Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[GMasterAres]

The biggest issue with transit in Metro Vancouver is that it isn't self-sufficient. It is always a money pit that loses money. That's the problem. So the more we expand, the more money ultimately we lose.

If they figured out a better way of funding transit and having transit generate its own funding such that the gap between subsidy was lesser, then I'd be more keen on taking debt on as a taxpayer to pay for some of these big projects.

You're right though that statistically, the Broadway line should be underconstruction now and hell it should have been completed imho before the Canada Line or even Millenium Lines were conceived of. It's just ridiculous when you look at the numbers. 6 of the top 10 bus routes both in ridership numbers and in crowdedness go to and from UBC.

Just seems stupid to me that we don't have a rapid line out there or that we'd even consider lines elsewhere until this gets done.

It is the #1 regional transit priority by far.

Just look at page 1 of this thread, it was posted in 2007 for the initiation of a planning study. We're in 2015 now, that's 8 bloody years and we're nowhere further along. Just f'ing dumb for lack of a better phrase.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by PaperTiger

So are you suggesting you'd be willing to pay more tax in years of deficit?

That's exactly what happens, although we don't pay it in the same year. We pay for deficit spending through higher taxes later on to service the extra debt load.

Although to more directly answer your question, I believe that deficits shouldn't exist. The legislature should be legally required to submit a balanced budget and automatic budget cuts should come into effect to prevent deficits.

[Smooth]

Originally Posted by jhausner

I don't think anyone cares about the NDP in other provinces. Pull up the statistics for the NDP in this province then compare notes. But you're right that it's not just the NDP that cause debt. The other governments in power cause just as much if not more debt if you add everything up.

Also keep in mind that the study comes from an economist from CUPE, Canada's largest union, and was posted on an online forum whose stated goal is "challenging the free-market orthodoxy which dominates both economics instruction and economic policy-making in Canada" http://www.progressive-economics.ca/about-pef/.

[twoNeurons]

This isn't a political thread. Take politics elsewhere.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Kisai

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...routes-3-facts-you-didn-t-know-1.3153203

And it's even more impressive when you consider the fact that Translink has been desperately trying to provide alternate services for UBC students. If a Broadway skytrain line opens - even if it doesn't go all the way to UBC - a lot of people using those alternate routes will migrate back to Broadway again.

Originally Posted by Jebby

Debt servicing is taken into account when considering an operating surplus.

There's a big difference between "debt" and "debt servicing". Saying that we only need to worry about debt servicing is like saying you only need to pay interest on your mortgage and ignore any attempts to reduce the actual amount owing.

I believe we should retire as much debt as quickly as possible, even if it means raising taxes in order to do that while providing more services. It's cheap to service the debt right now, but when rates go back up again the lower the debt, the less of our taxes go to paying interest on it (or the more of our taxes can be used to provide more services).

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by jhausner

The biggest issue with transit in Metro Vancouver is that it isn't self-sufficient. It is always a money pit that loses money. That's the problem. So the more we expand, the more money ultimately we lose.

Welcome to reality. Public transit the world over tends to operate on deficits as the majority of the commuting public is relatively too poor to pay the true cost/price of mass transit. Further, government is not really about making profit. That's a private sector mantra. Hence the mission of government is about national security and equity which are both "money pit" ventures!

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by jhausner

The biggest issue with transit in Metro Vancouver is that it isn't self-sufficient. It is always a money pit that loses money. That's the problem. So the more we expand, the more money ultimately we lose.

If they figured out a better way of funding transit and having transit generate its own funding such that the gap between subsidy was lesser, then I'd be more keen on taking debt on as a taxpayer to pay for some of these big projects.

It is self sufficient ... just not the way you calculate it.

At a certain density, individual travel via one's own conveyance becomes expensive and then impossible.

Imagine 100,000 people from Surrey and Burnaby going downtown in their own cars. Where would they park? What roads would they drive on.?

At 1.25 people per car, you would need 80,000 parking spaces in downtown to accommodate them.

The gas tax you are paying when you drive your car downtown is for the privilege of driving your car without 80,000 more cars being in front of you.

What is that tax ... 10 cents or 20 cents a liter.

Great - love to pay it, so that when I drive my car, I can actually DRIVE my car instead of spending 6 hours a day in traffic.

What the "intellectually over endowed" people in politics don't get is that what they are really doing is making it easier for people to get off the road.

All that BS from them that some street level tramway system is better because of the cost, does not calculate what I am willing to pay to drive in peace.

It also does not calculate that I am driving less because sometimes for about 10 bucks, I buy an all day pass and visit about 6 business appointments, in no traffic at all.

A RR transit system is like sewer and water and any other service. At some point in the densification, you have to build segregated conduits for the service.

A conduit for people is just such a service. It is an underground pipe for people. Everyone benefits when.

Imagine every one in Vancouver getting their water from their own well or from a daily water truck. imagine them trying to dispose of waste water via septic tank into the same ground.

At a certain density, you just have to "go conduit". And you have to pay for it .


Or ... go live 50 miles outside of Whitehorse.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by jhausner

You're right though that statistically, the Broadway line should be underconstruction now and hell it should have been completed imho before the Canada Line or even Millenium Lines were conceived of. It's just ridiculous when you look at the numbers. 6 of the top 10 bus routes both in ridership numbers and in crowdedness go to and from UBC.

Just seems stupid to me that we don't have a rapid line out there or that we'd even consider lines elsewhere until this gets done.

It is the #1 regional transit priority by far.

Just look at page 1 of this thread, it was posted in 2007 for the initiation of a planning study. We're in 2015 now, that's 8 bloody years and we're nowhere further along. Just f'ing dumb for lack of a better phrase.

When you bring politics into something , you get bizarre results.

Not bizarre from the POV of a politician, of course, but bizarre from a logical POV.

Who votes, and how, and for whom?

That is what determines transit, not need.

Three groups of people suffer because of the lack of a RR line to UBC.

The first are the residents of the West Side, who have 60,000 people on cars and buses traveling down regular city streets to UBC in the morning and back again at night.

The second are the people who waste, heavens knows how much time, getting from wherever they live to UBC on that crowded and inefficient bus and car system.

The third are the people who would happily live on an Evergreen line that ran from Coquitlam to UBC with all the business, recreational, shopping, residential that they could ever need .. all on one subway pass.

Service every three minutes, comfortable, air con, security vigilance. and fro 6 to 10 bucks a day ... cheap.

You would have to be an idiot to own a car.

Of course, that quality of life is only one vote and only for one politician on a line that touches 5 jurisdictions.

Politics ... worthless.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

This isn't a political thread. Take politics elsewhere.

With respect, you have to be kidding.

Transit is all politics ... and the number one rule in politics is ...

you are always running for re election.

That imperative distorts whatever it touches.

So sorry ... but politics is the main theme of this forum, whether you like it or not.

The logic was settled a long while ago ... RR to UBC.

The politics are never settled and there to plague us forever.

[usog]

Once again chiming in with the opinion that skytrain to arbutus is possible but skytrain to UBC will probably not pass due to the schism it will cause amongst the mayors unless UBC pays for anything beyond arbutus.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by usog

Once again chiming in with the opinion that skytrain to arbutus is possible but skytrain to UBC will probably not pass due to the schism it will cause amongst the mayors unless UBC pays for anything beyond arbutus.

Sadly you may be right.
I wonder how to get the last leg built.

[Jimbo604]

Originally Posted by usog

Once again chiming in with the opinion that skytrain to arbutus is possible but skytrain to UBC will probably not pass due to the schism it will cause amongst the mayors unless UBC pays for anything beyond arbutus.

Arbutus is so lame, if they don't make it to UBC at least get to Alma/Dunbar..

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

With respect, you have to be kidding.

Transit is all politics ... and the number one rule in politics is ...

you are always running for re election.

That imperative distorts whatever it touches.

So sorry ... but politics is the main theme of this forum, whether you like it or not.

The logic was settled a long while ago ... RR to UBC.

The politics are never settled and there to plague us forever.

I was, indeed, partly kidding. Just sick of hearing "my party is bestest" when in reality, like you said, all parties simply have one goal... to stay in power. Everything else, including what's best for the people, is secondary. Especially when it comes to budgets and crap like that. I mean, seriously... most of the time a good or bad economy has nothing to do with which party is in power... particularly on the provincial level. It's really just a wash.

I find it rather comical to see people debate things like this and while I know politics are involved, seeing people debate about political issues not really related to the point at hand is just a waste.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by jhausner

The biggest issue with transit in Metro Vancouver is that it isn't self-sufficient.

Neither is the road network. Neither is the sewer and water network. Neither are hospitals. Neither are schools.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Neither is the road network. Neither is the sewer and water network. Neither are hospitals. Neither are schools.

The nature of government doesn't lend itself to private sector based/driven "profitability" (but rather national equity between competing interest groups). The problem thus is that the private sector NEEDS the public sector through which to provide the basic infrastructure that girds the modern economy/society while not wanting (re: the private sector) to pay the true/higher cost level of taxes required to keep such public sector infrastructure viable.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

The nature of government doesn't lend itself to private sector based/driven "profitability" (but rather national equity between competing interest groups).

You are quite correct on this statement. Too many people think government can be run like a for profit corporation.

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

The problem thus is that the private sector NEEDS the public sector through which to provide the basic infrastructure that girds the modern economy/society while not wanting (re: the private sector) to pay the true/higher cost level of taxes required to keep such public sector infrastructure viable.

It is not just the private sector that doesn't want to pay the higher costs. The public in general does not understand what the true costs of maintaining and building infrastructure is. Very few people want to give up the freedom provided by the personal auto and the subsidies provided by government to maintain and improve highways. Governments are afraid of introducing pricing schemes to recover costs because opposition parties will use it as a wedge issue to defeat which ever government is in power.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Smooth

Also keep in mind that the study comes from an economist from CUPE, Canada's largest union, and was posted on an online forum whose stated goal is "challenging the free-market orthodoxy which dominates both economics instruction and economic policy-making in Canada" http://www.progressive-economics.ca/about-pef/.

A stat is a stat doesn't matter who posts it and I voted Liberal and am not a union member. I'm just not scared of "the other side" like most people are.

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by GoTrans

You are quite correct on this statement. Too many people think government can be run like a for profit corporation.

I and most of my friends would agree with you, except government employees, should be treated as, and held to the same accountability as, private sector employees.

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by jhausner

A stat is a stat doesn't matter who posts it ......

I had a very astute boss, early in my management career, who used to say to us every time we used statistics to cover out butts, "Figures never lie, liars always figure." Its a mantra I still follow today, especially when a politician or the press comes up with a statistic. Yes they are useful, but how was the question asked, in what context, etc, etc.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by AMTDGT

I had a very astute boss, early in my management career, who used to say to us every time we used statistics to cover out butts, "Figures never lie, liars always figure." Its a mantra I still follow today, especially when a politician or the press comes up with a statistic. Yes they are useful, but how was the question asked, in what context, etc, etc.

What I meant is a fact is a fact. I too subscribe to the notion that stats can be molded, but the site didn't post stats it posted facts.

I do do research before I post typically:

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/debtmgmt/debtstat97-98.pdf
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/debtmgmt/debtstat98-99.pdf
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/debtmgmt/debtstat99-00.pdf
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/debtmgmt/debtstat00-01.pdf
etc. etc.

They back the numbers in that site and are from the provincial government itself both as NDP and as Liberals.



Truth is the facts on our deficit and debt numbers show that no one government is amazing and the notion that the NDP are bad for causing debt is a myth. I'm not an NDP supported because I disagree with them on other platform items, but I am a believer in truth and fact, and the facts don't support the Liberals claims that they are good at managing our provincial budget.

They're actually pretty bad at it. Heck both the NDP and Liberals put forward budgets (and proposed platform budgets) estimating $100/barrel in oil prices. What planet are they both on?

And another fact, BC hasn't been debt free since 1982 and we've gone through 3 different government ideologies since that date. So yes I'm big on facts and I just don't think our government in any flavor is actually effective at anything financial in nature which makes me sad and is probably why politicians shouldn't be in charge of money.