  Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 215 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 65.92.146.128 |
What do you guys think if Metro Detroit came up with a transit bill of rights, that the region had to abide by? Heres my idea of a transit bill of rights. ---------- 1: 90% of Metropolitan Detroit residents must be within a 10min walk of a full service bus stop. 2: 90% of Metropolitan Detroit residents must have access to full service seven day a week bus service, within a 10min walk of their homes and work. 3: All bus routes must run a service every 30min or better, seven days a week. 4: Bus routes must run from early morning till after 1AM seven days a week. 5: A night own bus service must operate over the entire Metropolitan Detroit region, insuring that the majority of work places in the suburbs are served by overnight service. 6: Limited stop bus services must operate on all radial streets from downtown Detroit to suburban transit centres. Service on these limited stop routes must operate every 15min or better, seven days a week. 7. No opt out. All suburbs and cities in Metropolitan Detroit will get regional bus services, and must pay taxes to fund the service. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1169 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.14.251.28 |
Your #3 is not good enough. REAL city transit systems run buses every 6-8 minutes during peak/rush periods, every 15-20 minutes during non-peak times, and every 30-40 minutes on overnight runs. The whole point of viable transit is this: a transit authority makes its schedules to MEET THE NEEDS OF THE RIDERS. Riders should not have to go out of their way to adjust their schedules to catch a bus or a train. You see, in real cities, riders know that during peak periods if they miss a bus or train, another one will be along in less than 10 minutes. That kind of thinking is alien to the great transit minds in metro Detroit. Again, good transit tailors ITS SCHEDULING to serve its customers, not the other way around. Good transit tries to be responsive. Too much to hope for in metro Detroit? Yes. And that's exactly my point. Viable transit will not happen here in our lifetimes, folks. Metro Detroit will not embrace public transportation unless gasoline reaches maybe $10 per gallon (which, to my way of thinking, wouldn't be a bad thing -- it would force a change in mass behavior and get people to quit romanticizing the automobile around here). | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 93 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
As long as it doesn't end up forcing people who don't use these forms of transit to pay for others to use it. I'd be all for using public funds to create the bus stops and pay for regulatory costs, but let the ones actually riding the bus pay for whatever it costs to get them from point A to point B. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7557 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Then should we make sure that the only funds that go to road construction/maintenance are taken on by those that drive. 30% of Detroiters do not have a car but I can assure you that they are paying for the road infrastructure. Non-sensical hypocrisy in your post. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4993 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
Jt1, how do you enforce that? Check a box on your tax form saying "I don't drive"? And, honestly, how many things do you pay taxes for that you don't personally use? If you don't have kids, you're still paying taxes for schools. You pay taxes for public parks and such, whether you use them or not. Taxes aren't "pay for what you use." That's not part of the deal. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7558 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
I don't want to enforce it and I think it would be silly to try. It is a common infrastructure paid for by all, just as mass tramsit should be. Just making a point for the 'I don't use it so I won't pay for it crowd' I think you may have missed my point or I may not have made my point clear enough. I just get fed up with people that are only willing to 'pay' for what they use whne it comes to the anti-mass transit crowd. | ||
The_aram Member Username: The_aram Post Number: 4994 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.124.8 |
Yeah, reading through it, might have read a little too quickly. But I do agree with your point. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 94 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
jt1: Absolutley not...both buses and cars use the road so that should be a shared cost... I pay 100% of the operating costs for my car (car payment, insurrance, gasoline, and maintenece), and those who ride the bus should pay 100% (or pretty close to it) of the operating costs to keep the buses going... And you wanna talk about people whining? How bad would those 30% of Detroiters whine if they had to subsidize the expenses of people who own cars? Afterall, they'll probably get a ride from a car owner from time to time, right? (Message edited by thejesus on July 25, 2006) | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1652 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
Miketoronto, your #1 isn't realistic. Some parts of the metropolitan area are so thinly settled, it would never make sense to have any sort of transit service there. Typically, you need to have a minimum of seven dwelling units per acre (gasp!--Calcutta crowding conditions for sure) to have effective transit service. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 3529 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 70.226.45.189 |
I'd be all for a rebate of my taxes used for roads I never use, so please don't use my tax monies for roads anywhere I don't use them. Also there are many parks national, state and local I rarely have time to visit. Why should my tax dollars go to maintain them? Charge only those who actually use them for the upkeep and maintenance. I don't use the Universities, colleges, schools, or libraries. Again, my dollars are used to support them, why should those of us who don't use them have to pay for them? Etc. etc. etc. Thanks Thejesus, thinking like this should return us to a Dark Age in no time. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1731 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 134.215.223.211 |
Thejesus, You don't pay 100% of the costs for your car. The actual maintenance costs of the roads, the actual environmental impact, the actual cost and impact of extracting and refining fuel, etc. are not paid by you. They're paid by all tax payers regardless of whether or not they drive a car. Furthermore there are significant costs, especially concerning the environment and maintenance, that are not even figured into the costs you are currently paying. Politicians and business owners figure we'll just figure out how to pay for the true cost of things when it gets to a point where we can't put up with it anymore or just pass more bonds so our grandkids pay for it. It's a proven fact that mass transit, including buses, have far less impact and have far less operating and maintenance costs than cars. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4641 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
That's a very fine proposal Miketoronto, But I invoke #3 for transit pick up to any stop may come early or late pending on the traffic and the amount of ridership in the bus. Let's add this rule: #8. Due to more bus drivers stopping to resturants, convenient stores during their schelduled run. A bus watcher will be posted in every public bus routes. A bus watcher must wear casual or plain clothing. It must not talk to any bus driver during their schedule routes. If any bus driver stop at any stores during their run a bus watcher must write up a report by giving the name of the street, city, and route number in their mini electronic report device. That device would send the information to the manager's office at any terminal. The manager will get this incident report and it will call the bus driver to manager for explanation, than the bus driver would get suspended without pay for 2 weeks, 2nd warning the bus driver would get suspended for a month and 3rd warning the bus driver would be fired after a replacement driver is commenced. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 3530 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 70.226.45.189 |
Next time you fly anywhere, thank the subsidy the rest of us paid. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 95 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Bvos: Whether that is true or not, the fact remians that any benefit dervied from such a thing would still benefit the people using buses as well. There's not a valid argument you can make that can justify someone in my position having to pay not only for the operating costs of my car, but also for a bus system I don't use, when the people riding the buses ONLY have to pay for the buses. I'm not advocating getting rid of buses. Rather, I'm advocating making those using the buses pay for their operation. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7560 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Jams - Don't forget about Amtrack as well. Many people that rely on bus service certainly can't afford a trip on Amtrack or Northwest Airlines but some are fine with them paying for that. The Jesus - How do you remedy Jams situation since he does not use the roads at all. Should he get a refund. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1653 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I guess we're conveniently ignoring the expensive infrastructure that cars require. Is that free now? | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 10361 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 64.118.137.226 |
This last Friday I had 4 Grand River buses pass me between 6:05-6:25pm. I suspect that another bus would not have showed for a good 45 minutes after those 4. One of the systems greatest flaws is that they simply don't stay on schedule, they simply drive. I can't count the number of times I've watched buses playing leap frog between stops. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 45 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
Those without cars are not being overly taxed for the transportation system. The majority of the funds being expending for roads and transit come from automobile user fees such as the gas tax and vehicle registration fees. In fact the arguement can be made that automobile drivers subsidize transit; regardless in many communities general funds or special taxes also help to fund either transit or road preservation programs. I won't make such an arguement as there are always outliers. We don't need buses every 30 minutes or less. We need buses that operate on a regular schedule and that operate when the majorityof the riders need to get somewhere. You should not operate that kind of service at 3 am because your operational costs will be very high, so you need to allocate your buses to when people want to use them. There is a major disconnect around here between the realtionship of land-use and transit. You cannot legislate that relationship. Education is the best way to get to the issue, and education will fall on a deaf ear if someone goes to use a bus (schedule in hand) and arrives at their destination an hour late. Transit Orientated Design will work well in most of the older parts of the metro, in the other parts we might need to design the transit to fit the needs of the area. Once folks see a good working transit system combined with neighborhoods that are serviced by transit, then they will demand this of the politicos. We unfortunately will never have a good working system until we adequetly fund them, and that is why I find transit supporters who want to screw up taxes dedicated to transit so frustrating. I am sure they think they know what they are doing is right, but we need to have transit in place for the poor and those who cannot drive. This is a moral obligation based upon how we have structured our society, not a financial one. JT1 BTW, its Amtrak not Amtrack, you should not criticize train services if you can't spell them right. (Message edited by detroitplanner on July 25, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 97 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Danindc: What infastuction are you refering to that benefits cars but not buses? | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 400 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254 |
Supersport, I saw the same thing the other day. I was driving up Woodward just south of HP and I passed two DDOT buses following each other by no more than 100 feet. As I passed them, each stop they hadn't reached yet was stacked like 10 deep with people. My best guess is that a bus hadn't arrived in quite some time. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 457 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
Thejesus, how about all the roads that buses do not use? Or, would you like to dramatically increase bus acquisitions to render my point moot? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7564 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Yep, that little spelling mistake took away from the point of the post. What a pathetic little point of yours. Since you chose to be the little spelling bitch you may want to check the spelling of 'arguement', 'realtionship' and 'adequetly'. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7565 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Now back to the point. Would you like to discuss the subsidies that train service in the US get from the government? | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 47 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
People do walk on the roads that lead to the bus stops. I think we are missing the big picture of a coordinated transportation system, not cars vs trains or trains vs buses. We need to look at stuff such as sidewalks and accessibility. Bike Paths and safe street routes for bikers. Places to integrate the movement of frieght from truck to train, or train to ship, or ship to truck. You will always have congestion at the peak hours. Thats life, get used to it. All cities have this, not just Metro Detroit. The questions we should be asking is how do we make things better?; not ow do we reduce congestion?! Show me a city without congestion in the peak hour and you will find that city is way crappier than Detroit. Congestion is a price we pay for being in an economic center. The question we should be asking is: How do we use transportation to improve the quality of life for all and elavate those who need help? JT!: Not a pathetic point, you just hit a pet peeve of mine. I run into transportation planner every day that have never rode the system nor can spell it. I support intercity train service, and it bothers me that there are so many folks out there that havenever rode the system or can even spell it, yet they are the first to complain about how much it costs. Benefits of the train include roomy seats and leg room, stress free arrivals at better destinations than planes give you, and a chance to get up streach our legs, and get something from the beverage/food car. You should try it sometime JT1. (Message edited by Detroitplanner on July 25, 2006) | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7566 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
frieght Thats -should be That's ow elavate Being your spelling being for shit I agree with your post. The issue is that this region is so backwards that people assume that supporting transit is only supporting poor people. A two car household probably spends $1000+/month on payments, insurance and gas but balk at the idea of supporting mass transit. I find that to be very discouraging. In Metro Detroit mass transit of any sort is seen too much as a poor man's transportation. I don't think that is the case in many other metro regions in the country. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 48 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
I'm typing fast here, I am on my lunch hour, not composing an essay. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 98 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Upinottowa: And what about the road going though parts of the city that I, as a motorist who lives and works in the suburbs, never use? See how ridiculous this can get? The point is, the cost of road construction should be shared, and the cost of using those roads should be incurred by the people who use them in the manner they use them. There's no reason I should have to pay for both a car AND a bus when I only use one to get to work. The bus rider is only paying for one, so why should I pay for two? The cost of setting up a bus system should be paid for with public money, but that's all. Likewise, if we ever build a light rail, that should be set up with public money as well. But let the people who actually use it pay for it's operation and maintenence. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7571 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
How about mileage spent on the roads. My money says that you use many more road miles than the typical bus user. If your splitting hairs on being the financial victim let's look at a per mile usage charge. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1656 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I think the handle "thejesus" is supposed to be ironic. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 99 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
How so? | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 458 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
I do not think that a bill of rights is an appropriate solution. An unenforceable bill of rights is essentially propaganda. An enforceable bill of rights (I am not certain how a transit company could have an enforceable bill of rights) tends to favour special interests rather than improve the system as a whole. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 49 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
Jesus, you as a motorist benefit from public transit. Do you realize how many folks out there should not be driving that ride the bus? In most large cities transit is used in numbers high enough to be considered a vary acceptable travel demand management strategy. Here in Detroit however, more trips are made aroound here by walking, or by sharing rides than by transit. For a guy who picks the screen name of the one who said 'love one another as I have loved you', you sure as hell don't have any compassion for the least of your brothers. Well truth is that drivers support transit, but the true cost of driving is hidden also. How much of the system is operated in the budgets of the local police departments? How much of the cost is being outlayed in payments to, and withdrawls from insurance companies? How much roadwork is done by public utilities who need to cut into roads to get at cables or pipes? Separating out who pays for what is silly. Just remember we are investing in a system, and that system needs to be comprehensive for it to work correctly. It needs the support of all users, it needs the support of those who pay for it through property taxes, or through gas taxes, it also needs the support of the business person that uses the transportation system to get his products in the hands of those that need it. In many cases private companies have stepped up to the plate to invest in transportation as they know it is good for business. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 102 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Deroitplanner: I didn't say get rid of the bus system. I said that those who use it should pay for it. I don't ask the bus riders to subsidize my car payment, nor would I. And regardless of whether you can make some kind of argument of how the bus systems indirectly benefits me, can we agree that either way, it still benefits the bus rider MORE than it does me? | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1804 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
But they do... | ||
Detroitej72 Member Username: Detroitej72 Post Number: 113 Registered: 05-2006 Posted From: 66.184.3.44 |
I really think we should ask trainmann what his fellings are on this subject... Thought I'd stir the pot a bit. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 748 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 69.209.128.123 |
Actually, I always thought drivers supported the roads, but was suprized to recently read that only half of the expense comes from gas tax and license fees, making the road system a massive public subsidy. It is really hard to justify the position that mass transit can't pay for itself while subsidizing roads so heavily. Another form of road subsidy is that society bears the massive costs of pollution, climate change and war that our dependence on oil causes. I'm all for allowing people to own private cars and use roads, so long as the drivers bear the full, crushing burden of this indulgence. Once they do, the econonomic benefits of mass transit will be apparent and we will have a just, sustainable and far more convenient and affordable transportation system. As the number of cars decreases, the cost per vehicle of sustaining the road infrastructure will increase, creating a vicious (or virtuous) cycle making it ever less afforable to drive and eventually toppling the whole awfull edifice of private automobile ownership and its legacy of social and environmental destruction. Okay, so I wish.... | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 1665 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 4.229.132.107 |
These threads tend to get bogged down in detail about who pays for the roads etc, etc; things that have been discussed at length here. I am amused at those that cry about not paying for what they don't use.That is in todays world a silly argument.We pay for all kinds of shit that we don't directly use.It is what gives us the quality of living we take for granted.So that whole argument is simply not credible anymore. However the fact is at least here in Ann Arbor that places that don't pay into mass transit don't have service. AATA runs programs for folks with disabilities and for senior citizens.There are twp's within Washtenaw co that put no money in so that their residents don't benefit from these programs.They can use the programs but they only go into effect when the rider is in a place(A2,Ypsi, Pittsfield twp)where the progams are funded. The idea of calling this a bill of rights is ludicrous.........more like a mandate of dictations.......but until places i.e. the leaders of all the twps and villages etc, etc are willing to put some cash in.......... | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 50 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
I suggest everyone read act 51, the state law that distributes road funding. Safety LU, the federal law that distributes federal road funding, and the act 51 reports, where locals have to disclose how much they pay into operating their individual systems. There is a lot of mis-information on this site. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 105 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
You guys keep trying to complicate this...this is a relatively simple issue...let me try to dumb this down a notch. Both bus riders and car drivers use the roads. This should be a shard cost. Car drivers, however, not only pay for the OPERATION of their cars, but also for the OPERATION of a bus system they may not use. Bus riders ONLY pay for OPERATION of the bus system. They are not required to pay for the OPERATION of motorists' cars. Forcing people to pay for something they don't benefit from leads to situations like we have in Livonia where the residents realized that they were dishing out cash for other people's transortation and getting little or nothing in return. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1658 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
Yes, and those of us who are single have to pay taxes to send other peoples' kids to school. What's your point? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 116 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
You directly benefit from an educated public which is why if you want to be a citizen in this country, you have to pay for public education...so there is a reason for that...but even if there WASN'T a reason for it, that would be a pretty crappy argument to make...since we're getting screwed one way, what's the big deal if we get screwed a second way? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7593 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
And bus service provides transportation for a workforce that doesn't have a car. We all directly benefit when unemployment is lower. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4675 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
That's right we don't need to pay up to $500.00 a week just to fill 9/10ths a gallon of gas for your car. Ride the bus and save you car for longer trips. And you'll save money in the end. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1173 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226 |
So, your point, "Thejesus," is that it's all about ... YOU. You don't want to help pay for a societal good. OK, duly noted. And... tuff sh*t. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 404 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254 |
From NIMBY, comes NFMW (Not From My Wallet) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 118 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
JTI: You are correct. Which is why we shouldn't get rid of buses. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 119 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Fury: It's not as if we're talking about universal healthcare here (which I do feel should be funded with public $$$, and it will once the Dems regain power) We're talking about transportation. It costs me more to drive my car that it does for someone to ride a bus, yet I'm paying for my car AND for a bus I don't use. However, if we suddenly passed a law that required bus riders to subsidize motorists' car payments to even things out(which I would never want btw), I'm sure you'd have a huge problem with that. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7598 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Then use the bus if it is such a great deal. It is nice to have options. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7599 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
How about costs of utilities and other infrastructure going into new neighborhoods. What is your take on those capital costs being passed on to all users of the utility? | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 3541 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.38.13.147 |
THANK YOU JESUS Thank you for knowing I cannot pay for my health care alone, but since I'm currently relegated to taking a bus to pull myself out of the miserable existence of a minimum wage job with no benefits which takes me two hours to get to. I appreciate the fact you would consider my health. Bless you. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 120 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Jt1: I would need to know specifics...I'm not as familiar with that area of public policy as I am with public transportation.. But either way, that fact that your being screwed one way doesn't justify being screwed in another. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 121 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
... (Message edited by thejesus on July 27, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 124 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Jt1: Why should I use the bus? I don't mind paying for my vehicle, nor am I asking anyone else to help me pay for it. I mind paying for someone else's vehicle payment in addition to my own when I only need 1 to get to work. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7602 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
WHy should I pay for Universities or education. I shouldn't have to pay for schools as I have no kids. The circular logic goes around and around. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4677 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 198.111.165.50 |
Because Jtl, Universities are a private educational facillities. There's no such thing a "free college." | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1665 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
Thejesus, for as much as you claim to know about public transportation, you are painfully unaware of the subsidies that drivers already receive. Do you think that gas tax covers all the costs of driving? As a non-driver, I'm not particularly thrilled at how much of the tax dollars I pay goes toward paving new highways way out in the suburbs, and fixing potholes that suburbanites help create in city streets with their assault vehicles. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 126 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
There's no circular logic involved...I have answers for your questions...but you lack answer for mine because you know that there aren't any justified ones... Anyways, looks like my side is winning...people are beginning to get wise to this...Livonia was just a test case and is only the beginning...soon other cities will follow suit and stop forcing their resients to pay for two forms of transportation when they only use one.. watch and see | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1666 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
Your side is winning? Well, in the Kingdom of Southeast Michigan, where up is down, and down is up, that may be the case. Elsewhere, public transit ridership (you know, where people actually see it as a worthwhile investment) is through the roof. Perhaps you should tell Salt Lake that they're nuts for having a ridership increase of 40%+ from a year ago. Tell them they're wasting their money by adding 30+ miles to their rail system. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7609 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
And the whole region is falling to shit. Nothing like being the best player on a last place team. Kudos to you and your wonderful thinking. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 127 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Why would I tell them they're nuts? I have no problem with public transit...I think it's a great thing. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 128 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
In what ways is the region falling to shit, and exactly which aspects of it falling to shit are you attributing to bus riders being made to pay for their own transportation? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7611 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
I believe that they are seeing a boom in population as well. I wonder when Metro Detroiters will start moving there in addition to Chicago, California, Florida, Atlanta, Phonenix, Las Vegas, etc. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7612 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Highest unemployment, lowest increases in housing are two nice factors. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/84 75859/ Rank Metro area One-year change 256 Greeley, Colo. 2.70% 257 Grand Rapids, Mich. 2.60% 258 Boulder, Colo. 2.50% 259 Cleveland, Ohio 2.40% 260 Detroit 2.10% 261 Dayton, Ohio 2% 262 Warren, Mich. 2.00% 263 Holland, Mich. 1.80% 264 Ann Arbor, Mich. 1.80% 265 Florence, S.C. 1.80% 266 Monroe, Mich. 1.60% 267 Spartanburg, S.C. 1.50% 268 Flint, Mich. 1.50% 269 Burlington, N.C. 1.40% 270 Cedar Rapids, Iowa 1.40% 271 Lafayette, Ind. 1.20% 272 Canton, Ohio 1.20% 273 Erie, Pa. 1% 274 Anderson, Ind. 0.80% 275 Saginaw, Mich. 0.10% Pretty appealing , huh? The Detroit line is for the entire Metro region. 8 of the 20 coldest real estate markets are here. Makes me excited for the future of the region and State. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 129 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
Yes, we're all aware the unemployment and real estate value situation. Now try to answer my question. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1667 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
And the point is, the State of Michigan would have more money to invest in things like education and jobs if it put money into transit and stopped building so many damn freeways in cornfields. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7613 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
So I should believe that these are not 2 major factors in the health and future of a region. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 131 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 24.169.224.43 |
We're talking about the current and past state of the region...we can't argue about the future because who knows what the future holds? And I'm sorry, but you're going to have to do some serious convincing to get me to believe that metro-Detroit's unemployment rate is the result of it's public transportation system. Plymouth, Northville and Canton stoped forcing residents to pay for public transit in the 1990's and those are some of the nicest working-class cities/towns around. Absolutley beautiful. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 408 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254 |
Shit, they're already moving to BFE Wyoming. | ||
Jsmyers Member Username: Jsmyers Post Number: 1810 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.131.7.68 |
And what happened to their neighbor's unemployment during that time? Have Redford, Dearborn Hieghts, Detroit, Inkster, Ypsilanti, and other communities had their unemployment rates go up or down? This little fragments we call cities, villages, or townships aren't really anything on their own. How many people live and work in the same jurisdiction? The fact that they have stopped transit from going through them is hurting both their business people's ability to find workers, but mostly it is hurting their neighbor's ability to find and hold a job. Transportation isn't the only factor in unemployment by any means, but it has a significant role. Here is a good policy paper on the issue that I read when I was getting a degree about this very issue: http://www.brookings.edu/metro /publications/mismatchexec.htm Do a search for "spatial mismatch transit" and you will learn a lot. | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 162 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
When Wal-Mart moves into a larger store in Livonia and hires more workers they will pay for good bus service and will do so out of the kindness of their big hearts by paying all the workers decent wages. They will make sure that people in Detroit will always have good reliable bus service by bringing SMART back. This will all happen when Hell freezes over. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 136 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.138 |
Why should they do so out of the kindness of their own hearts? They are runing a business, not a charity. If there is an economic need for bus service and Wal-mart can't function without it, then you'll probably see them dish out some extra cash for the buses. But if they are able to operate their business without a bus service, then why in the hell should they dish out $$$ for a service that they don't even need? Anyone who runs their business like that is going to go under, and deservedly so. Sometimes I wonder whether you people even realize that your arguments don't make any sense, or if you just don't care. (Message edited by thejesus on July 30, 2006) | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 175 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
Next tuesday we will vote on the SMART renewal YES means we will all live within a mile of a freeway. NO means we will all live within walking distance of a bus line. It's your choice. Please challenge the facts, if you can? http://savethefueltax.org | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 176 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
If you think the above is far fetched then call SEMCOG and your state leaders and ask them how much the state is paying to help save SMART. Your YES vote will pave the way for more and wider freeways and roads. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4724 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Yes Trainman, a YES vote means that the SMART bus will keep on moving a freeway expansion will NOT happen right away due to bureaucratic hold in the Michigan Legislature. a NO vote means we don't have to live within walking distance of bus line for it's already there. and the SMART bus will be gone from your suburban city only to be replace by -----! NOW THAT'S A FACT. | ||
Innovator Member Username: Innovator Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2006 Posted From: 69.242.220.200 |
someone pointed out that bus+car users both pay taxes for road upkeep - if i am a bus rider, and i pay taxes to build new roads out in the suburbs, that really doesn't benefit me at all, because I don't see additional or expanded bus service on those roads. | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 181 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 205.188.116.137 |
Danny, The SEMCOG plan has formally approved the I-75 expansion. I think we both should protest this freeway and not attack each other. You see, the road lobbyists love it when mass transit supporters don't agree because it gives them more money and power to exploit the poor. Of course not all of them but too many of them for Michigan to get a good mass transit system because we must attract more riders from cars if we really truly want to help SMART. I know by your posts that you know the facts. So, I want the SMART tax to work and not to fail. Hopefully, this tax will work. | ||
Vandykenjefferson Member Username: Vandykenjefferson Post Number: 19 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 68.40.195.233 |
Building a massive mass transit system (I'm thinking intermodal here - light rail, buses, commuter rail, expaned people mover) would both make the entire are more attractive, but it would help spur a economic rebound. One of the quickest ways for to rebound an economy is to do a little "new-deal" style in-the-red government spending.... Also, Thejesus- As a tax payer you have to accept some taxes for things that will never benefit you but will help the city, state and nation as a whole. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4735 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Trainman, You qouted that The SEMCOG plan has formally approved the I-75 expansion. I think we both should protest this freeway and not attack each other. HELLO!!!!! IN ORDER TO HAVE A PROPOSED FREEWAY EXPANSION IT HAS TO GO THROUGH M-DOT AND OTHER BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. THAT WOULD TAKE YEARS NOT MONTHS. SEMCOG CAN ONLY DO URBAN DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE TRI-COUNTY AREA. NOT TO PUSH THE REPUBLICANS IN THE MICHIGAN LEGISTURE TO ENFORCE THE PROPOSED FREEWAY EXPANSION. SO VOTE YES ON THE SMART BUS MILLAGE AND THE FREEWAY EXPANSION WOULD DIE OFF FOR A 100 YEARS ONLY TO COME BACK WHEN THE TRI-COURTY AREA HAS EXPERIENCE A RAPID ECONOMIC GROWTH. VOTE NO AND THERE WOULD BE NO SMART BUS SYSTEM IN YOUR CITY PEROID. TRAINMAN, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE NO ON SMART. IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AGAINST THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO REALLY NEED MASS TRANSIT TO GET TO WORK, RUN ERRANDS, VISIT THEIR FRIENDS. WHILE THE GAS PRICES GOES UP. You see, the road lobbyists love it when mass transit supporters don't agree because it gives them more money and power to exploit the poor. Of course not all of them but too many of them for Michigan to get a good mass transit system because we must attract more riders from cars if we really truly want to help SMART. SCREW THE ROAD LOBBYISTS!!! THEIR PLANS WILL NOT EVEN REACH THE MICHIGAN REPUBLICANS' AGENDA. LOTS OF REPUBLICAN MICHIGAN LEGISLATURE DON'T WANT TO HEAR ROAD LOBBYISTS CRYING ABOUT "WE NEED MORE ROADS, LET'S GET RID OF PUBLIC TRANSIT" FOR THE REPUBLICANS WILL ASK THE TAXPAYERS DO YOU WANT TO INCREASE YOUR PAYMENTS? THEY WOULD SAY HELL NO!!! SO IT'S BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. TRAINMAN, YOU GOING TO HAVE TO DO BETTER TO PERSUADE PEOPLE TO VOTE NO THE SMART BUS MILLAGE DECREASE FOR LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE LEANING ON VOTING YES FOR THE MILLAGE DECREASE. YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS SO-CALLED FREEWAY EXPANSION IS TOO VAGUE. I know by your posts that you know the facts. So, I want the SMART tax to work and not to fail. YES, THE SMART BUS MILLAGE DECREASE WILL SAVE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THE TAXPAYERS EXPENSE. NOT ABOUT THE FREEWAY EXPANSION THAT IS SUPPOSE TO BE IN THE BALLOT. |
