|
A $20 congestion charge into downtown Vancouver. Now.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
Lexicon posted:You still haven't addressed congestion. That's the primary reason why road pricing is a good idea. I wouldn't be so vehemently in favour of it if Vancouver and most other North American cities of decent size had such a huge problem with miserable congestion. Well there the obvious solution is improving public transit. I agree with you, that there are congestion problems for sure, but I don't see why it should be solved by simply pricing out the poorest of society.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:A $20 congestion charge into downtown Vancouver. Now. lots of european cities do surge toll pricing to cut down traffic
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Hey look guys we got a real keynesian believer here how cute what do his comments have to do with countercyclical fiscal and monetary policy i do not get it
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:what do his comments have to do with countercyclical fiscal and monetary policy i do not get it Leisure
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
We can't have public transit and toll roads at the same time because ... ??? Also if you're going to argue that we shouldn't price out the poorest members of society from a thing (which does not seem to be a necessity in this case but a luxury), how about making public transit free first? Oh and then implementing road tolls to pay for it. That would be rad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:A $20 congestion charge into downtown Vancouver. Now. wouldn't a rear end in a top hat tax be a more effective way to raise money?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
etalian posted:wouldn't a rear end in a top hat tax be a more effective way to raise money? you mean a 50% increase to the lowest marginal bracket? that kinda regression; i ain't going out like that
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Well there the obvious solution is improving public transit. I agree with you, that there are congestion problems for sure, but I don't see why it should be solved by simply pricing out the poorest of society. "There are poor people" and "congestion plagues our cities" are two entirely separate problems, requiring separate solutions. Confusing the two is unlikely to result in a satisfactory solution to either. I'm vehemently in favour of road pricing for the reasons stated; very separately I would like to see us move towards a guaranteed minimum income.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Well there the obvious solution is improving public transit. I agree with you, that there are congestion problems for sure, but I don't see why it should be solved by simply pricing out the poorest of society. You could make this argument for a ton of things (lots of them privatized and much more egregious violations of the basic rights of society's poorest people), even within the realm of driving - if we shouldn't pay for roads, why do we have to pay for driver's licences? Insurance? Parking? It doesn't hold water here. For the very, very few people for whom the cost of tolls would make or break their lifestyle, the loss is vastly outweighed by the benefits. It's just good tax policy. There's also the theoretical possibility that this demographic breaks even in the form of lower tax (particularly if toll roads mean lower PST, which is regressive). I see where you're coming from but I don't agree it's nearly as serious an infringement as you think, and certainly not as serious as many our society's poor already face.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 07:31
|
|
|
Tolling roads seems like a really dumb thing to me. For one in an ideal world I would hope that part of the taxes people pay would go to general transport upkeep such as buses, trains and public roadways. I doubt that that's the case but this isn't a problem with people driving but rather a political and accounting problem. Secondly if you're going to punish people for driving cars then punish everyone for driving cars equally not people just going to a specific location. If a specific part of the city is incredibly congested then that's poor city and transit planning not a driver issue. In any case punish them by taxing gas or increasing insurance. On that note from what I've read BC taxes gas based on emissions and the point of the tax is to offset the emissions that a vehicle outputs. I don't know if this tax is effective or if the money is used for anything constructive but drivers already have to pay extra for the emissions they're generating, in BC at least. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/topic.page?id=1A80D78D2FC440ECB036B9EDE1EA7771 Thirdly, in the specific instance of the Port Mann bridge, which as far as I understand is operated and maintained by TransLink, I don't want to reward them for the absolutely lovely job they did with that project by using their deathtrap of a bridge and paying their lovely tolls. As far as I know TransLink gets money from tons of tax and toll sources and they aren't exactly doing the best job managing their budget and maintaining and updating their infrastructure. From a personal standpoint I would love to take transit more but the time difference between driving and busing for me is more than an hour, and probably close to an hour and a half depending on my luck on bus and skytrain timing. As for the Port Mann toll bridge I don't take it on principle, I'd rather pay the extra money in gas than give money to TransLink execs. EDIT: Seems that TransLink had a budget surplus in 2013 but a decrease in ridership so I'm wrong about them managing their budget poorly but I think that the quality of service has been mediocre. According to that article the ridership also decreased by 2% in 2013 which is interesting. http://www.vancouversun.com/business/TransLink+records+2013+budget+surplus+despite+million+fewer+passengers/9885295/story.html Terebus fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Nov 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 12:10
|
|
|
Toll the roads and provide free alternate access with the earnings. The rich people can avoid travelling on a free bus or train with the teeming unwashed masses and the poor people save what they would have spent on gas and car insurance and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Terebus posted:Thirdly, in the specific instance of the Port Mann bridge, which as far as I understand is operated and maintained by TransLink, I don't want to reward them for the absolutely lovely job they did with that project by using their deathtrap of a bridge and paying their lovely tolls. As far as I know TransLink gets money from tons of tax and toll sources and they aren't exactly doing the best job managing their budget and maintaining and updating their infrastructure. Well good job admitting that your form of protest is really stupid.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Or maybe both our countries could get their heads out of their asses and just fund infrastructure with taxes like they're supposed to. Look, I can dream.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Or maybe both our countries could get their heads out of their asses and just fund infrastructure with taxes like they're supposed to. Tolls are a form of tax though. It helps makes car use unappealing for regions which have the capability to function differently which I'm all for. A tax across the board for gas use or insurance is going to hit rural areas where there is no public transit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
tolling roads is also a form of congestion control, so ruling it out and then blaming whomever for poor planning is an odd tack to take.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Isn't London in the UK set up with toll zones? Like, you pay a fee to drive in the downtown core, which has the effect of promoting people taking the underground to get to work, alleviating congestion? Is that a suborning of the right to drive your Buick leSabre wherever you please, gently caress everyone else?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
When coupled with good transit, congestion charges work great. Also cry me a loving river about having to pay some tiny fee to drive up to a luxury resort. Anyone driving off the island has to pay about $70 each way. But wait it's way cheaper if you take transit, "only" $16. Rarg my god given right to drive a car anywhere any time. To make matters even more unfair, larger vehicles have to pay more?? Can you imagine, being punished by the government just for your choice in vehicle?? It's a horrible injustice. Anyone who has to commute between Victoria and Vancouver once a week or more (and there are a LOT of those) are going to laugh anyone whining about a tiny toll to whistler. Specially since Victoria gets something like 50 cents to the dollar we give in taxes while the Vancouver area gets around 1.30 and we've got plenty of highways and bridges begging for long overdue upgrades.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:Isn't London in the UK set up with toll zones? Like, you pay a fee to drive in the downtown core, which has the effect of promoting people taking the underground to get to work, alleviating congestion? Is that a suborning of the right to drive your Buick leSabre wherever you please, gently caress everyone else? Yes, and it works pretty well there. Its been in place for 12 years or so. It generates decent income which they re-invest in transit, has lowered congestion during peak periods, is not in place on weekends or holidays, and has improved air quality in the area. When they introduced it they brought something like 300 extra buses on line. Transit has to be ready. I'm all for them doing something like that in Toronto. There are cheap ways into the core, so people can make a choice. People who live in the suburbs surrounding Toronto, need to loving pony up and help build transit in Toronto, they spend 10 hours a day here five days a week, anyhow. People who are against congestion tolls are really just trying to protect their poor life choices which are wholly car dependant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
Why can't we just put up license plate scanners and do it like the 407 in Toronto? If the real price of running a highway was evident everybody would agitate for better transit, wouldn't they?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
To sort of be fair to Toronto commuters, while I think they do need to pay tolls for the wear and tear they cause on infrastructure, the province and the federal government need to pony up the dough for transit first. The GO is $300 and a monthly TTC pass is more expensive than buying 10 tokens for the week. The pricing is insane for people trying to get to the economic centre of the country. A transit system the size of the TTC or the GO should not be expected to be profitable or even finance itself. It's not the case anywhere else in the world. Maybe if every rural Ontarian and other Canadian didn't want us to drown in our own filth, something could be accomplished in Toronto.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
If the real price of car-centric development and sprawl/suburbia was evident it would upend the entire pattern of development this continent has grown to depend on and that's not going to happen any more than a government tackling the bubble because yes, people in the know know that they will both lead to absolute disasters that will get worse the longer we wait, but no one wants to deal with the pain of stopping the problem and fixing it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:If the real price of car-centric development and sprawl/suburbia was evident it would upend the entire pattern of development this continent has grown to depend on and that's not going to happen any more than a government tackling the bubble because yes, people in the know know that they will both lead to absolute disasters that will get worse the longer we wait, but no one wants to deal with the pain of stopping the problem and fixing it. Plus everyone 40 and up thinks suburban sprawl and car centric living are the unquestionable natural order of things and can't conceive of anything else. Also, their entire net worth is inextricably tied to the burbs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:33
|
|
|
eXXon posted:Well good job admitting that your form of protest is really stupid. The difference in money for me is pretty much nonexistent since the place I usually go to in Surrey is close to the Patullo so the real choice is do I want to give the toll fee to Translink or do I want to give the money to the gas station. Seems like a pretty easy choice since TransLink is such a shitshow. An Angry Bug posted:Or maybe both our countries could get their heads out of their asses and just fund infrastructure with taxes like they're supposed to. Yep this is pretty much what I'm advocating considering that these taxes are already being collected. http://buzzer.translink.ca/2013/03/translink-101-where-does-translink-get-its-funding-and-how-do-we-spend-it/ Translink gets funding from a bunch of different tax sources. flashman posted:Tolls are a form of tax though. It helps makes car use unappealing for regions which have the capability to function differently which I'm all for. A tax across the board for gas use or insurance is going to hit rural areas where there is no public transit. Again I think this is an issue of accessibility. If I could take transit without extending my commute by 3 hours a day I would but since I don't have that option I have to drive. Why should I get double punished because TransLink can't provide a sensible service and I happen to live and work in the wrong locations. JawKnee posted:tolling roads is also a form of congestion control, so ruling it out and then blaming whomever for poor planning is an odd tack to take. To me tolling seems like treating the symptom rather than the cause. For example I don't think there's any amount of tolling that can fix the nightmare that is the Lions Gate bridge gridlock. Blade_of_tyshalle posted:Isn't London in the UK set up with toll zones? Like, you pay a fee to drive in the downtown core, which has the effect of promoting people taking the underground to get to work, alleviating congestion? Is that a suborning of the right to drive your Buick leSabre wherever you please, gently caress everyone else? That's great, I wish we had London's transit system but we don't. At least in Vancouver we don't, can't speak for other Canadian cities. Doesn't London also have increased car insurance prices for anyone that lives in the city center. That's what I've heard which makes a lot more sense than toll roads. Baronjutter posted:When coupled with good transit, congestion charges work great. I'm all for better transit. I would love to take the train up to Whistler but I'm pretty sure a round trip ticket is $269. That's stupid and unreasonable yet it would be a much better option. In any case I'm talking about tolls in general and I think the toll on the Port Mann is far worse. As for people with bigger cars getting charged more, that already happens since they're getting more gas and paying more since there's a carbon tax rolled into gas prices in BC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Plus everyone 40 and up thinks suburban sprawl and car centric living are the unquestionable natural order of things and can't conceive of anything else. Well of course it is, that's where the cheap land is. If we had to pay the actual cost of the cheap land it wouldn't be cheap anymore and how could anyone afford homes? And what would happen to my property values if my suburb suddenly had to pay high enough taxes to support its own infrastructure and costs? On top of the housing bubble in Canada, north-america in general has a suburban infrastructure bubble. We've built massive highway systems, overpasses, bridges, and untold thousands of km of roads to serve low density low tax yield land in the name of "growing the economy". They made some places some short term riches, but in the long term it's a horrible ROI, negative in many cases. So many bridges and overpasses have had their replacement or key maintenance deferred again and again because there's no money to fix or replace them. It's not as bad in Canada as the US, but we still have this problem. And even when upkeep isn't deferred it's still expensive as hell and a net drain on the economy, and the money is always raised in a way that doesn't upset the folks who depend on the infrastructure or impact their property values. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 22:40 on Nov 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Nano suites. And when house prices go even higher, pico suites.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
let's just start living inside of other human beings
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
peter banana posted:let's just start living inside of other human beings We already start living inside other human beings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
not much of a life tbh
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
.
Sassafras fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
Sassafras posted:You should probably fact-check certain assumptions you've made before constructing larger philosophical belief systems off of them, seeing as the Port Mann has nothing to do with Translink. I fully expect it to destroy transit progress in BC for about a decade, if not longer. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Sassafras posted:You should probably fact-check certain assumptions you've made before constructing larger philosophical belief systems off of them, seeing as the Port Mann has nothing to do with Translink. I was under the impression that TransLink is in charge of the regional transportation network of Metro Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada, including public transport and major roads and bridges. This is coming from wikipedia but I've heard this in other places. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransLink_%28British_Columbia They have a page dedicated to the Port Mann on their website http://www.translink.ca/en/Getting-Around/Driving/Traffic-Cameras/Bridges-and-Tunnels/Port-Mann-Bridge.aspx And their site says that part of their revenue is from bridge tolls http://buzzer.translink.ca/2013/03/translink-101-where-does-translink-get-its-funding-and-how-do-we-spend-it/ You're right that I assumed that TransLink is in charge of the Port Mann and there's why. Who is in charge of maintaining and tolling the Port Mann bridge? I know that TreO is the company you pay through but I thought they were just contracted to set up the tracking and payment system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Terebus posted:Again I think this is an issue of accessibility. If I could take transit without extending my commute by 3 hours a day I would but since I don't have that option I have to drive. Why should I get double punished because TransLink can't provide a sensible service and I happen to live and work in the wrong locations. In this ideal world all this extra revenue from toll roads would go towards making transit a viable and cheap alternative to operating your own vehicle. If for whatever reason transit isn't possible in your area and toll roads are a crippling expense then I would suggest moving because it doesn't sound like a sustainable location anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Terebus posted:I was under the impression that TransLink is in charge of the regional transportation network of Metro Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada, including public transport and major roads and bridges. This is coming from wikipedia but I've heard this in other places. Translink is the "independent" body that the provincial government dumps all of it's unfunded transportation infrastructure into. Build a new, but unfinished skytrain line somewhere, kick in a month or two of operating expenses and give it to translink to deal with. Not enough funding available for them to perform their mandate? It is that unaccountable body of fat cat bureaucrats screwing it up again. Congratulations for letting the provincial government off the hook, when they point at the farty dog.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
.
Sassafras fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:Translink is the "independent" body that the provincial government dumps all of it's unfunded transportation infrastructure into. Build a new, but unfinished skytrain line somewhere, kick in a month or two of operating expenses and give it to translink to deal with. Not enough funding available for them to perform their mandate? It is that unaccountable body of fat cat bureaucrats screwing it up again. My mistake, I though that TransLink was responsible for all of the transportation infrastructure not just the part that the provincial government decides to dump on them. I honestly though that TransLink was the provincial government's arm for anything transportation related. The provincial government is definitely hosed up right now and this just adds another thing to the list of things they're doing wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Sassafras posted:the privatization of BC highway maintenance in the late 1980s (mini backgrounder). Hmm, I don't really know what to think about that read. Apparently most employees were paid more under the privatized system but that's mostly due to unions and strikes. At the same time those private companies are probably incredibly rich at this point. It seems that the government would have saved a lot of money if they ended up not privatizing but there are tangible benefits to the privatized employees. It probably had a lot of negative implications in the long run. You've even pointed out that there's only one remaining employee owned company so I'm guessing a lot of big firms moved into the void created by privatization and muscled out nearly all of the employee owned companies. I was never trying to imply that the provincial government wasn't part of this whole mess, I just though that their hand in it was purely TransLink, thanks for the clarification everyone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
At this point any fuckup or mismangement by any crown corp or entity can be directly attributed to abusive meddling by the BC Liberals. It's like Godwins Law for BC Politics, and it's a bloody miracle that organizations like Hydro are even able to function through the amount of crap they put up with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
No more transportation chat. Ben Rabidoux made CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/bri...grees-1.2847245 gently caress him though, why would we trust anyone but the experts at CMHC?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
Sassafras posted:This transit funding referendum is going to be a gong show. Worse than the HST one for votes based on complete ignorance. Rime posted:I fully expect it to destroy transit progress in BC for about a decade, if not longer. I'll just put this here if you feel like trying to do something about that. E: Though in some ways, it's already set transit progress back. Basically the province has said that there will be no new transit funding except by referendum. Now all they have to do is sit on their hands and then blame the Metro Vancouver mayors for not being organised enough. Still, if you feel strongly about it, it's worth getting involved with the campaign (especially once it kicks into gear). Lead out in cuffs fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 05:54
|
|
