$4.09 for regular gas. what do you think? (Phoenix: mortgage, credit rating)

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by silverbear

I can tell you that this past week it has been standing room only a few times on both the Red Line and Route 70 along 24th St. I've never seen that before on Valley Metro buses. One stat I can find is from Valley Metro's recently released scorecard. It shows a 23% gain in express bus ridership over last year. This goes along with what I've been hearing in the national media: Public transit ridership is up around the country, but unfortunately the transit agencies are being hit by high fuel costs and the economic slowdown and therefore cannot expand service to keep up with the demand.



Nevertheless, I've got to differ with your claim that L.A.'s public transportation is much worse than Phoenix. Los Angeles has the heavy rail Red Line connecting Downtown to Hollywood and beyond, it has multiple light rail lines going to places like Pasadena and Long Beach, it has commuter rail to outlying areas, and it has some bus routes that run 24 hours a day. While L.A. may have an autocentric image, the truth is that someone without a car would have an easier time getting by there than in Phoenix.

Of course, Phoenix is improving and expanding its public transit, and it should be evident from my other posts that I'm a huge supporter of those efforts. Still, we need to be realistic in comparing Phoenix to other cities. Phoenix probably has better transit than cities like Tampa, Detroit, or Indianapolis, but it's still catching up to Los Angeles.

I think what is more relavent is actual ridership and the percentage of commuters using public transportation. Although LA does have more rail laid out, often it is incomplete, inadequate, and LA is just planned for cars and not public transporation. That has been changing for LA, but just not fast enough, but the 20 miles of light rail in Phoenix will allow for a more promising system to be in place for Phoenix. LA currently has 100 miles of rail for a metropolitan area of over 15 million, not including Riverside area, if that one contiguous metropolitan area were taken into consideration, then LA has a system (for over 20 million people) that is far more inadequate to deal with its population needs than that of Phoenix.

Heavy commuter rail in LA is a joke, unforetunately. Which is why in my previous post, I didn't completely disagreed with the guy from Oxnard that heavy commuter trains in LA is pretty laughable. However, the light rail and VERY small subway lines are taking up some slack, but its sad that even that doesn't compete with Phoenix's bus system. Throw into the mix a lightrail line that is built in the densest regions of the Valley, and you have a formula that will work. Even though the lines you talk about in LA go to "cool" areas, they are not the employment clusters in LA. Even in central LA, including downtown, 447,000 people work in this central location...the other 10 million working people in LA will have to take their cars to their jobs which are even more decentralized that the Phoenix area.

If people in LA committed to riding their public transit more, then LA would be more inept and willing to building more and much more quickly as they are doing in Phoenix. One major difference, Phoenix has more federal funding because our air quality is many times better, even when taken into account the population difference, pollution (industrial and the like), and ridership for public transit outpaces LA, therefore more federal transit dollars for Phoenix. Second, the citizens of Phoenix and Maricopa county have decided, quite smartly and with foresight, to be taxed in order to build more public transit infrastructure, extending light rail, purchasing of new natural gas/clean burning fuel buses, and yes increase freeway infrastructure. While Phoenix still has only a fraction of L.A.'s population, now would be the time to start building more transit infrastructure, which exactly what the region is doing.

Another note, LA has arguably always had a disadvantage when compared to other cities (even Phoenix), in terms of being built with low density planning, much more sprawl, and lack of infrastructure. Before the early 1970's, the only place in the Phoenix area to shop (with the exception of Scottsdale of course), dine, attend a show, and so on, was downtown. The first mall to open in Phoenix, was Christown I believe in the mid 1970's. Before that, every major department store, restaurant, office building, apartment buildings, flats, and what not were in downtown. Phoenix had an extensive network of electric street cars, trollies and buses. However, with the widespread advent of air conditioning, vehicles that were affordable to the masses, and the transition to a suburban culture all across the U.S., downtowns began their decline. However, LA has always been a sprawling city...be it the whites who gathered in Westwood, Beverly Hills, and the western areas of the city, the Hispanics in Chavez Ravine, East L.A., and the like, and the blacks in the Southern areas of the city, LA since its conception has been plagued with this set up. One reason why their public transportation is dismal.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by twiggy

I'm saying!!! God, have a heart, they are more sensitive to cold and heat. I would gladly take care of them, take a few bucks out of our paychecks and heat their house. My goodness!!!!

I'm sure there will be all sorts of bills to provide assistance for home heating in the northeast this winter. It is interesting that you never see a bill to help US pay for AC. I guess they figure people can tolerate heat better than cold and they are probably right.

[Phoenix lady]

Originally Posted by w1ngzer0

i know it gets to freezing temps and i don't know how sensitive to temp change old folks are, but couldn't you just buy an extra blanket? There is also clothing like fleece and other artificial cloth that doesn't breathe.

If we as a society don't care about our elderly, then, I think, the price of oil is the least of our problems.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

You're welcome to donate all you want. While no one likes higher oil/gas prices, it's not my job to finance people's lifestyles because they failed to plan well. My dad is losing his job at the end of the month and doesn't care about it in the least and my mom lost hers years ago and decided to not bother working anymore. When you spend your working years living beneath your means and never counting on anything from the gubmint, you tend to be better prepared in your golden years. Call me harsh, but if I was one of those people living on credit cards, buying things I couldn't afford and not saving anything, I might expect others to take care of me later. I'm not and I don't.

Some people have 'screwed up'; yes-------others simply got bushwhacked by exploding fuel prices.

It will be interesting to see what happens to many of the 'Yuppies' as their investments implode due to business bankruptcies, etc.

Us Blue Collar types have all but been eviscerated by downsizing, job exports, etc.-------the Yuppies will be next.

Remember: any job that can be done by telecommuting can be shipped off to India, etc.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

I'm sure there will be all sorts of bills to provide assistance for home heating in the northeast this winter. It is interesting that you never see a bill to help US pay for AC. I guess they figure people can tolerate heat better than cold and they are probably right.

Even at 90F; I can still sleep--------anything below 50F is asking for trouble. Both scenarios occurring indoors that is.

I know of what I speak of; I am a Wash DC native.

[LadmoFan]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

I think what is more relavent is actual ridership and the percentage of commuters using public transportation. Although LA does have more rail laid out, often it is incomplete, inadequate, and LA is just planned for cars and not public transporation. That has been changing for LA, but just not fast enough, but the 20 miles of light rail in Phoenix will allow for a more promising system to be in place for Phoenix. LA currently has 100 miles of rail for a metropolitan area of over 15 million, not including Riverside area, if that one contiguous metropolitan area were taken into consideration, then LA has a system (for over 20 million people) that is far more inadequate to deal with its population needs than that of Phoenix.

Heavy commuter rail in LA is a joke, unforetunately. Which is why in my previous post, I didn't completely disagreed with the guy from Oxnard that heavy commuter trains in LA is pretty laughable. However, the light rail and VERY small subway lines are taking up some slack, but its sad that even that doesn't compete with Phoenix's bus system. Throw into the mix a lightrail line that is built in the densest regions of the Valley, and you have a formula that will work. Even though the lines you talk about in LA go to "cool" areas, they are not the employment clusters in LA. Even in central LA, including downtown, 447,000 people work in this central location...the other 10 million working people in LA will have to take their cars to their jobs which are even more decentralized that the Phoenix area.

If people in LA committed to riding their public transit more, then LA would be more inept and willing to building more and much more quickly as they are doing in Phoenix. One major difference, Phoenix has more federal funding because our air quality is many times better, even when taken into account the population difference, pollution (industrial and the like), and ridership for public transit outpaces LA, therefore more federal transit dollars for Phoenix. Second, the citizens of Phoenix and Maricopa county have decided, quite smartly and with foresight, to be taxed in order to build more public transit infrastructure, extending light rail, purchasing of new natural gas/clean burning fuel buses, and yes increase freeway infrastructure. While Phoenix still has only a fraction of L.A.'s population, now would be the time to start building more transit infrastructure, which exactly what the region is doing.

Another note, LA has arguably always had a disadvantage when compared to other cities (even Phoenix), in terms of being built with low density planning, much more sprawl, and lack of infrastructure. Before the early 1970's, the only place in the Phoenix area to shop (with the exception of Scottsdale of course), dine, attend a show, and so on, was downtown. The first mall to open in Phoenix, was Christown I believe in the mid 1970's. Before that, every major department store, restaurant, office building, apartment buildings, flats, and what not were in downtown. Phoenix had an extensive network of electric street cars, trollies and buses. However, with the widespread advent of air conditioning, vehicles that were affordable to the masses, and the transition to a suburban culture all across the U.S., downtowns began their decline. However, LA has always been a sprawling city...be it the whites who gathered in Westwood, Beverly Hills, and the western areas of the city, the Hispanics in Chavez Ravine, East L.A., and the like, and the blacks in the Southern areas of the city, LA since its conception has been plagued with this set up. One reason why their public transportation is dismal.

LA's mass transit is a joke. San Francisco has far better mass transit as California cities go. Phoenix's mass transist,, along with their excellent customer service, goes far in encouraging people to use mass transit.

As to shopping, Chris Town was built in the early 60s. I used to shop there with my family in the mid-60s and into the early 70s. Other early places to shop were Park Central and Saks, if you had money. Metro Center became the place to shop during the late 70s as it was the newest (and first major) mall in Phoenix.

In the 60s Scottsdale was a sleepy burb with a western atmosphere. Almost no one shopped in Scottsdale unless they were an unknowing tourist looking for trinkets.

LF

[LadmoFan]

Originally Posted by ArizonaBear

Even at 90F; I can still sleep--------anything below 50F is asking for trouble. Both scenarios occurring indoors that is.

I know of what I speak of; I am a Wash DC native.

Assistance with both air conditioning and heating should be provided for the elderly and poor. Lack of heat can endanger the elderly as their bodies do not regulate temperature well. The same can be said for heat.

I do know that poor Arizonans receive economic assistance for their utilities. Why not the elderly?

Finally, in the California high desert, at least in my county, we open air conditioned shelters for anyone without AC. The temps have to reach a certain mark before the shelters open.

In fact, our senior citizen's center is one of the shelters available to all.

LF

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by LadmoFan

LA's mass transit is a joke. San Francisco has far better mass transit as California cities go. Phoenix's mass transist,, along with their excellent customer service, goes far in encouraging people to use mass transit.

As to shopping, Chris Town was built in the early 60s. I used to shop there with my family in the mid-60s and into the early 70s. Other early places to shop were Park Central and Saks, if you had money. Metro Center became the place to shop during the late 70s as it was the newest (and first major) mall in Phoenix.

In the 60s Scottsdale was a sleepy burb with a western atmosphere. Almost no one shopped in Scottsdale unless they were an unknowing tourist looking for trinkets.

LF

You are right, it was built in 1961 and Metro-Center was built in 1978. Park Central was never really a large regional mall, and after it opened, it really didn't end the downtown department store business. That happened with Christown and the drive, that back then, was no longer "worthwhile." However, my point is that Phoenix had a much more dense city center until the drive to suburbia ended that era.

And Scottsdale has served as a spot for vacationers and back then, a certain plush "cadallac and caviar" type of environment. While you wouldn't find large department stores, expensive clothing, and handmade garments were popular and expensive.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by LadmoFan

Assistance with both air conditioning and heating should be provided for the elderly and poor. Lack of heat can endanger the elderly as their bodies do not regulate temperature well. The same can be said for heat.

I do know that poor Arizonans receive economic assistance for their utilities. Why not the elderly?

Finally, in the California high desert, at least in my county, we open air conditioned shelters for anyone without AC. The temps have to reach a certain mark before the shelters open.

In fact, our senior citizen's center is one of the shelters available to all.

LF

In all fairness; how did our 'senior citizens' deal with the oppressive heat in DC, etc. 50 years ago-------AC was a rare and expensive feature back then.

That stated; many more people froze to death in the '4 seasons' areas if there were no sources of fuel for fires.

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

You are right, it was built in 1961 and Metro-Center was built in 1978. Park Central was never really a large regional mall, and after it opened, it really didn't end the downtown department store business. That happened with Christown and the drive, that back then, was no longer "worthwhile." However, my point is that Phoenix had a much more dense city center until the drive to suburbia ended that era.

And Scottsdale has served as a spot for vacationers and back then, a certain plush "cadallac and caviar" type of environment. While you wouldn't find large department stores, expensive clothing, and handmade garments were popular and expensive.

Los Arcos Mall was out of the 1960's as well, I believe------it was torn down about 3-4 years ago.

And there is Town and Country @ 20th St/Camelback which is still in operation I believe. Open air admittedly; but, looking at the new Tempe Marketplace-----what is old seems to be new again