An Economic Analysis Of Rapid Transit In New York 1870 2010

This is consistent with a substantial body of economic theory, albeit not conventional neoclassical economics, which frequently treats transit as a special case. This conflict is linked to faulty assumptions underlying neoclassical economic theory.

Why does New York City have a subway system, and why does it have such an unusual design? Railroad engineers developed its bold and ambitious design in 1891 for the purposes of speed and convenience, above all else. By understanding the original thinking behind the subway, we can see beneath the grit and appreciate the true beauty of the system…and be inspired to build even bigger and better things in the future. The subway possesses a combination of design elements that make it unequalled among the world’s major rapid transit systems. The pillars of the system’s design are the high-speed right-of-way and trains, being underground but close to the surface, having extensive four-track mainlines with all tracks on the same level, and providing bi-directional local and express service.

New York could have had a practical and profitable subway in operation by the 1870s—financed entirely by the private sector—had franchise terms been as liberal as those in Great Britain. Although it would not have been as technologically sophisticated as the 1904 subway, it would have been superior to the elevated railways of the time. Moreover, permitting experimentation and entrepreneurship in New York City's transportation industry would ultimately have accelerated the development of subway technology. Regardless, given the political constraints, the DBOM public-private partnership model finalized in 1900 was extremely successful. The lines built under this model comprise half of today’s New York City Subway network. Fares were low, no government subsidies were required, and investors earned high returns (until the unprecedented inflation of World War I, which could have been resolved by allowing the franchisees to raise fares with inflation).

What is the purpose and effect of non-compete clauses in infrastructure privatization contracts? Can we expect infrastructure privatization to achieve efficiency gains when competition is barred?

Manhattan's natural history -- Mannahatta to Manhattan: settlement to grid plan -- Land use before the Civil War -- The tenements and the skyline -- The economics of skyscraper height -- Measuring the skyline -- The bedrock myth -- The birth of Midtown -- Edifice complex? The cause of the 1920s building boom -- What's Manhattan worth? 150 years of land values

Radically improved urban transportation would greatly improve our quality of life and standard of living, and substeading would achieve this. Substeading is homesteading underground; it is a legal process that would allow new privately owned corridors to be brought into productive use from the unused subsurface. Substeading is economically powerful, based on proven technology, and could transform big cities in a generation. It would create brand-new and conveniently-located rights-of-way, ideal for new urban transportation networks and other infrastructure. This would pave the way for bigger and better cities by nurturing new construction and infrastructure technologies and by eroding regulatory obstacles to new development. Substeading is also politically practical because it has minimal environmental impacts, requires no government funding, and doesn’t use eminent domain.