What's With The Streetcars? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: neighborhoods, construction, college)

[abr7rmj]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

This thread is turning out like the past others in this forum on the same subject. Just reiteration after reiteration of the same tired arguments from each side with no changes. The issue is back on the ballot again, let's see where it goes from there. If the language is too restrictive why worry, it is only a City ordinance, nothing more, and easily overturned.

I said the same thing a couple of pages ago. No one on this board is sitting on the fence on this issue; no one is going to be swayed one way or the other.

Any further discussion on this topic on this forum is the epitome of preaching to our respective choirs.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by abr7rmj

I said the same thing a couple of pages ago. No one on this board is sitting on the fence on this issue; no one is going to be swayed one way or the other.

Any further discussion on this topic on this forum is the epitome of preaching to our respective choirs.

Well said, preaching to the choir does little in political situations. Others say I have no business intruding on Cincinnati's business since I do not live there.

Excuse me, but I have every business. If the City screws up such that more of our high ranked companies with central headquarters here decide to leave, then I am certainly affected.

There are those arguing about being progressive and not backward. So stop using your cliches, and show me the endorsements by the heads of the highest ranking coporations in Cincinnati, such as P&G, Convergys, and others this is the proper direction to go and I may reverse my opinion.

Since the corporations are really paying the bill via their employee income tax, I do value their opinion. Localized developers will feather their own nests, but I believe the national and global coporations are more objective.

[UKUKUK]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Europe has learned that it does not work and is struggling with an unsolvable problem. Do we want to model after them? I don't. I'm guessing that those who want the toy trolley aren't really paying any taxes at all. Slackers and takers for whom an expensive toy paid for with others peoples money sounds like a good idea.

Europe's transportation networks are far more comprehensive and affordable than ours, firstly.
Second, no. The people that want the "toy trolley" are the people who realize it's not 1950 anymore.

The market demands efficient public trans, hence why the majority of development in cities like Cleveland and Portland are all HEAVILY centered around their public transit corridors.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by UKUKUK

Second, no. The people that want the "toy trolley" are the people who realize it's not 1950 anymore.

Its funny that you say that because 1950 was about the time the trolleys were replaced here in Cincinnati with fast, efficient diesel buses. People hated the trolleys. The rails in the road made it impossible to bike along them, people tripped on them, the streetcars were frequently delayed because of some obstacle, etc. Mostly they were traveling at a fast walk.

So now you want them back. Rail was the technology of the 19th century. A nice 800,000 pound locomotive hauling empty cars back down an entire route to fill up again hardly makes any sense.

Of course, the toy trolley is really just a ride like a Ferris Wheel or a roller coaster, but instead of being in an amusement park where it belongs, it will clog up our streets with equipment and civil service employees all at the taxpayers' expense.

[OlliesThoughts]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Its funny that you say that because 1950 was about the time the trolleys were replaced here in Cincinnati with fast, efficient diesel buses. People hated the trolleys.

Hmm...Wilson, were you around for the 1950's streetcars?

I wonder if this is a disagreement between generations.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

.

Since the corporations are really paying the bill via their employee income tax, I do value their opinion. Localized developers will feather their own nests, but I believe the national and global coporations are more objective.

Could have just been a typo on your part, but the last time I checked, my employee income tax was coming out of my pay, not the employer's pocket.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

Could have just been a typo on your part, but the last time I checked, my employee income tax was coming out of my pay, not the employer's pocket.

I believe I said the employee's income tax. So where does this imply the employer pays it? But successful employers must be able to attract capable employees. This is why I value the opinion of employers as to what should happen in the area.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by OlliesThoughts

Hmm...Wilson, were you around for the 1950's streetcars?

I wonder if this is a disagreement between generations.

I sure was. And, since all of my family lived in Chicago and I spent summers, holidays, weddings and funerals there all my life and probably have logged more train miles than everyone else on this thread combined. I rode the train to Chicago by myself at about 8 years old.

I think there is something about this that is affected by "generations." Young people do not recall what it was like to rely on trolleys and trains to get anywhere. They have a sense of romance about these inefficient and antiquated technologies meant for a lifestyle that disappeared 40 years ago. Working in a big crowded central city, living in a dense area with amenites in walking distance and keeping work hours fixed like the tides. Today, we have a diverse society going every whichway all day long, with flex time and multiple trips by multiple family members. The exact antithesis of what a train provides.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by OlliesThoughts

Hmm...Wilson, were you around for the 1950's streetcars?

I wonder if this is a disagreement between generations.

Yes and I was there too. Definitely remember riding the streetcars downtown with my mother in the late 40s/50s, and also the replacement trolley buses. So with Wilson I can definitely can say been-there-done-that, and it is a technology well past its time. If you want something new then come up with new, not some technology which was discarded 60 years ago.

Trying to sell us on it was a mistake to discard years ago just does not fly. Everything people disliked about it back then is still true. There is virtually nothing it contributes to the quality of life.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

I believe I said the employee's income tax. So where does this imply the employer pays it? But successful employers must be able to attract capable employees. This is why I value the opinion of employers as to what should happen in the area.

As I said, it could have been a typo on your part. If you go back and re-read your original post (which by the way I quoted, only adding emphasis to indicate the part I was questioning) there is no 's following the word employee. It changes the context of the statement considerably.