Thoughts: a) At first blush, this could come across as some crazy last ditch effort by a long-shot candidate to remain relevant, but; b) public transit is key to solving gridlock in huge cities and requires courageous, novel ideas. None of us want our commute to double in the next decade.
Too many elections are about the new swift talker who mows down the incumbent based on poor previous performance. We're swayed more by witty sound bytes and Crest-commercial-worthy smiles than we are by solid policies and people who genuinely want to make a difference, rather than those who just want a sweet job for 4+ years.
I applaud the plan, but take issue with the comparison of user fees and tolls. Gas taxes continue to go up to pay for road expansion and maintenance. User fees you go up to maintain and expand services. The two can't reasonably be co-mingled.
It might at first glance be a decent idea but if you look closely it relies on a huge increae in taxes and fees.
Nowhere does it say that those increases will be dedicated to transit so you can be sure thet it will be out in the general account and used as needed for politician pet projects.
It is a sign of a weak mind that says the answer to all of the funding problems is higher taxation and fees full stop. That is what drives businesses away from the city. I also have to wonder about the twisted logic that states you'll get to work quicker if there are tolls. Good thing for the city this guy has no chance at winning anything.
This website is not only read by GO Transit passengers, but also by employees of various transit agencies across Canada and the US, members of the media and enjoys an audience from around the world. Please take that into consideration.
You can remove your comment but a copy of that comment is retained by the software and is immediately available to the editor.
ThisCrazyTrain.com's commenting rules are simple: If you make an overly offensive comment (racist, bigoted, etc.) or go waaaay off topic, your comment will be deleted. Please conduct yourself accordingly.
Interesting.
ReplyDeleteThoughts:
a) At first blush, this could come across as some crazy last ditch effort by a long-shot candidate to remain relevant, but;
b) public transit is key to solving gridlock in huge cities and requires courageous, novel ideas. None of us want our commute to double in the next decade.
Too many elections are about the new swift talker who mows down the incumbent based on poor previous performance. We're swayed more by witty sound bytes and Crest-commercial-worthy smiles than we are by solid policies and people who genuinely want to make a difference, rather than those who just want a sweet job for 4+ years.
I applaud the plan, but take issue with the comparison of user fees and tolls. Gas taxes continue to go up to pay for road expansion and maintenance. User fees you go up to maintain and expand services. The two can't reasonably be co-mingled.
ReplyDeleteIt might at first glance be a decent idea but if you look closely it relies on a huge increae in taxes and fees.
ReplyDeleteNowhere does it say that those increases will be dedicated to transit so you can be sure thet it will be out in the general account and used as needed for politician pet projects.
It is a sign of a weak mind that says the answer to all of the funding problems is higher taxation and fees full stop. That is what drives businesses away from the city. I also have to wonder about the twisted logic that states you'll get to work quicker if there are tolls.
Good thing for the city this guy has no chance at winning anything.
This Ari Goldkind is the only one who seems to have a grasp at what it means to run a city. Too bad I can't vote for him.
ReplyDeleteShame this came so late. You can see with these comments that at least he's making people think about his ideas and examine the economics of it all.
ReplyDelete