30 years of MARTA

[MattCW]

Except the sales tax occurs only if you actually buy something within the MARTA counties. If you lived in say Lithonia, but did all your shopping in Conyers, you'd never pay into MARTA. It is possible to never financially support MARTA regardless of residency.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

There's nothing wrong with making a promotional video for a service. Even if it is a pat on the back. Even if it is a government provided service.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. You haven't explained your reasoning, but my feeling is that a public agency has no business using taxpayer money to pat itself on the back. That's especially true for an agency like MARTA, that has its back up against the wall ($1 billion in deferred maintenance and $7 billion in unfunded capital needs).

For the costs of the video: Is there a factual figure for this? The video doesn't look like it was of top notch quality, aka "no expense spared". I could make something like that if I already had the equipment. College students take on plenty of projects to add into their portfolio. I worked on a project in college that was for "Energize East Central Indiana". The company came to our college because they knew they could get the work for free. It was a class project to make a video for this group, and the "best one" was going to be used for their advertisements.

Well, as I said above, the video was done by the Horne brothers. You may think they're amateurish but their work has won a lot of awards and accolades.

And once again... reducing fares??? If MARTA has a budget problem, why is reducing fares a good idea?

Why not? Some transit systems have turned things around by doing just that.

For those mad that MARTA (may, or may not have) spent money promoting a service people already know about, how do you feel about McDonald's? Do you feel like they're robbing you as well?

If you're referring to me you're off base. I'm not "mad at MARTA." I simply think spending money on a slick pat-yourself-on-the-back video is a poor expenditure of public funds for an agency that's in dire straits as MARTA is.

Government agencies are not in the marketplace like private companies. If they don't make a profit, well, they just don't make a profit. Their stock doesn't go down, and there are no shareholders to hold them accountable. They just keep on bopping along as usual, and ask for more taxpayer money.

Do I feel "robbed" by MARTA? No, there's great value in the system and I have vigorously supported it since its inception. I'm often one of the 124,000 people a day who use the system.

Does that mean I approve of frivolous expenditures? I'm afraid not. It's hard for me to see how any MARTA supporter would consider that a good idea.

[LynnHarris]

"MARTA General Manager Keith Parker said to the Fulton County Board of Commissioners earlier this month the agency, which will earn $400 million this year and spend $438 million, will turn itself around financially in five years.

Its strategies include “customer relief” to regain thousands of riders lost since 2009 when one-way fares rose to $2.00..."


Neighbor Newspapers - MARTA to curb knucklehead behavior cut jobs open restrooms

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

That is a intellectually dishonest comparison - I pay a 1 cent sales tax to support whether I ride it or not. I pay no tax to support McDonalds - I only pay if I eat there.

It's only intellectually dishonest if you can't see the forest through the trees.

I'm going to keep with my McDonald's comparison to keep continuity.


You have a choice to eat at McDonald's, right? And you also have a choice to live in Atlanta (or for most people, "Atlanta: the Metro")

You can eat at other places not named McDonald's, right? And you can also live in other places not named Atlanta (or, "Atlanta: the Metro"), right?


So if you don't want to subsidize products the McDonald's brand offers, don't eat there. If you don't want to give money to a company that makes the most ANNOYING commercials you have ever seen, don't eat there. Don't give them your money.

So if you don't want to subsidize the amenities the city of Atlanta offers, don't live there. If you don't want to pay taxes to a city (or, "Atlanta: the Metro") for things you don't agree with, then don't live there. Don't pay taxes to a place that offers things you don't like.



I listen to a lot of conservative talk radio, and something I hear over and over again is, "Government should run like a business or a private company."

If people want that to be true, then be prepared to see many more of these "pat-on-the-back" videos, and then the people who gave the green light to those videos giving themselves a $50,000 bonus because they did such a good job in letting other people move ahead with making said videos.

But, luckily, government is not like a business, and this video did not cost $300 million to make and put out there like McDonald's Arch burger did.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

It's only intellectually dishonest if you can't see the forest through the trees.

I'm going to keep with my McDonald's comparison to keep continuity.


You have a choice to eat at McDonald's, right? And you also have a choice to live in Atlanta (or for most people, "Atlanta: the Metro")

You can eat at other places not named McDonald's, right? And you can also live in other places not named Atlanta (or, "Atlanta: the Metro"), right?


So if you don't want to subsidize products the McDonald's brand offers, don't eat there. If you don't want to give money to a company that makes the most ANNOYING commercials you have ever seen, don't eat there. Don't give them your money.

So if you don't want to subsidize the amenities the city of Atlanta offers, don't live there. If you don't want to pay taxes to a city (or, "Atlanta: the Metro") for things you don't agree with, then don't live there. Don't pay taxes to a place that offers things you don't like.



I listen to a lot of conservative talk radio, and something I hear over and over again is, "Government should run like a business or a private company."

If people want that to be true, then be prepared to see many more of these "pat-on-the-back" videos, and then the people who gave the green light to those videos giving themselves a $50,000 bonus because they did such a good job in letting other people move ahead with making said videos.

But, luckily, government is not like a business, and this video did not cost $300 million to make and put out there like McDonald's Arch burger did.

Conservative talk radio. I now understand your viewpoint.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by arjay57

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. You haven't explained your reasoning, but my feeling is that a public agency has no business using taxpayer money to pat itself on the back. That's especially true for an agency like MARTA, that has its back up against the wall ($1 billion in deferred maintenance and $7 billion in unfunded capital needs).

It's politics. Never showcase your weaknesses or faults. You can, but don't expect to be in a position of power afterwards.

Originally Posted by arjay57

Why not? Some transit systems have turned things around by doing just that.

Do you have examples? What transit agency made more money by lowering their fares? In fact, what organization ever made more money by asking for less money in their price points? I'm genuinely interested.

Originally Posted by arjay57

If you're referring to me you're off base. I'm not "mad at MARTA." I simply think spending money on a slick pat-yourself-on-the-back video is a poor expenditure of public funds for an agency that's in dire straits as MARTA is.

I wasn't referring to you specifically.

So tell me, what could MARTA have done with that money that was spent on the video?

Originally Posted by arjay57

Government agencies are not in the marketplace like private companies. If they don't make a profit, well, they just don't make a profit. Their stock doesn't go down, and there are no shareholders to hold them accountable. They just keep on bopping along as usual, and ask for more taxpayer money.

Correct. If the government was like a business, and costs overran, citizens would be deported (fired) to someplace else.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

Conservative talk radio. I now understand your viewpoint.

I listen to it. I never said I enjoyed it... or looked forward to it... or I even agree with it.

But I see both (all?) sides of the coin.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

Do you have examples? What transit agency made more money by lowering their fares? In fact, what organization ever made more money by asking for less money in their price points? I'm genuinely interested.

Well, here's a recent article about what they've done in Rochester and Detroit. Great outside the box thinking (and action).

When Mark Aesch became head of the Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation Authority, back in 2004, the metro area's bus system was in terrible shape. The agency carried a $4.5 million deficit and on-time performance was stuck at 76 percent. Officials wanted to approach the problem the way so many other city agencies were handling similar situations at the time: with a fare hike. Aesch said no.

"There was no way in my judgment we could ask the customer to pay more for an underperforming experience," he recalls.

Not only did Aesch keep his pledge not to raise fares, but in 2008 he actually lowered them. By the time he left the position, at the end of 2011, Aesch and his creative approach had transformed Rochester's bus system into a total winner. Buses drove fewer miles, carried more passengers, and boasted a 91 percent on-time record. The agency accumulated a $35.5 million surplus while decreasing its reliance on taxpayer funding by more than a third.

More....How to Fund Transit Without Raising Fares or Cutting Service - Eric Jaffe - The Atlantic Cities

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

I listen to it. I never said I enjoyed it... or looked forward to it... or I even agree with it.

But I see both (all?) sides of the coin.

Point well made. You are likely better rounded that I am! Apologies if I misunderstood your post.

[Lady's Man]

AnsleyPark - some questions for you. What do you think the city of Atlanta and the surrounding metro area would like without MARTA? Is it reasonable for you to have to pay an additional 1% sales tax to have a system like MARTA in place, regardless of whether you use it or not?