MARTA eyeing major expansion up Georgia 400 corridor (to buy, gated)

[AnsleyPark]

NYC's is. Unfortunately for Atlanta, NYC, Boston and others put their primary systems in long before MARTA, benefitting from lower land / right-of-way costs, after even inflation adjustment. I'm afraid we, in Atlanta, are stuck with our modern costs and will never ever have a NYC-like system.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

NYC's is. Unfortunately for Atlanta, NYC, Boston and others put their primary systems in long before MARTA, benefitting from lower land / right-of-way costs, after even inflation adjustment. I'm afraid we, in Atlanta, are stuck with our modern costs and will never ever have a NYC-like system.

Most of those systems were built by private companies.
WMATA benefits from federal funding and serving the nations capital.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by cqholt

Most of those systems were built by private companies.
WMATA benefits from federal funding and serving the nations capital.

I sorta think thTs a distinction without a difference. Billions of dollars are still billions of dollars.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

I sorta think thTs a distinction without a difference. Billions of dollars are still billions of dollars.

But of course the feds are going to pour billions into the nations capital's transit system before it does Atlanta. WMATA has preference because it serves DC.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by Ant131531

I refuse to pay more than $2.50. NYC is the same price, but far more extensive. I'll drive, thank you.

I'm fine with you driving. I just don't want to pay for your roads or be forced to build parking for you.

[AnsleyPark]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I'm fine with you driving. I just don't want to pay for your roads or be forced to build parking for you.

The flip side to this is that many folks without access to MARTA don't want to pay for MARTA access either. Likely the reason the state doesn't support it. I believe the more reasonable position should be that the state provide funds for all modes of transport - rail and road - in a sensible region specific way. There has to be a sensible middle-of-the-road approach to all of this.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by AnsleyPark

The flip side to this is that many folks without access to MARTA don't want to pay for MARTA access either. Likely the reason the state doesn't support it. I believe the more reasonable position should be that the state provide funds for all modes of transport - rail and road - in a sensible region specific way. There has to be a sensible middle-of-the-road approach to all of this.

The only fair way is to have people pay for what they use. This should be corrected by upping the gas tax and adding tolls to cover 100% of roads and then cutting MARTA free from government control and only have riders fully pay for its cost. But I accept that there may need to be temporary fixes because of our political climate. So in the mean time, At least evenly distribute the "free" money. And transit gets relatively little money.

[kferq]

Originally Posted by jsvh

The only fair way is to have people pay for what they use. This should be corrected by upping the gas tax and adding tolls to cover 100% of roads and then cutting MARTA free from government control and only have riders fully pay for its cost. But I accept that there may need to be temporary fixes because of our political climate. So in the mean time, At least evenly distribute the "free" money. And transit gets relatively little money.

No this is still not fair, because we all benefit from the economic benefit of improved transportation. Do not forget the benefit of transportation infrastructure on economic growth. I may walk to work, but I still benefit from increased economic activity that puts money in my customers pocket! I would be a freeloader if I did not pay into the system.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by kferq

No this is still not fair, because we all benefit from the economic benefit of improved transportation. Do not forget the benefit of transportation infrastructure on economic growth. I may walk to work, but I still benefit from increased economic activity that puts money in my customers pocket! I would be a freeloader if I did not pay into the system.

Give me an example of a single industry that does not provide an economic benefit to the community. All of them encourage new developments near where they locate jobs (In addition to providing direct salaries to employees). They encourage suppliers to relocate to the area. They increase tax collections. Why aren't you giving tax dollars to that new restaurant down the street that hired a bunch of people and bought food from a local supplier? If you aren't eating at the restaurant aren't you a freeloader from that economic benefit?

Transportation is no different.

[Ant131531]

Originally Posted by jsvh

I'm fine with you driving. I just don't want to pay for your roads or be forced to build parking for you.

And that's the attitude that makes MARTA lose more and more riders every year! Great job discouraging more people from riding! As less people ride, the less service there is, the more delays, the less security and more crime. MARTA isn't a extensive transit system that I think deserve people to pay more than 2.50. This isn't Tokyo where it's a high tech system, clean and efficient. This is Atlanta, a ghetto unplanned mess of a city.