75% say Yes to $3.5 billion BART bond. (San Jose, Fremont: renters, lawyer, home)

[04kL4nD]

You're ignoring the fact that people don't really have a choice to take BART since traffic has gotten so insane. It's a poorly run monopoly on a service people desperately need to get to work, and there's no real incentive to provide a more efficient service since there's zero completion available. If you're happy with the service that's fine, but I think it sucks compared to NYC, Chicago, DC, and even Boston. I didn't vote for it, but I'll definitely be paying for it anyway. That's part of life. I'll happily eat crow if that money is spent wisely, but after living here for 10 years, I know it's not going to happen.

If you'd like to compare it with systems in Europe or Asia, I'll just laugh.

[smashystyle]

Originally Posted by 04kL4nD

You're ignoring the fact that people don't really have a choice to take BART since traffic has gotten so insane. It's a poorly run monopoly on a service people desperately need to get to work, and there's no real incentive to provide a more efficient service since there's zero completion available. If you're happy with the service that's fine, but I think it sucks compared to NYC, Chicago, DC, and even Boston. I didn't vote for it, but I'll definitely be paying for it anyway. That's part of life. I'll happily eat crow if that money is spent wisely, but after living here for 10 years, I know it's not going to happen.

If you'd like to compare it with systems in Europe or Asia, I'll just laugh.

I disagree that BART is worse than the Metro in DC or the T in Boston. The Metro goes more places, because they had the power and funding of the Federal Government to basically put the metro wherever they wanted, but the system (which has very similar technology to BART) has been terribly maintained and is now catching fire requiring shutdowns of the entire system. The Metro is actually a good analog to BART, with some similar challenges of getting funding from different governments, a similar system, and a growing city. The comparison makes BART look good and shows what could have happened if BART wasn't maintained (including with Measure RR).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...8dc_story.html

The T works well in parts of Boston, where they had the luxury of putting in a subway before much of the city's growth. But it's also really slow and can be pretty crowded. I would take BART over the slow, antiquated Green Line any day.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by 04kL4nD

You're ignoring the fact that people don't really have a choice to take BART since traffic has gotten so insane. It's a poorly run monopoly on a service people desperately need to get to work, and there's no real incentive to provide a more efficient service since there's zero completion available. If you're happy with the service that's fine, but I think it sucks compared to NYC, Chicago, DC, and even Boston. I didn't vote for it, but I'll definitely be paying for it anyway. That's part of life. I'll happily eat crow if that money is spent wisely, but after living here for 10 years, I know it's not going to happen.

If you'd like to compare it with systems in Europe or Asia, I'll just laugh.

If BART was truly some disaster they could find other ways still. Again though what so terrible about BART 5 years ago? You act like it's never been a good service despite many of the issues its having being more recent due to its age and swelling ridership.

Yes lets look at DC Metro, it's far far more of a mess than BARTlol.

Did BART have to shut down its entire system in the middle of a work week: D.C. Metro to close Wednesday for emergency safety checks - POLITICO

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...tory-failures/
https://www.rt.com/usa/343483-dc-met...privatization/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us...isis.html?_r=0
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...5b4_story.html

Also you're not actually paying for it either seeing as you don't pay property taxes being a renter as far as I know.

[WizardOfRadical]

Bart sucks. The trains are packed, AC stops working in half the cars, and stations are nasty, even in Pleasanton!!!!!

Bart has improved, 5 years ago poo bacteria was the most common organism found on trains.

Kudos to bay area voters who realized their antiquated, 1970's, Jetsons train system needs money. Now shut up and pay or take the bus. AND YES THAT MONEY IS GOING TO SEIU UINION MEMBERS. GET SOME!!!!!!!!!!!

[jade408]

Originally Posted by sav858

Also you're not actually paying for it either seeing as you don't pay property taxes being a renter as far as I know.

nope, rent prices are influenced by property taxes. And the prices we pay for goods and services. It is a myth that renters don't contribute to property taxes.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by jade408

nope, rent prices are influenced by property taxes. And the prices we pay for goods and services. It is a myth that renters don't contribute to property taxes.

You don't pay a property tax directly and are not guaranteed to pay for any increases/assessments in it. Your rent is determined by the market, not property taxes.

[NewbieHere]

I think the BART works better than the T in Boston and better than the Metro in LA. But this bond money is it to extend to San Jose? I mean what is it for?

[Oakformonday]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

It would be foolish to believe BART will spend $3.5 billion to simply "build trains".

New trains are already on the way. The new trains have nothing to do with this Bond Measure. Here's a video that explains it and you can go to the BART website for more info if you are interested.

BART's new car arrives | bart.gov

[TheseGoTo11]

Recently moved here from DC, and can promise you BART is better than Metro, which serves little purpose other than to build up union pensions. Unlike BART, they've got declining ridership and no bottleneck like the Bay Bridge forcing people onto the train.

[04kL4nD]

I grew up in the DC area and I completely disagree. BART nighttime and weekend service is a joke if you actually like going out past midnight.