|
|
| Re: WMATA Latest N Route Silver line news (533905) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: WMATA Latest N Route Silver line news |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Sat Dec 15 11:42:11 2007, in response to Re: WMATA Latest N Route Silver line news, posted by Sand Box John on Sat Dec 15 11:33:40 2007. "The 15% you quote is proof to me that light rail would be an even bigger boondoggle."It means that not enough people are using transit. "You must of forgotten that I was born in Kansas City. I grew up on the Country Club Plaza. I have family that still lives in the Kansas City area. I saw the growth in the 1960s and 70s. I have no doubt that the growth has continued. " I didn't forget. And yes, the growth has continued. Mind you, I like it - my wifde derisively calls Kansas City a "nice suburb" but since it has urban problems, I'd like to see a more solid urban tax base (and that means higher density). Higher density ---> more demand for transit. "Your point that the east side has a transit dependent population leads me to believe that this no more then a wealth redistribution schema that subsidies the cost of transportation to those that can not or will not pay for it out of their own pockets." There is no question that investment in transit produces wealth redistribution,and that is entirely proper. In Kansas City, the wealth distribution is much, much smaller than in other places because the sales tax funding transit is regressive - it falls disproportionately on the poor. The poor subsidize the rich; transit evens the playing field a little. "You own a car. You pay the city and state fees and taxes to own and operate that car on the public roads." Which does't even come close to paying the costs of those roads. In Kansas City, a 1 cent sales tax pays for roads - again, the poor subsidizing the rich; car-less people subsidizing drivers. |
|
|
|