You think its bad for PAT now, it's about to get A LOT WORSE! (Pittsburgh: to live, fence)

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by bmantz65

I wish I could share in your optimism of a chance that a deal will get done. I just don't see it. I wish there would be a deal but I have a hard time imagining it.

A "reasonable chance" isn't quite what I would call "optimism". But I do think it is worth remembering that as much as we focus on PAT in these discussions, PAT is only one small part of a much bigger issue, and many people are affected by that greater issue, and there is widespread public support for doing something about it.

Again, I'm not offering any guarantees, just explaining why I think it is possible.

I don't know about expansion of transit service in coming years. Will enough people be around to utilize it in the expanded areas?

The fundamental forces in favor of such a result are not likely to go away. It is conceivable that due to this Tea Party foolishness the state, and by extension the Pittsburgh Metro, will go into such a death spiral that it never recovers, but I think it is more likely than not that this will be a very damaging episode that nonetheless fails to turn back the tide.

[gg]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

That's also part of the TFAC report, so you are also ignoring the facts on that issue.

Seems you like to ignore the cost side of issues. Being a fiscally responsible person, I find your views very short sided. Attacking costs and hopefully learning by past mistakes like those huge pensions is something to learn from. Seems you just want to throw tax payer money around. You were all for that drink tax and putting tolls on I-80 and really anything to penalize others for the shortage of something else. I just am not buying into your massive spending plans. Get used to it, I am not backing what you propose. I don't like huge taxes for fat cats.

[LIRefugee]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

People aren't ignoring anything. You are just wanting MORE funding and many of us are looking at WHY this happened, not how we can throw more money at it. You seem to be in the corner of more taxes, more tolls and just keep the machine going. We aren't ignoring the TAFC's crap, we are looking at the shortfall and WHY?

Goodness, can't you see that? Look deeper at this issue and stop trying to put bandaids on it. The bandaid of the drink tax is a prime example of punishing one group of people. The restaurant owners. Now they want to punish those that need to use I-80 to find this monster? Goodness, when will it end?

I suppose you (and others) would prefer users of mass transit to be "punished"? Which is more integral to a well-functioning city, robust mass transit or cheaper drinks? Is it not better to find solutions to a problem rather than complain that the problem exists in the first place? It's good to know WHY, but it's better to know HOW we can fix the problem, and work towards it. It's no good to stop at WHY, you need to go to HOW. Too much foot-stamping at WHY makes HOW all that much harder to do.

What I least understand is how anyone can think LESS funding would solve anything, by itself, as it would inevitably make the problem worse.

[gg]

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

I suppose you (and others) would prefer users of mass transit to be "punished"? Which is more integral to a well-functioning city, robust mass transit or cheaper drinks? Is it not better to find solutions to a problem rather than complain that the problem exists in the first place? It's good to know WHY, but it's better to know HOW we can fix the problem, and work towards it. It's no good to stop at WHY, you need to go to HOW. Too much foot-stamping at WHY makes HOW all that much harder to do.

What I least understand is how anyone can think LESS funding would solve anything, by itself, as it would inevitably make the problem worse.

No, I don't want to punish mass transit users. If anything I would want more for them to be quite honest. What I don't like is how they target certain groups to pay for it. If you are going to raise money, it needs to be something across the board, NOT like that drink tax. That was unfair. If they have to raise money it shouldn't target a group of businesses or people. It should be much more wide spread.

[UKyank]

I still think the PAT funding is a dead issue until the outcry gets much louder. Let's face it, PAT services a very small number of people compared to the population of PA. Even if transportation itself gets a funding boost that doesn't mean PAT specifically will see the money funneled it's way. I see way too many state interests that translate into votes way ahead of PAT in the state breadline & way too many people looking at PAT's situation and seeing it as their chickens finally coming home to roost after years of bad decisions & mismanagement - (and that's not off base either, I mean how can SEPTA have lower legacy costs yet be twice the size).

To win the fight proponents of PAT should be focusing all their energy in getting the state to allow for a bankruptcy regardless of how outlandishly impossible some think that idea is and stop coming up with new fees & taxes to fund it as that idea is hostile to the majority of Pennsylvsnians that have no use for PAT whereas they would have no problem with a bankruptcy allowance.

[gg]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I still think the PAT funding is a dead issue until the outcry gets much louder. Let's face it, PAT services a very small number of people compared to the population of PA. Even if transportation itself gets a funding boost that doesn't mean PAT specifically will see the money funneled it's way. I see way too many state interests that translate into votes way ahead of PAT in the state breadline & way too many people looking at PAT's situation and seeing it as their chickens finally coming home to roost after years of bad decisions & mismanagement - (and that's not off base either, I mean how can SEPTA have lower legacy costs yet be twice the size).

To win the fight proponents of PAT should be focusing all their energy in getting the state to allow for a bankruptcy regardless of how outlandishly impossible some think that idea is and stop coming up with new fees & taxes to fund it as that idea is hostile to the majority of Pennsylvsnians that have no use for PAT whereas they would have no problem with a bankruptcy allowance.

A couple of great points here. Public transit riders are tiny number in comparison to the state population. Allegheny County put that drink tax bandaid on PAT for a bit. Bankruptcy might be a real option. Wish there was a way to start over, but the taxpayers are stuck with those greedy SOB's that beefed up those pensions and killed PAT for all. Ah well, the school districts in our region hurt us as well. One thing about the Pittsburgh region, we are in deep with unions and they know how to really make things hurt for the masses.

[LIRefugee]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

I think it is more likely than not that this will be a very damaging episode that nonetheless fails to turn back the tide.

Let us all hope so, I see so much in Pittsburgh's favor that I would hate for something like this to put the kibosh on everything. I agree that more sensible heads will eventually prevail, I just hope it happens before too much damage is done.

[Goinback2011]

Again, at the state level there is a de facto alliance between people who support public unions AND people who want to kill off public transit.

That makes no sense at all. You're grasping at straws. I've never met someone who is 'anti-transit' and I doubt there is an organized group of people who could be called this, let alone that this phantom group would form an alliance with public labor unions.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by h_curtis

Seems you like to ignore the cost side of issues.

The TFAC also looked at ways to save on costs.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I still think the PAT funding is a dead issue until the outcry gets much louder.

That's because you insist on thinking of it as "the PAT funding issue".

In fact, the PAT funding issue is just one subcomponent of a much broader state transportation funding issue. And I don't mean that in some philosophical sense: PAT gets a predetermined amount from the state transportation fund, and it was a general shortfall in that fund that automatically caused PAT's state funding to be cut, and a general solution to that problem will in turn automatically increase PAT's state funding, unless active measures are taken to exclude PAT (which is possible, but may be heavier lifting than some people assume).

Even if transportation itself gets a funding boost that doesn't mean PAT specifically will see the money funneled it's way.

Actually it does, unless the state changes its existing funding formulas to exclude PAT. Which they may try, but I don't think doing that will be easy--up to now they are still trying to preserve the fiction they are not actually anti-transit, and such an effort would rip the lid off.

way too many people looking at PAT's situation and seeing it as their chickens finally coming home to roost after years of bad decisions & mismanagement - (and that's not off base either, I mean how can SEPTA have lower legacy costs yet be twice the size).

Certainly people who are anti-transit are doing everything to encourage that view, and you will find many people on, say, Internet forums echoing those memes.

But I wouldn't assume those efforts are as successful as you seem to think they are. Some people may not be willing to pay any attention to these facts, but it is actually true that under Bland, PAT has gone through a massive overhaul and greatly improved its operating efficiency, and independent observers have been willing to say as much. And it is actually true that this particular crisis wasn't caused by anything that happened at PAT, but rather by the state cutting PAT's funding.

Again, there are lots of people who don't want the public to understand these things, and lots of volunteer accomplices scattered throughout the Internet and such, but ultimately the truth may be harder to suppress than you are assuming.

By the way, the answer to your parenthetical is mostly just that the Philadelphia area did not go through the steel bust.

To win the fight proponents of PAT should be focusing all their energy in getting the state to allow for a bankruptcy regardless of how outlandishly impossible some think that idea is and stop coming up with new fees & taxes to fund it as that idea is hostile to the majority of Pennsylvsnians that have no use for PAT whereas they would have no problem with a bankruptcy allowance.

Again, I'm sure anti-transit people would love it if pro-transit people would just give up the fight for adequate and fair funding for transit and start doing completely useless things instead, but that is unlikely to happen--that's just way too obviously self-defeating.

Of course the real purpose of this argument is not to persuade pro-transit people to give up, but rather to try to persuade potentially undecided people that somehow pro-transit people only have themselves to blame if the anti-transit people succeed in cutting funding for transit.