Public Transportation: LA vs Singapore

Alright, we've all heard how best the public transportation in Singapore is (in comparison to countries like America), but let's see how real that is ok?

First, some quirky differences:
1) In LA, you pull a cord (which is attached to the bell I think) to signal the bus to stop. It was hard to figure it out at first, and even when I finally did, it didn't work caused I tugged the cord too lightly.... For that matter why is it signalling the bus to stop is always a challenge? It took me 6mths to figure out where the NUS Internal Shuttle Bus bell was.
2) People say hi and bye to the bus driver for no fucking reason. It's their culture I guess...

Now, let's see what LA has that the great Singapore doesn't:
1) When you board the bus, a machine-voice drones about some important information, like the bus number and where it is going. This is good, as the customer (unless he's deaf like me) knows where he is going. How many times have I boarded 95 thinking it was 96 and vice versa? An irritating monotonous machine voice reading out the destination would solve that problem.
2) The machine-voice also announces the next bus stop. This is a very useful tool for people unfamiliar with the area. It's not like Singapore, where you can't really tell which bus stop is beside {insert road name}, and you have to stick your head out frantically searching for landmarks to give you an estimate as to where your destination is. Just announce the next stop fuck it!!!
3) Bus departs on time, and it's really down to +/-1 minute. (Note: I've been hearing the transportation system near Westwood is one of the better systems, so it may be worse elsewhere in the States). This can be both good and bad. Good because you can plan your trips well, bad cause you can't urge the bus driver at the interchange to move his butt until the preallocated time. Personally, I would go with punctuality with the schedule, which is something Singapore lacks especially during the day hours... one day you wait for 5min for the bus, the next day it's 15min....
4) Further to punctuality, bus schedules actually provide an ETA for stops in mid-journey. Meaning, let's say the bus travels to A to B via areas C, D, and E... there are timings for C, D and E, so one can estimate how soon a bus will arrive based on the vicinity to the nearest timed area. How accurate this is, I dunno yet, but from a one-day experience it's fairly accurate...
5) Bus fares are relatively cheap. Here, I'm basing my comparison that one dollar in Singapore has the same spending power as one dollar in the US (cause it really seems that numerically speaking alot of stuff are about the same price, except the damn food). Bus fares varies between the bus companies, but it doesn't go beyond $1.00+. Plus, UCLA students ride on buses for only a quarter (i.e. $0.25) and high school kids and senior citizens by default pay ~$0.50. Also, all fees are flat... i.e. how long you ride the bus doesn't affect the fare. Compare this to Singapore that charges from $0.70 up to $2.00+ for their supposed "long distance" trips (which is comparable in distance to the buses here). It would be interesting to know how bus fares in LA have inflated over the years... I guess when you have everything monopolized by SBS=TIBS=SMRT, the fares increase every few years. Heh...
6) UCLA actually makes an attempt to subsidize public transport. Remember I said all students pay a quarter for any bus trip. They also have to option to purchase a bus pass to cover that small fee for $20+/3mths (~$8/mth). Hello... NUS!!! $50+/mth for bus pass with no normal rides subsidy!?!? More interestingly back in 2003, apparently riding on the Big Blue Bus (the bus network that covers UCLA + Westwood most extensively) was FREE. (Source: http://dailybruin.com/news/2003/jun/23/big-blue-bus-no-longer-free-bu/). In 2003, they announced that students would have to co-pay a quarter, but assured "The new rate will remain constant for a three-year period". It's now 2008, a year more than the 3-yr period and it's still a quarter. When is that last time TIBS=SMRT=SBS promised not to raise their fares and actually kept it?

Now here's what Singapore can probably offer (not alot):
1) Bus service here is quite irritating because of the fucking 101 companies around. Already there is the Big Blue Bus, Culver City Bus, Metro and some other shit company whose name I can't remember that have stops near UCLA/Westwood. Because of the number of companies, searching for information and a suitable route can be more time consuming. Trade off for healthy competition I guess... but then again this is a small issue. There is some learning cliff initially here, unlike Singapore that raises fares continuously every other year citing shit like rising prices of gasoline despite rocket high profits for the previous financial year.
2) More extensive coverage is the only big plus factor I can think of. You see, Americans really have a fetish for walking, and because of their walking fetish, the bus networks here aren't that extensive, unlike Singapore. (Note: OK, that's probably not the real reason, but nevermind)