Mass Transit: Left vs. Right? (federal, Austin, million, Texas)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just curious, but where did you get 80% of Americans live in urban areas? I have no idea myself, just asking. I mean I'm all in favor of light rail where applicable, as I think it will also encourage less than urban areas to consider adopting a hub-feeder-semi-urban systems.
The 80-85% figures are thrown around quite frequently but you can see it here:
Thanks, I just didn't realize it was quite that ratio. I guess for us 20%er's we should be grateful that a van transit service runs twice a week to take the elderly to the doctors.
I understand that many liberals are crazy and would love to control everyones lives. But I think you are seriously delusional if you think that cars actually pay for themselves. If this was a real free market, most people wouldn't be driving cars right now anyways, because the real cost of gas should be more like $5 to $10 a gallon. Do you have any idea how much tax dollars are pumped into highways and roads, that isn't covered by the gas tax that hasn't been raised since 1993? And all the polution that comes from automobiles that is cleaned up by tax dollars. And the defense spending for all those wars, the overthrowing of regimes, and the tens of billions we spend in buyouts(foreign aid) to keep our friendly dictators doing what we tell them to do?
This is a Republican senator petitioning to raise the federal gas tax. Recognizing that the current tax does not cover expenses, so to pay for the current crumbling infrastructure, they are having to tap into the general fund(more debt).
Your "freedom to drive" is silly because it comes at the cost to people who don't drive, or don't drive often. Local roads are almost entirely paid for by local property taxes. To pretend that liberals are proposing to "take away your freedom" because they want to take away the subsidies that car drivers already receive. Would be like saying, if the government stops funding abortions that they are stripping away a womans "right to choose". Or if they stop subsidizing college tuition that they are trying to "take away a persons freedom to go to college". None of those things are true.
The federal gas tax should be AT LEAST doubled immediately. But it should go MUCH higher than that to pay its real costs. The diesel tax should also go up at least triple. A fully loaded semi truck(about 50-60 tons) does about as much damage to the roads as 40,000 passenger vehicles. True story. You should travel the I-75 corridor and see the non-stop string of loaded semi trucks running on it all day every day.
Your post is drivel. Gas taxes are siphoned off for other pie-in-the-sky programs.
I repeat, your post is drivel. there isn't anything else even worth responsding to.
You are correct. There are certainly advantages to mass transit. Most of us do not have work or play patterns that allow us to use mass transit and never will. We just want mass transit users to pay their own way.
Like your paying your own way driving a car. Everyone in this country subsidizes highways and gasoline. I call bulls....
Why do most people insist on owning cars when they have access or could have access to mass transit? Cars are expensive and oil is increasingly volatile.
Cars are not a necessity if you live in an urban area, as does 80% of the north american population.
People who could use mass transit but decide to drive cars contribute to put a strain on oil prices, which in turn affect everybody because as you said, oil is the lifeblood of our economy. People who actually need oil in rural areas would benefit from less stress on oil prices.
Less cars does not only reduce carbon emission. Whether you agree with global warming or not, cars contribute to bad air quality in urban areas and nose pollution. Not to mention all the much needed space paved roads take up.
Mass transit also encourages walking (or bike riding) which you'll agree, a lot of people could use. Obesity related diseases have an economical cost.
The benefits of mass transit are obvious and if people used it more, the quality of the service would increase dramatically with added revenues. Still, many people insist on owning a car. It's their choice, but not exactly a smart one. Cars are an expensive luxury and depreciate fast. That's a lot of misallocated capital that could go into something more productive. I like this man take on it: DovBear: The greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world
Since people obviously aren't smart with their money, they shouldn't complain when the government has to step up for them and build future infrastructure.
I have plenty of money to buy a bunch of brand new cars in cash. My GF and I both have a business of our own and we have children and we do very well without cars. When I hear people complaining about traffic or oil prices or like yourself, complain about a tiny tax on oil to support mass transit, I can't help but shake my head in disgust.
If you can spend 20-30k on an average car, then fill it with black gold, pay for insurance, maintenance/repairs, license, parking, younameit...why are a few extra cents on the gallon to support mass transit such a big deal?
If you can't afford a slight increase in gas price, you shouldn't be owning a car because your budget is obviously too tight. And what do you want? You want all mass transit users on the road? That would surely add a lot of traffic and increase oil prices with added demand. You'd be the first to complain.
Truth is, most car owners, regardless of their political leanings, cry more than infants because they think cars and low gas prices and perfect roads are entitled to them. Learn to deal with your choices and shut your giant collective trap already.
Let's clear up a serious misconception on your part.
America is not so much "need" based. Instead it is "want" based.
I don't have to establish a "need" or prove it to you or any other sniveling lib.
All I have to do is WANT it, and that is all there is. I want a truck (have 3 of them), and even if I never drove them, because I want them, I will keep them. And even is there is mass transit (intended for the sweaty masses only) I will still take one of my 3 trucks, not because I need to, but because I WANT to.
That IS the way it is, and if ANYONE attempts to change that, they are in for a second think (for starters).
Your post is drivel. Gas taxes are siphoned off for other pie-in-the-sky programs.
I repeat, your post is drivel. there isn't anything else even worth responsding to.
So you think if the entire gas tax revenue was used for roads and highways the cost of such infrastructure would be covered? Wrong. Do you have any idea how much other tax money is used for vehicle transportation? Put up some facts to prove his post is drivel.
You must have driven through there on a Monday morning at 3:00 am.
Dallas proper is a nice enough city. Then there are these endless suburbs which all look alike, except that the dry areas have no liquor stores. They stretch out for miles and miles. Consequently, everybody drives everywhere.
And they are the worst drivers. I became convinced that some of them wanted to hit me. Nothing else could explain the recklessness I saw.
I guess Dallas is ok. Couldn't live there personally....it's a cultural wasteland. Miles and miles of nothing but the same crappy looking chain restaurants and strip malls. And all of the neighborhoods look just alike too.
But it seems like a bucolic enough place to raise a family, if that's the type of thing you're looking for.
Your post is drivel. Gas taxes are siphoned off for other pie-in-the-sky programs.
I know you weren't addressing me but I wanted to chime in to tell you you're delusional. We've gone over this topic in a half dozen threads over the years and the hard truth is, no, gas taxes don't even come close to paying the maintenance of current roads much less the construction costs of roads. Depending on the state user fees (in the form of registration fees and gasoline taxes) pay for between 40%-60% of the cost of road maintenance with the remainder coming out of state general funds or from Federal subsidies.
Just to pay for road maintenance we would have to double the gas tax and the car registration fees. That would still leave tax payers stuck paying for 100% of the road construction costs but I'll settle for at least removing the maintenance subsidies by making car drivers actually pay for the roads they use.
First of all, why doesn't Arlington TX not want it? Maybe because most of those driving in and paying $50 to park are from out of town. Perhaps there is never a traffic problem except during games. I don't know. But regarding the opinion that mainly the poor ride it, that is not true in Chicago, New York, or several other cities. In cities with only buses, that may be. Probably why opponents of mass transit reserve their strongest venom for rail: it might attract riders with money and clout.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
