MARTA to make an $8 billion pitch to change the face of Atlanta (Buckhead: private schools, skylines)

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Matt, I am a regular transit user & buyer of fares.

I never said you weren't.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

I want this so much.



Even this would be a great start.

Again, though, one very minor quibble--do you think that these LRT/streetcar lines should have colors other than red/gold/blue/green, to avoid confusion with the HRT lines of the same color?

Yeah, they probably should be. I just used the ones given by the images in the Plan.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by MattCW

I never said you weren't.

Originally Posted by MattCW

You want to push the burden of paying for infrastructure to just the riders instead of everyone that benefits from it. The only reason you would want to do that is so you can sit back, pay for nothing, but enjoy all the benefits of a thriving city.

.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

I want this so much.



Even this would be a great start.

Again, though, one very minor quibble--do you think that these LRT/streetcar lines should have colors other than red/gold/blue/green, to avoid confusion with the HRT lines of the same color?

I think they should use letters or numbers. The current downtown streetcar uses 'A Line'

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by jsvh

.

Pretty sure he's referencing your laissez-faire attitude about the free market. There're more benefits and costs associated with piece of infrastructure serving society at large, than are really covered in the user fees by default.

So it makes sense of society at large to help fund a service that is not explicitly profitable, because it increases quality of life. Example: increased funding in education so that the poor can attend school, leads to a drop in crime, increase in public health, and generally leads to a higher level of technology. That in turn creates more people who can work in higher-tech fields, start their own businesses, invent, create, etc.

I do not subscribe to Libertarian, pure Free-Market capitalism, as I'm sure you can tell, and I have a feeling that Matt thinks similarly.

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

Pretty sure he's referencing your laissez-faire attitude about the free market. There're more benefits and costs associated with piece of infrastructure serving society at large, than are really covered in the user fees by default.

So it makes sense of society at large to help fund a service that is not explicitly profitable, because it increases quality of life. Example: increased funding in education so that the poor can attend school, leads to a drop in crime, increase in public health, and generally leads to a higher level of technology. That in turn creates more people who can work in higher-tech fields, start their own businesses, invent, create, etc.

I do not subscribe to Libertarian, pure Free-Market capitalism, as I'm sure you can tell, and I have a feeling that Matt thinks similarly.

But...but...the unregulated market is the best thing ever! It saves us all! Because the Lord God Reagan told me so! In a vision that I have night after night!

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

But...but...the unregulated market is the best thing ever! It saves us all! Because the Lord God Reagan told me so! In a vision that I have night after night!

I am not really a fan of Reagan.

I guess y'all are just going to have to keep waiting in the soviet bread lines / traffic till you figure out that markets actually are the best way to distribute finite resources.

Originally Posted by fourthwarden

I do not subscribe to Libertarian, pure Free-Market capitalism, as I'm sure you can tell, and I have a feeling that Matt thinks similarly.

Sorry, if y'all want to get off on this tangent again you should bring it up in one of the old threads again where I already have responded.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Sorry, if y'all want to get off on that tangent again you should bring it up in one of the old threads again where I already have responded.

I really don't, and I actually don't mean to offend anyone for their opinion on the matter either. I was mostly trying to explain where Matt's statements came from, and got a bit wordy.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by jsvh

.

Read it again, I said you WANT to be able to sit back and pay nothing, something you have made abundantly clear over the years.

Originally Posted by jsvh

I am not really a fan of Reagan. *SNIP*

I guess y'all are just going to have to keep waiting in the soviet bread lines / traffic till you figure out that markets actually are the best way to distribute finite resources.

Have any evidence to back that up or do you just like calling everything you don't agree with "communism?"

Sorry, if y'all want to get off on this tangent again you should bring it up in one of the old threads again where I already have responded.

Nope, if you don't want to talk about it, then you don't bring it up. Silencing the other side of the argument doesn't mean you win.

[jsvh]

Matt,

I am happy to pay for products and services I recieve. You are the only one offering to support free loaders by giving out services to free to everyone including non-users & non-tax payers.

I dont' call everything communism. But the only real option to a market based economy is a command based economy which is the signiture economic policy of communism. I do call out non-market solutions for what they are.

Transportation infrastructure by definition is not a public good. Expecially once it gets to the point of congestion. That means it works best by having users pay for it. There are plenty examples out there of the best transportation systems suceeding by charging users by what they use, and the failures not. What is the best transit system that does not charge a fare that you can name?