17 Miles in Just 78 Minutes! Light Rail vs. Reality in LA

Everyone loves light rail - especially if they don't actually have to rely on it for actual transportation or pay the full cost of what it takes to schlep a rider from Point A to Point B.

To get a better handle on what folks love about commuter rail, Reason.tv sent comedian Watt Smith for a train ride from Los Angeles International Airport to Burbank. During the 17-mile, 78-minute (!) journey, Watt chatted with fellow riders to find out if commuter rail is indeed better than driving or taking the bus.

And to help separate transportation myths from road realities, we've provided facts via pop-up windows that explain just how appearances can be deceiving when it comes to questions about the true costs and efficiency of rail transit versus other modes of transportation.

All of our information is taken from official sources provided by Los Angeles's Metro here and here.

About 5 minutes. Produced by Sharif Matar and Zach Weissmueller. Research by Tim Cavanaugh.

Visit www.reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notifications when new material goes live.

• Category

  News & Politics

[Joe402]

Of course libertarians would see rail as a thing that is actually bad for a city with urgent public transportation needs, but it doesn't benefit the super rich so there's that I guess!

[Joe402]

Kind of ironic that Libertarians hate trains with a passion considering that they worship Atlas Shrugged like a bible.

[Crosshair84]

Rail line does not spark development. Billions in taxpayer subsidies to developers to develop along the line does, typically done via TIF, which steals money from schools, fire departments, and police and funnels it to developers.

[Crosshair84]

Are you forgetting the billions collected in State and Federal gas taxes? Taxes whose original purpose was to pay for those roads.

[ckildegaard]

Free ways are free to the DRIVER. But taxpayers are subsidising it somewhere along the line. So no, it's not free, and it pollutes much more than any public transit system ever will.

[ckildegaard]

No. And bus systems rarely spark the type of transit-oriented tdevelopment that arail line does.

[Cyrus Wu]

The reason why some places like Light Rail are its connected to power-grid (no gasoline), people think trains are faster (sadly, they are not), greater capacity (less money on emploees).

Bus advantages: construction cost, buses are rubber wheeled meaning better braking and acceleration and versatility.

[Baron2yahoo]

Does anyone really want to ride a bus over a train

[Baron2yahoo]

but taxpayers like me would rather it be wasted on rail than buses, it makes more sense. id rather ride a rail than a bus, bus maintenance and operations cost more in the long run than rail, so in my view it's a "long term investment" in which i get more bang for my buck and the next there's a gas hike i won't sit in traffic asking myself why???

[jasonsc86]

That's not bad for rush hour....it would prob take you longer to drive from lax to Burbank