Gregor MacDonald weighs in with more mass transit concerns

Note: I apologize if there is an overwhelmingly disproportionate number of posts conerning the economics of mass transit. Yes, studying urban mass transit is one of my favorite hobbies, but there has also been a spike in the number of mainstream economists addressing this topic in light of current circumstances.

Gregor: ‘We’re All Keynesians Now’ and the Narcissism of Small Differences

Here at Gregor.us of course I have been adamant that, when it comes to spending on physical infrastructure, no area of investment will produce greater front-end and back-end returns than new Light Rail and Commuter Rail. My advocacy of investment in Rail however has been interpreted by some as my view that a perfect balm or salve exists for the sorry state of our economy. Not so. My advocacy of Rail lies (almost) completly within the current Keynesian framework. I’m just looking for the best bang for one’s buck, and I’d like the country and its cities to actually own something of value after the trillion dollar tidal wave passes over us. That’s why I’m not a fan of roads and bridges. But, I am a fan of utility grade solar and improvements to the electrical grid. Roads and bridges tend to go fallow over time. I’m not against some investment in roads and bridges. I just don’t see new roads and bridges paying off in the years ahead.

The problem of course is that certain groups, like the nation’s Governors, who tend not to be particularly forward looking, generally favor highway and bridge spending. The front-end job creation is perhaps a little more immediate on such projects, and frankly, I just have to believe there’s a better dovetail between the installed political structure of your average State, and the highway construction industry. From my post last week however, readers know I would regard any national Obama stimulus plan that favors highways over rail transport as a fiasco. And thus, we arrive at the narcissism of small differences.