Come on F-Line lol, I wasnt trying to bring up the taxes again...Its been beaten to death already. You cut off the quote right before the last sentence.
but then came across this as well which Boston absolutely could benefit a whole lot from...
^--typo on my part in splitting up the quote for reply.
And also irrelevant because the link you cited was from a thoroughly discredited voodoo economics astroturf thinktank that's not even in this country!!! That's the problem here: by dumping the linkspam from a policy house whose #1 cause above all else is anti-taxation, you ARE backdooring the tax issue and bringing it up again. If that was not your intention,
vet your links before posting. Fraser is so thoroughly associated with libertarian taxation causes that the mere mention of them is designed to stoke a strong reaction from the Riflemans of the great white North. Nearly any source would've been better than such a politically motivated one.
I was just saying that I was reading about Vancouvers metro expansion, (specifically I was looking for where they are building the new lines to... etc.) But as Im reading it looking for this, they mention yet another tax plan...which Im not looking for, but apparently it seems to be a theme when reading about expanded metros these days, so I noted it. Anyways as Im reading this I come across his part about doing an audit of the whole metro system before any expansion projects are started and I agreed, this should be step one before we also start on any of our larger projects. The GLX started out as a mess but was reeled in and saved. Lets stop it before it even begins the next time. Thats literally what I was saying. Should we never reel in the overspending?
Where does a system audit substantially create the
revenues to facilitate expansion? Have we not been auditing the system for years now? Where's that getting us except a couple refinancing rate reshuffles of the T's debt service? Nowhere. The debt service has to become manageable by the Legislature acting to take the Big Dig debt off the agency's backs before every $1 saved on payroll or an outsourced parts warehouse doesn't disappear into the debt service black hole.
Does that mean we should continue auditing? Sure, absolutely. But the connection between auditing of
payroll and ops with
expansion is nil...nothing...zero. It was nil with GLX. We got a crooked bid from an outside contractor, and so the outside contractor was fired with penalty and the project put out for re-bid. Nowhere did GLX bloat its cost projections or slim its cost projections because of an internally laid off bus driver or outsourced warehouse elsewhere. That is a false-false-false equivalence. Doubly false when the state won't even audit all that South Coast Rail is wasting in similar contractor grift at the conceptual stage, so not all projects are created equal with who Beacon Hill is politically OK wasting contractor payola on.
If we expand--on any mode--the payroll's going to have to do *some* expanding in key areas even if more efficiency gains come elsewhere. So while tightening the bolts on waste is always a top priority, it's not like we can get rid of bus drivers or mechanics at all while still aiming to expand fleets/garages and schedules.
Anyways, I dont really care who wrote it, I dont think it matters. I was just saying that he has a good point and I think it applies to us as well, thats all.
You should care who wrote it, because that's exactly how people get fooled into treating politically single-minded thinktank trash as unbiased policy analysis. It's irresponsible.
And once more: Vancouver ≠ Boston. L.A. ≠ Boston. Atlanta ≠ Boston. Seattle ≠ Boston.
Again and again and again and again for another week you're chucking up these transpo funding initiatives from different states...now different countries...that don't function like the institutions we have in Massachusetts for funding these things. Then positing another "Why can't we have these nice things" link about those same MA-irrelevant funding mechanisms. How many times does it have to be answered? We can't have those nice things because those nice things have to be proposed through OUR institutions. Numerous examples have been given as to the how's/why's similar things
could be done through the Legislature in spite of the hardships in reforming the Legislature.
Do these posts ever pivot to floating a working theory of how one could better fund transit in MA through MA? No...just turn gaze longingly back to the stuff on another coast we couldn't build that way even if we wanted to. This week with TL;DR junk science that you're now saying doesn't matter. What is the point of all this? That if it gets thread-bumped enough we'll magically turn into L.A. or Vancouver?
How about solving local problems on local turf. That's way more practical.
Thats all that I was saying and Stefalarchitects response of (Im not sure if private contractors will be any better, but it is bad, something needs to be done but Im not sure what) is really the extent of a response that was required to this simple suggestion.. And I most definitelly was not in any way implying that “busting the union provides enough revenue for expansion”. No idea where in gods name you got this from... Essentially everything youve said is somehow a response to something Im not even saying, drawn out to infinity.
It came by the act of posting an article from a thinktank that loves union-busting. This is a problem that you won't read your own sourcing before posting that stuff.
I literally was just saying that... “step 1” before we do any new expansion project here.. should be to make sure our finances are in order first and were not wasting large amounts of unnecessary money on bs... Aka audit where the money goes before taking on more money... thats it. How you get what you do from what little is said in here I have no idea, but you imply a whole hell of a lot and then debunk the things that your implying that Im not even saying in the first place. Not 1 time did I say an audit will fund the whole thing... seriously wtf bro lol..jesus.
Heres my ENTIRE point... “Step 1, Audit MBTA before taking on more money, Step 2 proceed” Thats what my entire post said in 1 sentence. So this is wrong?
If you would have framed an answer towards the question even being asked, I would know what your answer was... but everything went so far in every direction that I have no idea what you actually said through all of it, because its like 10 paragraphs about the taxes that I wasnt even talking about and then ended with the false premise that I thought that an audit would create all the money for an expansion. Thats like 11 of the paragraphs. Then I still really have no idea what to even make of it after that. Please just stay on target and get your point across in as few words as necessary. Do an audit or dont before taking on more funds.. Yes or no, thats literally it. Now I had to type 10x as much as my post even had to begin with just responding to all of whatever that just was.
If you are completely kerfuzzled about replies to your own posts, perhaps you should read the links in your own posts before posting. Fraser = TAXES!TAXES!TAXES! shouting. That's their whole bag. It's impossible to swerve away from their whole mission statement in life.
Here... forget everything else so far. Ill keep it straight and to the point and hopefully am able clear up all of the other confusion so far...
What is the plan that the city and/or MBTA have for getting the financing and approval together to allow NSRL, SS expansion, RED-BLUE, OL Extension, Fairmount, Blue-Lynn, Seaport-Rail, and anything else thats in the proposal stage to actually move fwd? Where is the money going to come from and what time tables are we realistically looking at?
This should be easier with direct questions than can have direct answers.
-Thanks
It's going to come through the Legislature...which we've talked about for a couple weeks now being THE conduit where you have to implement funding. Progressive funding, regressive funding, whatever.
Something following in the lines of that discussion and NOT what other states are passing under different mechanisms. Continue that discussion if it interests you, because playing this tiresome TL;DR game with replies clearly isn't advancing it any.
