Atlanta and Savannah vs. the rest of the state (Valdosta: job market, bankruptcy)

[Akhenaton06]

Originally Posted by WanderingImport

I highly doubt that half the population of Georgia, Metro Atlanta, cannot fund MARTA without the other half, which gets no use of it in day to day life. You may have your opinion on this matter and I will have mine.

Your doubts would be 100% unfounded. If that was the case, then you'd see examples of this all across the country and even overseas but you don't. Even then, it would not be all of metro Atlanta supporting MARTA because there would be no reason to extend it into every county that makes up the metro area. That would be extremely wasteful.

I do not believe it's short-sightedness, I believe it's logical.

So why is MARTA the only rail-based mass transit system in the entire country to not receive any state support? If you have that much confidence in the intelligence of state leaders in Georgia, then I'm getting out of here even faster than I originally planned, LOL.

Also, GDOT covers the entire state of Georgia so the entire state of Georgia is affected by what it does. MARTA on the other hand is not.

That's the point; GDOT covers the entire state of Georgia but every resident in Georgia isn't using or has access to all of the roads that GDOT builds or maintains. Based on your reasoning, my tax dollars should not be used by GDOT to widen a highway in Screven County; therefore, we should eliminate GDOT and let each county oversee the building and maintaining of their roads so that the locals are financing these projects themselves. The same would go for state incentives that go towards luring economic development projects to a particular city in the state. I'm sure you're against that as well?

As I said before, I am a supporter of mass transit and believe that we need to put less of our money into roads and more into mass transit. I just think we need to fund it the right way and not let those who have no use for it bear the burden of it's costs. I'm sure a lot of people would agree with that.

It seems that you don't have a clue what the costs are to operate and maintain a system like MARTA. If it had to rely only on local funds, it would go bankrupt overnight.

[912]

^ Loads of flawed logic above. MARTA is a "closed" system that travels in a certain area (a taxation district, basically). GDOT maintains roads all over the state. The argument that "not everyone drives roads in Screven Co." is a pointless argument. GDOT's work benefits ALL Georgians, from you, me, the farmers looking to move goods to market, the trucker transporting his container load from the port to the distribution center, etc. As MARTA doesn't have the statewide reach, or even serve the same purpose, it absolutely should be funded locally by ridership & property owners in the taxing district. If that leads to its bankruptcy, then so be it. It clearly wasn't run properly in the first place, now was it?

[Akhenaton06]

I can see that as a valid argument for interstates, but not roads that are more local in nature. Furthermore, the example I cited about incentives is just as relevant.

If MARTA were to lead to bankruptcy, Atlanta would suffer greatly and so would the tax coffers of GA. Mentalities like those above (which exist in the legislature, unfortunately) is a big reason why Atlanta isn't as competitive as many of its other peer cities across the nation.

Again, why do you think that every other mass transit system in the nation gets subsidies from its state? You can't say because they are all in liberal states because Texas does the same and its home to the most extensive light rail system in the country (Dallas). Those states understand that supporting mass transit is an economic development tool and the idiots here in GA just don't get that. The contrast between the progressiveness of Atlanta and the utter regressiveness of the state of GA is simply appalling to me.

[912]

Originally Posted by Akhenaton06

Again, why do you think that every other mass transit system in the nation gets subsidies from its state? You can't say because they are all in liberal states because Texas does the same and its home to the most extensive light rail system in the country (Dallas). Those states understand that supporting mass transit is an economic development tool and the idiots here in GA just don't get that. The contrast between the progressiveness of Atlanta and the utter regressiveness of the state of GA is simply appalling to me.

Other states are ALSO operating mass transit in the red. Seems to me their "subsidy" based systems are also flawed.

If it matters that much to you, as it appears to, then feel free to move out of this "regressive" state to one of the progressive states you seem to admire.

[Akhenaton06]

Originally Posted by 912

Other states are ALSO operating mass transit in the red. Seems to me their "subsidy" based systems are also flawed.

If it matters that much to you, as it appears to, then feel free to move out of this "regressive" state to one of the progressive states you seem to admire.

I figured that last statement was coming; for some reason it appears to be common among dissenters in this state. And plans are already in the works. September can't get here fast enough!

[David Alleyne]

It really is just Atlanta and Savannah in this state. Georgia's kind of like the 08-09 Cleveland Cavaliers with Lebron (ATL), Mo Williams (Savannah) and a bunch of scrubs...oh, and the governor of the state is Mike Brown like.

We can't mess with Texas (07 Spurs with 3 very good cities/players). Forget the basketball analogies but Texas, NC, Fla, VA, &, TN are all much better states than GA when it comes to cities. If you want to count the Mid-Atlantic powerhouse that shall remain nameless, they're like the 94-95 Orlando Magic.

Total package wise, Georgia's probably better than KY, WV, SC, MS, AL, LA, AR, and OK. I'm not being crass but the Macons, Helens, Columbus', etc are just mediocre to me. As an Atlanta native, ATL's not even that big to me, it's moderate.

[AlGreen]

I'm probably biased, but I'd honestly much rather live in Augusta than Savannah.

[MikeandIke27]

Originally Posted by Bizurko

^^^ im in los angeles right now and it truly has less traffic than atlanta metro they always say "traffic In l.a. is worse" I don't see any evidence of that and i come down here all the time. Back to topic though I wasn't saying state should fund public transport I was only saying it was a disappointment that a bunch of the surrounding counties didn't support the MARTA and how it has negatively impacted the traffic in Atlanta.

SO why Is DC traffic so bad if Public transport is the Key. To solving traffic issues???

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by WanderingImport

I highly doubt that half the population of Georgia, Metro Atlanta, cannot fund MARTA without the other half, which gets no use of it in day to day life.

That is simply not true. One more rider on MARTA is one less car on Atlanta's roads. That reduces traffic congestion by a tiny but measurable amount. Multiplied over the hundreds of thousands of people who ride MARTA daily, that translates to a lot of cars taken off the road. What does that mean for rural Georgia? Simply, travel through Atlanta becomes easier. And because of the sheer volume of freight that passes through the area, a countless amount of money would be saved by reducing shipping times.

What some people fail to understand is what is good for Atlanta is good for Georgia. I've lived in this state for quite some time, and I have yet to understand the smug disdain that many rural Georgians have for their state's economic powerhouse.

You may have your opinion on this matter and I will have mine. I do not believe it's short-sightedness, I believe it's logical.
Also, GDOT covers the entire state of Georgia so the entire state of Georgia is affected by what it does. MARTA on the other hand is not.
As I said before, I am a supporter of mass transit and believe that we need to put less of our money into roads and more into mass transit. I just think we need to fund it the right way and not let those who have no use for it bear the burden of it's costs. I'm sure a lot of people would agree with that.

Double standard. By that logic, we should make 285 a toll road because it "only affects Atlanta." As explained above, that is simply false. Besides, why are so many people in this state against unclogging our freeways? Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but it's almost like some WANT the freeways jammed...

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by MikeandIke27

SO why Is DC traffic so bad if Public transport is the Key. To solving traffic issues???

On any given weekday, about 3/4 of a MILLION people use the DC metro. You realize how much worse that city's traffic would be if they all got on the roads?