Why do the older metro trains have carpets? Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were trying to make it nicer than the typical subway cars in other cities, since it was the Nation's Capital, and also because so many commuters would be commuting longer distances in from the suburbs instead of the typical "milk delivery" types of rides you may have in cities like NYC or London.

However, over the years, that supposedly "nice" carpet turned nasty.

Yes the keyword here is NATION"S CAPITAL.

If they wanted to do something nice then they should collect the money from all states to support metro system in DC.
It is so unfair that the operations costs are shared by DC VA and MD while it has to serve the whole political body for the whole country and the billions of tourists coming from the whole world. At the very minimum the states should contribute something symbolic and the museums should charge a dollar per adult and that money should go strictly into metro upkeep.
The locals suffer the underfunded and overcrowded metro system because they have to support the whole world with this system.

Wait, whaaaat? Extending this logic, you'd be charging the UK for the NY subway because so many British tourists use it; you'd be charging Nevada for its citizens' use of BART in SF..just no. This is a dumb and untenable idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never been on a train in the US. They have carpets? Hm!

Not trains, these are subway cars

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Planes are carpeted.

Fortunately there are also fewer people vomiting, peeing, and spilling their Big Macs in them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would not it be awesome if the metro ride ticket would be in proportion to the HHI? So all those who make like 400K would pay like.. 100 bucks a ride, while those who make 30K would pay like 5? That would be a riot.

That is a dumb comment.

People who make 400K are probably not taking the metro.

And $5 is expensive. The most farthest rides at peak hours cost $6. How about a flat rate of $2.50 for all rides within the district? More employer subsidies? Make metro ridership great again?

We make $360K+ and take the metro daily--good exercise, and not a long ride from my NW neighborhood to downtown.

Taking metro is an excursive? Walking to work 5 miles is, sitting in a metro car for half an hour has as much to do with excursive
as washing a car on Easter with making you a Catholic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They were trying to make it nicer than the typical subway cars in other cities, since it was the Nation's Capital, and also because so many commuters would be commuting longer distances in from the suburbs instead of the typical "milk delivery" types of rides you may have in cities like NYC or London.

However, over the years, that supposedly "nice" carpet turned nasty.

Yes the keyword here is NATION"S CAPITAL.

If they wanted to do something nice then they should collect the money from all states to support metro system in DC.
It is so unfair that the operations costs are shared by DC VA and MD while it has to serve the whole political body for the whole country and the billions of tourists coming from the whole world. At the very minimum the states should contribute something symbolic and the museums should charge a dollar per adult and that money should go strictly into metro upkeep.
The locals suffer the underfunded and overcrowded metro system because they have to support the whole world with this system.

Wait, whaaaat? Extending this logic, you'd be charging the UK for the NY subway because so many British tourists use it; you'd be charging Nevada for its citizens' use of BART in SF..just no. This is a dumb and untenable idea.

So on the flip following your logic all the buildings in DC that house gov agencies should be paid by taxes collected from good citizens of DC VA and MD because they just happen to live nearby and so they should subsidize the operations of government. By the same token it is on the shoulders of the taxpayers of those three areas to support metro because they just happen to be here. Regardless that metro serves to support the government operations and tourists for the most part. So in this case why the government wont' designate some founds to support the metro that support the government operations?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was the 70s, everything had carpet on it.

Yeah, I guess we should be glad it wasn't shag carpet!

Yes.I was around in the 70s and people carpeted bathrooms and even kitchens. It was amazingly awful.

[Anonymous]

As a native NYer , when I visited DC as a kid I though it was so fancy and luxurious that the metro had carpet. I remember being so impressed by that and the lights flashing when the train came.