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

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

Fortuantly the Queen of England's dicisions have no direct effect on WPA

But INDIRECTLY she could be criticizing Corbett! Therefore, it is her fault, right?

...Onorato and Ravenstahls do they are our POLICTIAL LEADERS they're suppose to LEAD Brian not HIDE!

You can put as many words in caps as you like, it still won't make them responsible for the state cutting PAT's funding, nor give them the power to make a different decision.

By the way, I actually have no idea what Onorato and Ravenstahl have said about Corbett's plans (at least not after Onorato lost). So for all I know they have in fact criticized those plans. The reason I don't know what they have said is that it makes no practical difference, because Corbett doesn't care what the Mayor of Pittsburgh says (nor the guy that he beat to become governor). That is because the Mayor of Pittsburgh is elected by people who wouldn't vote for Corbett in a million years, and Onorato's supporters clearly weren't sufficient in number either. Threatening to persuade their people to not vote for Corbett AGAIN isn't going to mean jack to Corbett.

If you want to get Corbett's attention, find a leader who is elected by the same constituency, and has some pull with the voters that Corbett actually needs to get re-elected. That might mean something to him.

You're giving Corbett way too much immunity, if there is enough outrage because of his actions he will not ecape the rath of the public, the reason he's in office in the first place is because the rural public didnt want another 4 years of a pro-city democrate like Eddy.

I'm giving Corbett immunity because I am blaming him for his own decisions?

Come on. My whole point is we should be putting political pressure on Corbett, rather than randomly blaming every politician whose name we know for Corbett's actions.

I'm sure that Corbett wants another 4 years, as well as a chance to run for president down the line, its not going to help him if he's hated by his own state and collapses the state two economic engines to serve his and marcellus shales agendas.

Again, think that through some more. You are exactly right that we need to try to credibly threaten Corbett's political interests (in the hope he isn't an ideologue, and is just craven). You are exactly wrong that Ravenstahl and Onorato can do that. If you want to talk about Republicans who represent Southwest PA jurisdictions, then you might have a point.

I am blaming Corbett too, remember the "Blame Everyone" tag...but I see the whole scope of what's going on here, not blinded with tunnel vision focused on blaming one source.

Ask any political scientist: these battles are not won by the group with the largest numbers, but rather the group with the most focused strategy. Every bit of energy you waste blaming the guy who Corbett beat to get his position is helping Corbett get away with his decisions.

Again, if you want to talk about people Corbett might actually care about, that is a different matter.

You said it yourself "this is politics" its a game to which the American people will never get a clue until its too late.

Eh, we stumble along and make a lot of mistakes, but sooner or later we tend to get our act together. Corbett really represents a dying faction of American political life--literally, in fact--but it is precisely because they can see their demise that they have become so motivated. And so in 2010, with the poor economy favoring challengers and the opposing side being apathetic (and, ahem, pointing fingers at each other), they managed to win an election.

But that won't last. The economy is improving--slowly, but it is improving. This faction is still losing share, and the policies they have enacted are against the wishes of even a large portion of their voters (who they basically actively deceived while campaigning). So it may be as soon as 2012 that all this reverses, and if not then soon after.

But in the meantime, again, if you want to get Corbett to change his mind, you have to:

(A) Actually focus on Corbett himself; and

(B) To the extent you want help from elected officials in pressuring Corbett, look to officials who he actually cares about.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

I just want to make sure I understand your point. It appears as if the only way for the PAT mess to be fixed is for the state to reinstate its funding. So if this doesn't happen, what do we do?

Other than getting the funding restored, we can only lobby the state to change the state laws limiting PAT's options.

Assuming neither of those things works: then PAT will have to make even more drastic cuts in service, and the region will suffer the consequences until we get to elect a better state government.

I wish there was a better answer, but the state is driving this bus (pun intended). If they want to drive it over a cliff, there isn't much us passengers can do about it. As the saying goes, elections have consequences, and the 2010 election was a disasterous one for people who care about public transit in PA.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

At some point we have to at least acknowledge the possibility that the state may never restore its funding to PAT. If this happens what do we do?

Leave. Seriously. Emigrate.

If it eventually transpired that the state gov't was permanently in the hands of the Frackinators and that they had no intention of ever seriously grappling with urban mass transit (or more broadly, any urban concerns), then the alternatives would be acquiescence, resistance outside the established rules of politics, or emigration.

Acquiescence would mean living a crappy life in an increasingly crappy city. Resistance might be fun, but most of us aren't quite ready to replay the Whiskey Rebellion yet. So the easiest option would be to move to another place.

[greg42]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

At some point we have to at least acknowledge the possibility that the state may never restore its funding to PAT. If this happens what do we do?

Suffer basically, and demand changes, or leave.

[SuburbanPioneer]

Originally Posted by Blackbeauty212

But see that's where you confuse the two...Public Transit is Not A Business and shouldn't be run like one...its a public service like the Police, EMT, and Fire Departments.

No, I actually don't. I argue that public transportation doesn't have to be a public service. If there is a strong demand for such transportation, businesses should be allowed to fulfill the demand. Much like a demand for private education, private housing, private communication. The Internet access is a simple public necessity these days as well (UN just declared it as such a week ago). Speaking of which, Internet access is probably provided to you by a private company. Sure enough it's being subsidized through tax breaks, public libraries and other means, but you have a choice of private providers. It did wonders in terms of access fees, even in the very recent past. I want to see the same kind of competition among multiple public transportation providers in the city.

If you'd like an example more relevant to public transit, consider multiple school districts in this area and beyond going from running their own bus fleet to the one operated by a private company. Those who have switched, acknowledged significant cost benefits compared to what they had before and I don't see any complaints regarding the quality of service provided.

Why should we keep a failing service on a life support, especially since it's not really making any progress getting better? There are viable working alternatives. As long as there is a demand, those alternatives will survive.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by SuburbanPioneer

As long as people use transportation, doesn't matter what kind, there is always at least one successful business, the one that provides that kind of transportation. Even if such transportation involves driving personal vehicles.

On free public roads. Patrolled by free police. And so on. Which means those transportation businesses are also getting public subsidies.

The point is not that free public roads are always a bad thing, although in some cases we may need to start charging for them, both for revenue purposes and to eliminate congestion. The point is that there is no such thing as a comprehensive transportation system in the developed world that isn't getting public subsidies.

So the right question is not whether transportation should be subsidized--of course it should. The right question is what sort of transportation subsidies should we be providing. And there is no simple answer to that question, and indeed the answer keeps changing over time.

[robrobrob]

Originally Posted by squarian

Leave. Seriously. Emigrate.

If it eventually transpired that the state gov't was permanently in the hands of the Frackinators and that they had no intention of ever seriously grappling with urban mass transit (or more broadly, any urban concerns), then the alternatives would be acquiescence, resistance outside the established rules of politics, or emigration.

Acquiescence would mean living a crappy life in an increasingly crappy city. Resistance might be fun, but most of us aren't quite ready to replay the Whiskey Rebellion yet. So the easiest option would be to move to another place.

Got a little bit of a temper. Nice.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by SuburbanPioneer

I argue that public transportation doesn't have to be a public service.

Ayn Rand, come to me in my dreams, my love....

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by SuburbanPioneer

This is an interesting statement. Care to elaborate?

Your type, your kind...the perennially misinformed, clinging to an universally applicable idealized free market doctrine they scarcely understand and whose negative implications they fail to appreciate, willfully or otherwise.

That's all, nothing personal.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by robrobrob

Got a little bit of a temper. Nice.

Arrgghh, me matties, have at 'em - show 'em the edge of yer cold steel and send 'em all down t' Davey Jones. Argggh!