Is it a popular misconception for ppl to think of Chicago as an affordable city just because it's in the midwest? (Paris: sale, real estate)

[chet everett]

Go look it up yourself the data is in PDFs from the Civic Federation of Chicago and transportation programs at schools like USF. Chicago spends huge percentages more than other midwest cities.

Is that really a surprise? I mean who doesn't think STL or KC don't have the kind of bloated administrative overhead Chicago does? Those cities have long used contract services to operate and maintain their transit assets that are much more efficient that the clout heavy union mechanics and drivers clogging up the CTA. Sheesh.

[chet everett]

I swear,you people are going to drive to drink -- NY has a graduated income tax -- higher income brackets get a higher rate. Illinois has the same rate for all. There is no "soak the rich" only "allow Madigan and Quinn to tighten the noose tighter".

If you are not smart enough to take a flat tax rate out of your income stream how can it possibility be easier to budget a rising rate???

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

I'd definitely swap an income tax for a lower property tax.

This housing bust should have taught us all the problem inherent with taxing unrealized gains...

Seriously, I have a load of friends in Brooklyn, they all tell me the NY tax system is much better as far as stabilizing neighborhoods & just budgeting your money.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Go look it up yourself the data is in PDFs from the Civic Federation of Chicago and transportation programs at schools like USF. Chicago spends huge percentages more than other midwest cities.

Is that really a surprise? I mean who doesn't think STL or KC don't have the kind of bloated administrative overhead Chicago does? Those cities have long used contract services to operate and maintain their transit assets that are much more efficient that the clout heavy union mechanics and drivers clogging up the CTA. Sheesh.

And yet the CTA has a much higher farebox recovery ratio than either of those cities.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by chet everett

I swear,you people are going to drive to drink -- NY has a graduated income tax -- higher income brackets get a higher rate. Illinois has the same rate for all. There is no "soak the rich" only "allow Madigan and Quinn to tighten the noose tighter".

NY State income taxes are graduated - but they hit 5% once you make $11,000, and go up to 7% after $20,000. The top bracket is 8% for anyone making over $200,000. Add to that the NYC income tax - about 3.5% for most people, and you're looking at an income tax that is twice that of a Chicago resident for the vast majority of tax payers (and more than double for the wealthy).

For someone making $100,000/year that means an extra $5,000 in income tax each year. They'd need to spend $500,000/year inside the city limits to match the difference between the sales and income taxes. For a large city Chicago has generally low taxes.

[Vlajos]

Taxes can never be low enough to some.

[speedygonzales]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Chicago does not even a "best in the Midwest" public transit system if cost efficiency is factored in.

Ummm, so what city does?

[emathias]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Go look it up yourself the data is in PDFs from the Civic Federation of Chicago and transportation programs at schools like USF. Chicago spends huge percentages more than other midwest cities.

Is that really a surprise? I mean who doesn't think STL or KC don't have the kind of bloated administrative overhead Chicago does? T
...

Cite actual docs - there are too many out there of varying and sometimes conflicting numbers to be able to even begin to talk about them with your vague references.

For example, since you specifically mention St. Louis, St. Louis' most recent online budget stats show total expense of $323.7 million in 2010, for system-wide passenger-miles traveled of 250.3 million miles. That yields a cost per passenger mile of $1.29 per passenger mile.

APTA stats show Chicago having 1,963.8 million passenger-miles in 2008. The CTA's total operating expenses in 2008 were $1.033 billion. That's a per-passenger-mile cost of $0.52 per passenger mile.

In other words, you don't seem to have any clue about what you're talking about. Chicago and the CTA are far from perfect, but to claim that *St. Louis* is more efficient than Chicago for transit is just hogwash. I'll point out that the Chicago stats don't include Metra, which is has a per-mile cost far lower than $0.50/mile, so if those were included the numbers would be even more in Chicago's favor.

Don't like to actually support your claims? Fine. But don't expect to be taken seriously when real, cited numbers soundly disprove your wild, unsubstantiated claims.

[chet everett]

It is a pita to cut and paste links on the iPad.

I will drill into em as I feel like it.

Measuring Productivity at the Chicago Transit Authority | The Civic Federation

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/pdf/JPT11-4Raju.pdf


CITE ME!!!!

Originally Posted by emathias

Cite actual docs - there are too many out there of varying and sometimes conflicting numbers to be able to even begin to talk about them with your vague references.

For example, since you specifically mention St. Louis, St. Louis' most recent online budget stats show total expense of $323.7 million in 2010, for system-wide passenger-miles traveled of 250.3 million miles. That yields a cost per passenger mile of $1.29 per passenger mile.

APTA stats show Chicago having 1,963.8 million passenger-miles in 2008. The CTA's total operating expenses in 2008 were $1.033 billion. That's a per-passenger-mile cost of $0.52 per passenger mile.

In other words, you don't seem to have any clue about what you're talking about. Chicago and the CTA are far from perfect, but to claim that *St. Louis* is more efficient than Chicago for transit is just hogwash. I'll point out that the Chicago stats don't include Metra, which is has a per-mile cost far lower than $0.50/mile, so if those were included the numbers would be even more in Chicago's favor.

Don't like to actually support your claims? Fine. But don't expect to be taken seriously when real, cited numbers soundly disprove your wild, unsubstantiated claims.

[speedygonzales]

I still don't see a midwestern city that does public transit better than Chicago listed.

[chirack]

Chet do theese people even use public transit? Why would you messure per unlinked mile? You usually do have to transfer from bus to bus or from el to bus (unless you live very close to the el line) or even from el to el to get somewhere .