Highways or byways?

Four Twin Cities groups say Minnesota spent too much of its $600 million in federal stimulus money building new highways and too little fixing the roads it has and adding public transit.

[Tybalt]

any money spent on 'transit' is wasted money."transit" advocates do not care about traffic - they use this issue (largely a manufactured issue at that) for political cover; their aim is use government to control your life. they don't care about roads either.

[Back to the Fifties]

Opponents of mass transit are holdovers from the Fifties. But the days when these Fonz wannabees could rod around in their Chevy's on uncongested roads is over. When will they get the message: you can't build enough roads to keep up with the urban sprawl you encouraged. As the article indicates, even after we built the road system, we can't afford to maintain it. And woe unto anybody who wants to raise the gas tax a dime to BEGIN to cover the cost of maintenance. The anti-tax crowd will howl about that. Say---doesn't that lead us back to the original point: aren't they usually the ones who think they can outbuild urban sprawl?

[Fonz wannabee]

Peter Bell said he would spend stimulus money to cover the losses in operating costs. And, if mass transit opponents are 50s wanna-bees, than mass transit supporters must be 60's socialists.

[gdpcon]

Back to the Fifties wrote:

Opponents of mass transit are holdovers from the Fifties. But the days when these Fonz wannabees could rod around in their Chevy's on uncongested roads is over. When will they get the message: you can't build enough roads to keep up with the urban sprawl you encouraged. As the article indicates, even after we built the road system, we can't afford to maintain it. And woe unto anybody who wants to raise the gas tax a dime to BEGIN to cover the cost of maintenance. The anti-tax crowd will howl about that. Say---doesn't that lead us back to the original point: aren't they usually the ones who think they can outbuild urban sprawl?

Dear Clueless, less than 5% of commuters use public transit and it is already subsidized to the hilt - only 20% of operating expenses are covered by fares. Where's the return on your investment for increased public transit funding? That's right, there isn't any. Any clue on the % of the biennium budget goes to transportation? Answer, not nearly enough because we're too busy funding poor life style decisions with Health and Human Services and the black hole called K-12 education. Nearly 70% of the budget goes to H&HS and K-12 - this is a model that can not be perpetuated.

[Secondary Benefits]

To "gdpcon": Consider that wiser people than anti-transit thinkers have decided worldwide that mass transit is the only alternative for moving people in metropolitan areas. From Europe to Asia, planners have seen that you can only build and maintain a certain grid of roads and highways for the average one-person-per-vehicle to drive on before those expensive roadways become parking lots. Also, if you've traveled anywhere where there is a well-developed light rail transit system, you notice that these transit corridors have the ability to generate new housing and businesses along their routes. This revitalization of neighborhoods and more efficient locating of people and business doesn't show up as easily as dollars spent to support mass transit in a budget-- but it's a powerful contributor to an overall dynamic economy.

[Sam]

A visit to France using busses, bullet train, and LRT.

1) The French LRT was below grade and you never saw it and borded the train from a stairway in a small building at street level. Hiawatha has been disrupting traffic, bikes, pedestrians ever since it was built, BAD IMPLEMENTATION!

2) The Bullet was staffed by JERK conductors, has inadaquate luggage space, restrooms were UNUSABLE, and the train literally stopped working 6 times on a trip from Paris to the Riviara. As difficult as a plane flight is I would much rather ride a plane.

3) In France LRT IS NOT looked at as a development tool. Their LRT is used to move people only! If the Hiawatha is a development tool then let the developments PAY FOR IT! Why in sam h#e%l^l are taxes being used to subsidize some development??

4) The Bus is like ours, you don't want to ride them at light ridership times.

==========

Secondary Benefits wrote:

To "gdpcon": Consider that wiser people than anti-transit thinkers have decided worldwide that mass transit is the only alternative for moving people in metropolitan areas. From Europe to Asia, planners have seen that you can only build and maintain a certain grid of roads and highways for the average one-person-per-vehicle to drive on before those expensive roadways become parking lots. Also, if you've traveled anywhere where there is a well-developed light rail transit system, you notice that these transit corridors have the ability to generate new housing and businesses along their routes. This revitalization of neighborhoods and more efficient locating of people and business doesn't show up as easily as dollars spent to support mass transit in a budget-- but it's a powerful contributor to an overall dynamic economy.

[Hello]

No it was the money wasted on park and ride lots along with bike paths. Hello northfield lefty