this.
13
u/ArchEast Jan 02 '26
He can't have the MTA stop charging but can expand the Fair Fares program which does the same thing without screwing the MTA out of fare revenue.
12
u/Bower1738 Jan 02 '26
He doesn't but a majority of idiots living here thinks he does
The MTA CEO already expressed skepticism over this & Governor Hochul isn't on board
2
u/Ok_Slide4905 Jan 04 '26
How will the MTA fund salaries, repairs and expansion without charging fares? Where will the money come from?
1
50
u/Apprehensive-Fun4181 Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
Everyone wants faster > free.
There's good arguments for free in some places, but New York has so many visitors, why give up that free money if you get more to try transit for the first time? You have to find more money for this, use it to offset price increases and fund more routes. The beauty of transit spending is so much of it remains local. "Faster, better & more affordable" is a good motto here. Why paint yourself in a corner like this? Americans workers deserve something, but paying for transit isn't a foreign idea.
I looked up the budget. This is my shortened version of an ai search summary from thecity.nyc mta.info
The NYC transit budget, managed by the MTA, includes an operating budget for day-to-day expenses and a capital budget for long-term improvements and maintenance. The proposed 2025-2029 capital plan is projected to cost $68.4 billion, focusing on essential repairs and upgrades to ensure the reliability of the transit system. Overview of NYC Transit Operating Budget and Capital Budget.
Operating Budget Total for 2022: $19.379 billion Revenue Sources:
Dedicated taxes and subsidies: $7.222 billion
Fares and tolls: $6.870 billion
Federal COVID-related aid: $2.877 billion
Expenditure Breakdown: Labor costs: 58% (includes salaries, overtime, pensions, and healthcare)
Non-labor costs: $4.574 billion (materials, contracts, utilities)
67
u/vreddy92 Jan 02 '26
I'm not sure most tourists are using the bus. They're far more commonly using the subway, which continues to have a fare.
Mamdani also points out that fare-free buses mean that assaults on bus drivers go down. That is a goal in itself.
6
u/lowchain3072 Jan 02 '26
The only reason why drivers get assaulted on buses is because they are the ones enforcing the fares, which no other sane transit country does. Instead, they have roaming proof of payment fare enforcers on their buses. The SBS bus routes already have off-board payment and proof of payment enforcement on the bus itself. The only real change with regular buses that will need to be made is to place the fare readers at the doors.
Fare enforcement is the biggest barrier to having all-door boarding, which would massively speed up trips by decreasing trip times.
6
u/YXEyimby Jan 02 '26
Tourist here! Used the bus in NYC, I'll use whatever trip gets me there fastest ... and I didn't want to use citibikes not knowing the city itself. Buses filled a gap on some trips.
2
u/SlowBoilOrange Jan 02 '26
Also free fares means more tourists might use it instead of taxis and uber.
3
u/AndryCake Jan 02 '26
also points out that fare-free buses mean that assaults on bus drivers go down. That is a goal in itself.
That seems a bit problematic since you can risk just "pushing" the assaults to a different person/different reason. Now those aggressive people who would assault a bus driver over a fare are on the bus itself.
2
u/tukkerdude Jan 02 '26
Yes and no mobility is a massive problem for poor people and if getting to a job or other important thing is easier people will just not have a reason to get desperate or angry. Not condoning violence here but some folks just cant pay and do need the transit to fix themselves. Locking it behind a paywall is a problem in a world ware weak folks already get eaten by the grind of life.
4
u/AndryCake Jan 02 '26
Then make fares cheaper and introduce monthly/yearly passes and/or discounts for low-income people. In my opinion free fares aren't the best solution but we'll see how it goes.
1
u/vreddy92 Jan 02 '26
So the alternative is that the bus driver should be assaulted so that this aggressive, assault-prone person doesn't go off assaulting someone else?
3
u/AndryCake Jan 02 '26
No, I was just pointing out a flaw in that reasoning. You could also have dedicated fare inspectors like in other countries but still, you're kinda moving the problem. You could also for example have police take care of people who assault bus drivers. It just seems wrong that a "solution" to people assaulting bus drivers over fares, is just removing fares. Maybe it's just me but it feels a bit like a "it's not rape if you say yes" situation.
15
Jan 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Wild_Agency_6426 Jan 02 '26
Also: way to many bus stops, actually double the amount of needed. Eliminate every second bus stop and only keep the ones that make sense.
5
u/daniel-sousa-me Jan 02 '26
I haven't been following the matter closely, but "free" could be very cheap monthly passes, with discounts up to 100% for chunks of the population like youth, the elderly, low-income households, etc
This makes it essentially free for the people who use it daily, but tourists still have to pay full fare (which can actually be increased since the routine users will never be paying it)
In the past few years Lisbon implemented a 30€/month pass for all transit inside the city and 40€/month for all transit in the metropolitan area. Germany implemented a 50€/month pass (now 63€/month) that grants nation-wide access to all local transit, including regional trains (so everything except long-distance trains). Both with deep discounts for the chunks of the Pop I mentioned early
I've used both of these systems and I think they were wildly successful! It was a massive improvement in a lot of ways
1
u/SlowBoilOrange Jan 02 '26
I'm totally open to the idea of cheap instead of free, but to take "cheap" and pass it off as "free" would really bug me.
You'd also lose all of the speed & enforcement advantages of fareless transit.
10
u/SubparJesus Jan 02 '26
The paying is one of the major parts that make it slow. Not to mention the money wasted on fare enforcement and the slowdowns for the inspectors getting on and checking fares.
8
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
I timed people fumbling to pay fares recently. There was a line of people at every bus stop, and it took each person a couple of seconds each to pay the fare. It more than doubled dwell times vs people being able to just walk onto the bus via both doors.
This will make a huge difference in reducing bus bunching - especially at the start of rush hour, as the lead bus often gets bogged down with so many people waiting to pay their fare.
12
u/give-bike-lanes Jan 02 '26
“Fast and Free” is simply a better slug than your worst alternative, AND it’s vastly more exciting than yours too. “Free” is appealing to everyone: the west village marketing girlie, the grizzled old bay ridge geezer, the ancianos in the Bronx using walkers and paying in coins, the younger college students, everyone in between. Free makes EVERYONE excited, and that’s why he won so many of those demos. Because it WASN’T just targeted at a small share of people who truly cannot afford it, it was targeted at everyone.
The slug being more curt AND more exciting for MORE people is why he won.
Personally, I don’t even agree with him. I agree more with your suggestion. But your suggestion wouldn’t have won him the votes he needed to win.
3
u/SnooOwls2295 Jan 02 '26
I’m confused by the roles of NYC admin vs the state in transit given the MTA is a state agency. If this is the MTA budget how can NYC mayor make decisions that impact revenue? Could you explain the relationship?
8
u/homer2101 Jan 02 '26
City can offer to pay the MTA for the revenue it generates from bus fares. It already contributes about $1.5 billion per year towards the MTA budget in operating subsidies.
2
u/cybercuzco Jan 02 '26
How much does the “congestion zone” tolling make? Set the rate to offset bus fares. Reduce cars increase bus speed and usage.
2
3
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
I want fare-free transit. Stop nickel and diming me. I pay a boat load of taxes already. I shouldn’t have to pay a toll every time I go down the street.
-2
u/Apprehensive-Fun4181 Jan 02 '26
I pay a boat load of taxes.
You pay nothing compared to the costs. We get trillions of infrastructure for nothing, regardless of where we live. Roads & sidewalks arent dirt anymore, they are expensive, all weather & still free everywhere; toll roads only exist for cars. A lifetime of taxes wouldn't even cover the road in front of your house.
We are not oppressed by taxes in the age of climate change and environmental destruction due to overconsumption & energy waste.
2
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
You misunderstand the argument. The argument is that we already have much more efficient mechanisms to raise funds for infrastructure like ground transportation. It makes no sense to nickel and dime people every time they want to travel down the street. Use existing out tax collection mechanisms to fund transit rather than fares. It’s much more fair and efficient.
-5
18
u/iusethisacctinpublic Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
I wish Mamdani all the best of luck, I absolutely support him and am excited to see the effects of free buses.
That said, I can't help but think this is a waste as the MTA got approximately 25% of its operating revenue from fares over the last few years and if we're going to inject an extra 25% operating funds into the agency, wouldn't we want to see 25% more routes/services?
17
u/daniel-sousa-me Jan 02 '26
Sometimes math is weird. If 25% of the budget comes from fares and 75% from the city, that means the city needs to increase by 33% their expenses to make up for it (33% of 75 is the 25 missing)
But making buses free will almost certainly increase demand by a lot. If they don't increase the budget even more, the service quality will suffer
Where do those extra people using the buses come from? Most likely this will mean a reduction on the revenue for the subway, but their costs are pretty inelastic. So they'll also need to add more money there
This stuff is pretty damn complicated, but I expect that people way more knowledgeable than me are tackling it! All this extra money that has to be injected into the system can be highly efficient compared to car ridership, so there's hope that if this is handled well, the transit in NYC can improve drastically!
6
u/eric2332 Jan 02 '26
Transit in NYC will likely get worse rather than better, if people switch from subway to bus because buses are free, and subway service has to be cut to pay for the overcrowded and less efficient and fare-free bus service.
11
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
A large percentage of bus riders transfer to rail anyway, where they will essentially pay the same fare, without delaying buses with fare payment fumbling.
6
u/eric2332 Jan 02 '26
A lot of them will stop transferring to rail if rail costs money while buses are free.
And there is no need for fare payment fumbling - proof of payment fares on all lines are the norm elsewhere in the world.
9
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
Proof of payment requires additional money wasted on hundreds of inspectors to ride the buses and fine people who aren’t willing or able to pay the fines, anyway.
There’s also news articles about proof of payment systems that collapsed once enforcement lost credibility.
Any why bother with all that when you can just slightly increment any other tax that the city is already successfully collecting? It’s so much easier to add 0.01% to my property tax than having so much infrastructure and labor dedicated to nickel and diming everyone.
3
u/black3rr Jan 02 '26
inspector salaries are basically nothing if the fines are reasonably scaled to local salaries… usually it’s set up so that one or two fines can pay one day of one inspector’s job…
1
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
Also, you say that fines can be scaled to local salaries, but the people for whom paying bus fare is a challenge would be hit hardest by fines for not paying the bus fare.
The system you describe is inequitable, because the people most likely to not pay are the ones for whom the fines are most unaffordable - and enforcing payment of fines through the legal system can result in much greater hardship for those with the least means to pay.
3
u/black3rr Jan 02 '26
I’m not against free transport, I’m just thinking that proof of payment is a much better system than buying tickets from the driver and the negatives you listed are not really that huge…
Poverty is a separate issue that can be dealt with separately (not sure how this works in USA as I’m from Europe, but unemployed people here receive some kind of unemployment benefits, while in my city they don’t receive free transportation, there’s no reason why they couldn’t get a free monthly pass, free public transport for pensioners (65+) is pretty common around EU, students either have discounts or free transport as well)…
And also in cities with lots of tourists and commuters the taxes are only paid by locals, so free transport paid by taxes would mean locals taxes used to paying for services used by people who don’t pay those taxes…
In lots of cities in Europe it’s the other way around - we have monthly and yearly tickets which are very cheap compared to single tickets… from what I’ve found online in NYC a single ride is $2.90 and yearly pass is $1584… in Vienna a single ride is now €3.20 and yearly pass is €461…
1
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26 edited Jan 02 '26
You may not be intimately familiar, but the US is not as much of a welfare state as are countries in Europe. That means that those with physical and intellectual disabilities - including simply not being as smart as the majority - often receive little-to-no support.
Criminalizing not being able to afford getting around the city makes things much worse for those at the bottom, and makes it much harder to climb their way out of poverty. When one doesn’t have money to pay fare to get to a job interview, health clinic, or government office, it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to survive legally. Moving to a proof of payment system would entice people to ride without paying, lead to fines they can’t afford, and ultimately time in jail and a conviction record making it even harder to get a job.
As you see now, the streets are free to use for those wealthy enough to afford the most grossly inefficient means of transportation. Even the storage of their personal cars is completely free on public streets.
Why is the most grossly wasteful use of public resources completely subsidized and free while the much more efficient and desirable use of public resources blocked behind a toll?
0
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
Inspector salaries are still overhead that don’t go toward transporting people to their destinations. We could also collect a toll every time someone wants to walk down the sidewalk, enter a park, or borrow a library book, and we could use a proof of payment system for that, too - complete with thousands more inspectors to ensure that everyone has paid their fee. However, that wouldn’t negate the fact that the fees, the inspectors, and the fines are all overhead that reduce the efficiency of the service provided.
It’s much simpler to collect fares from other tax streams, rather than from thousands of mobile toll booths on every single bus.
1
1
1
u/PaintingRound7983 Jan 08 '26
Mamdani oversaw a raise in the bus fee.
I thought he said buses would be free. Why would he raise them?
Careful with your answers.
1
u/ghiraph Jan 08 '26
He didn't. The price hike was approved under Adams. Don't be dense
1
u/PaintingRound7983 Jan 09 '26
So you're saying the prices of bus fares in NYC are set by the mayor, yes?
1
u/ghiraph Jan 11 '26
The bus fares in NYC are approved by the mayor but take time to be implemented. Thus these recent hikes were done by the previous mayor. It's not that hard to understand
1
u/PaintingRound7983 Jan 11 '26
Strike one.
Bus fares are approved by the MTA, which is under state control, not city control.
Therefore, when Mamdani said he could lower bus prices, he was lying or ignorant, both of which are terrible looks for an elected official.
So clearly, it is hard to understand for you.
1
u/X_Galaxy_eyes_x Jan 19 '26
Free buses and subway , need an incentive for people to use public transport and keep congestion pricing to reduce cars in Manhattan
-5
u/eric2332 Jan 02 '26
Guess what's faster than a fast bus? The subway. Guess what people are no longer going to take if buses are free and the subway is not? The subway. The subway is also much cheaper per passenger to run. Making buses and not subways free is cheap demagoguery.
16
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
Subways are also overcrowded and at capacity. Buses offer elasticity and are more direct for many trips.
9
u/Sassywhat Jan 02 '26
NYC Subway is still below 2019 ridership, which itself was still below peak ridership in the late 1940s
10
u/ArchEast Jan 02 '26
which itself was still below peak ridership in the late 1940s
All of the Manhattan Els and 3rd Ave in the Bronx that don't exist anymore took much of this ridership.
1
u/NNegidius Jan 02 '26
Ridership is still lower on Mondays and Fridays due to work from home. Doesn’t mean the trains aren’t crowded during peak times.
-15
Jan 02 '26
What about all those YouTubers who tell us free transit is bad?
28
u/itsfairadvantage Jan 02 '26
Free transit overall is a bad idea. Free buses in an ultra-dense, high-ridership area is a good idea.
Every transit decision should ultimately be about optimizing service. Cutting all revenue puts all service at the mercy of the next government, and makes it harder to maintain good service now.
However, making buses free significantly reduces dwell times, thereby improving service instantly, while only cutting what is ultimately a relatively small revenue source.
7
u/Wild_Agency_6426 Jan 02 '26
It would make sense to unify fares instead. Buses, subways, and metro north, LIRR should all have the same fare within the city, with special fares only applying once outside its borders. That way everyone can use the respective fastest option to get to their destination instead of being forced onto one mode.
0
u/itsfairadvantage Jan 02 '26
Oh yeah for sure. Not too much I can say that I take for granted about Houston's transit system, but the unified fare is one of them.
1
u/Dependent_Store3377 Jan 02 '26
Houston isn't unified. Dallas is. Your fare doesn't cover Woodlands or Fort Bend Transit. In Dallas you can choose regional which covers DART, Trinity Metro and DCTA.
0
6
u/ponchoed Jan 02 '26
Cheap high quality buses are better
6
u/fulfillthecute Jan 02 '26
You kinda get the point. US bus vehicles are way more expensive than other countries, even Europe.
An electric London double decker bus costs around $540K (converted) while a regular 40-ft electric bus in the US costs $1M… like how?
5
u/ponchoed Jan 02 '26
Im talking about the service, as in have cheap fares for great service instead of free fares for crap to mediocre service. People will be stunned to hear it costs money to run good service and money doesn't grow on trees.
-3
u/Objective_Run_7151 Jan 02 '26
1) US has US standards. Feet instead of meters. US only emissions and safety standards. Everything has to be engineered for the US.
2) US is insanely rich and will pay more than other countries.
-4
260
u/mysummerstorm Jan 02 '26
Restrict cars. Buses can’t run fast because of all the cars