<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Transit Outsourcing Booms &#8212; But Are There Safety Trade-offs?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dc.streetsblog.org/2009/07/13/transit-outsourcing-booms-but-are-there-safety-trade-offs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dc.streetsblog.org/2009/07/13/transit-outsourcing-booms-but-are-there-safety-trade-offs/</link>
	<description>Your daily source for national transportation policy news and analysis.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:57:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian B</title>
		<link>http://dc.streetsblog.org/2009/07/13/transit-outsourcing-booms-but-are-there-safety-trade-offs/comment-page-1/#comment-76941</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:21:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dc.streetsblog.org/?p=7941#comment-76941</guid>
		<description>The &quot;safety trade-offs&quot; described in this post are one of the worst examples of anecdotal reasoning I have seen.  The blog takes an example, a train operator hired by this company and who was responsible for the LA train crash, to imply that this one company&#039;s standards are lax, and thus, by further implication, that all &quot;outsourcing&quot; will be equally lax.

I am sorry, but one example does not implicate an entire system.  It&#039;s like saying that because D.C. and Chicago (both of which have had crashes recently) have both have accidents, that implies that each city is lax in its hiring and by further implication, that all government operation of mass transit is inherently unsafe.

Indeed, it is exactly the &quot;profit maximizing&quot; mindset which makes an &quot;outsourced&quot; system of transportation both the most cost effective AND the most safe (a company which had an unreliable would not only be unsafe, but would also be very delayed, both of which would decrease demand).  Ultimately, government run transportation over the long term is flawed, because its heavy subsidization and politicization means that it is not responsive to rider demands, which are shown through a price system.  This makes the transportation unreliable, unsafe and unsustainable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;safety trade-offs&#8221; described in this post are one of the worst examples of anecdotal reasoning I have seen.  The blog takes an example, a train operator hired by this company and who was responsible for the LA train crash, to imply that this one company&#8217;s standards are lax, and thus, by further implication, that all &#8220;outsourcing&#8221; will be equally lax.</p>
<p>I am sorry, but one example does not implicate an entire system.  It&#8217;s like saying that because D.C. and Chicago (both of which have had crashes recently) have both have accidents, that implies that each city is lax in its hiring and by further implication, that all government operation of mass transit is inherently unsafe.</p>
<p>Indeed, it is exactly the &#8220;profit maximizing&#8221; mindset which makes an &#8220;outsourced&#8221; system of transportation both the most cost effective AND the most safe (a company which had an unreliable would not only be unsafe, but would also be very delayed, both of which would decrease demand).  Ultimately, government run transportation over the long term is flawed, because its heavy subsidization and politicization means that it is not responsive to rider demands, which are shown through a price system.  This makes the transportation unreliable, unsafe and unsustainable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

