|
Baronjutter posted:I'm not really familiar with the state of roads in the US, is it pretty bad outside of rich areas? I don't think I've ever driven a road locally that made me think "hmm this road could use some maintenance" and all the roads I drove on in europe were even better, the cobbles vibrate your car but they're always in perfect shape. No pot holes, no dangerous bridges and overpasses, no roads with their crumbling shoulders encroaching into the travel lanes. It's not the state of the roads, it's where they are and where people live. Nothing is where it should be, and there's no hope of things ever getting fixed because people are too stupid and selfish to do things properly. Now with global climate change, and the ever-worsening state of global politics, and the forthcoming mass famines, and the widening wealth gap, and resource scarcity, we're just so hosed in so many ways and there's absolutely gently caress-all I can do to help. I'm not ever having kids, so that'll be my biggest contribution, but goddamn, my life is never going to be any better than it is now, and once the I-84 project is done, I'm probably going to be forced into retirement.
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It's not the state of the roads, it's where they are and where people live. Nothing is where it should be, and there's no hope of things ever getting fixed because people are too stupid and selfish to do things properly. Hopefully the miles of empty ruined roads and mostly abandoned post-apocalyptic looking suburbia and small towns will act as a warning for future generations? The warning being "be rich and live in a major city" if you want to do well in the future?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It's not the state of the roads, it's where they are and where people live. Nothing is where it should be, and there's no hope of things ever getting fixed because people are too stupid and selfish to do things properly. I feel your pain. My fiance and I aren't planning on having kids either and we both work in public service fields (she's a teacher, I'm in the non-profit world). I've taken to just savoring the small victories--we're getting bike lanes here in Brookfield as a part of a wider downtown project that is based on smart growth principles. And passenger rail service to NYC may become a thing again here. There's gotta be more than just 84 for you though. Isn't there supposed to be an infinite ramp-up happening? I'm watching the budget negotiations, but I was under the impression that some projects were moving forward regardless of that. I am curious though, from your perspective, when you say things aren't where they should be, what comes to mind? Suburbs? Exurbs? Or am I missing your point more so? @Baronjutter I'm not so sure suburbia is going to die out any time soon in the US. There is a cultural attachment to the car that is deeply ingrained. Many equate success with three acres of land, four bedrooms, and two cars. There's a cultural undercurrent of "only young, irresponsible, unattached" people live in cities. When they grow up and have families, they always move to the good ole suburbs where there are good schools and no scary poor people and minorities. While the current generation seems to be bucking this trend, the denser US cities in the northeast that you could pin your hopes on for sane future planning have serious issues providing affordable housing. Developers aren't really building anything but luxury housing, and the desire to preserve historic architecture and not destroy the character of neighborhoods prevents increased density needed to really alleviate all the pent up demand for housing in places like New York. People are moving to the sprawling sunbelt metros because housing is cheaper and land is plentiful. Places like Texas are growing fast and are culturally averse to density. The Texas legislature is actually trying to kill a private high-speed rail project because the "market has already decided cars are best."
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
The idea that suburbs are going to die out is based on sheer ignorance. If anything they'll continue slightly growing at worst for a long time to come yet, due to both displacement of poorer people from cities and the ongoing leaving of rural areas.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:There's gotta be more than just 84 for you though. Isn't there supposed to be an infinite ramp-up happening? I'm watching the budget negotiations, but I was under the impression that some projects were moving forward regardless of that. I am curious though, from your perspective, when you say things aren't where they should be, what comes to mind? Suburbs? Exurbs? Or am I missing your point more so? Well, I can look at things the optimistic way: by the time I'm done working on I-84, it's gonna be like 2030 and I'll be so goddamn sick of transportation engineering that I don't think all the money in the world will change my mind. I've got plenty of lucrative hobbies I could hop onto. As for where things should/shouldn't be, a lot of it has to do with resources. We have cities in deserts where there's nowhere near enough water or food nearby, we have them along coasts which are going to be undersea within a century, we have every mode of transportation just jammed together so haphazardly that there's really no way to straighten things out short of carpetbombing. Ideally, suburb, exurb, whatever, we'd at least live somewhere that won't require us to go to war over water rights or coastal access over the coming decades.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I'm not really familiar with the state of roads in the US, is it pretty bad outside of rich areas? The budget for our state's road network is paid for by the gas tax, which is a flat amount ($0.19 here) paid per gallon of gas pumped at a station. The state government hasn't raised this gas tax once this century. As fuel efficiency has gone up, overall consumption has fallen and the gas tax hasn't changed one speck. The state budget for roadwork has declined precipitously because of all that, and now there's a seriously backlog of work that needs to be done but there's no money available for repairs. Every year that those repairs are deferred, the damage to the roads gets worse, and the cost of repairs gets worse, which means that it gets even harder to get the money needed for those repairs, which means that work is deferred some more, which means road conditions get even worse... Everybody in the state recognizes that the state of our roads is seriously hosed up at this point, but even with things being as awful as they are, the idea of just raise taxes goddammit is still too much for a lot of people to bear. The state House of Representatives in particular is loaded with anti-tax tea party-ish representatives right now, and they refused to approve a straightforward tax hike even after the Senate voted for it and the governor was begging for it. Instead the legislature concocted a sort of brilliant system of compromises which would try to offset any sort of gas tax hike by shifting around the values of some other taxes and change when some taxes would be applicable and others wouldn't; the state legislature then took this complicated scheme and instead of voting on it themselves, made it a public referendum. Nobody really campaigned enthusiastically in favor of it, and voters didn't like how complicated and how many compromises there were in the plan, so the thing was shot down hard. So now basically a year has been wasted on this referendum and in the meanwhile no other plans or additional funding has been raised, so our roads are even worse than before because there's still no money to pay for all the work.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I'm not really familiar with the state of roads in the US, is it pretty bad outside of rich areas?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Also, we have real winters around here and that wreaks havoc on the roads. Tons of potholes in the spring, which might be fixed by the end of the summer.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Let me tell you about the state of Michigan. It was hilarious how uneducated people were about Prop 1 (the above referendum). I had some lady arguing with me that it was going to raise the price of gas by 40+ cents a gallon and I read the brochure SHE GAVE ME, did some quick math, and it was more like 7 cents a gallon. Which is piddly. The only thing worse than Michigan politics are the roads.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:I'm not so sure suburbia is going to die out any time soon in the US. There is a cultural attachment to the car that is deeply ingrained. Many equate success with three acres of land, four bedrooms, and two cars. There's a cultural undercurrent of "only young, irresponsible, unattached" people live in cities. When they grow up and have families, they always move to the good ole suburbs where there are good schools and no scary poor people and minorities. While the current generation seems to be bucking this trend, the denser US cities in the northeast that you could pin your hopes on for sane future planning have serious issues providing affordable housing. Developers aren't really building anything but luxury housing, and the desire to preserve historic architecture and not destroy the character of neighborhoods prevents increased density needed to really alleviate all the pent up demand for housing in places like New York. People are moving to the sprawling sunbelt metros because housing is cheaper and land is plentiful. Places like Texas are growing fast and are culturally averse to density. The Texas legislature is actually trying to kill a private high-speed rail project because the "market has already decided cars are best." Filthy yard-haver here. The primary reason that I live in a suburb is that for the same price I pay on mortgage and taxes for a very nice 2 story house with an attic, basement, and yard, I could afford a tiny studio apartment in NYC with the toilet in the kitchen. Scary brown people had nothing to do with the decision. I did at least find a house near the train station so I don't have to drive to work.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:I did at least find a house near the train station so I don't have to drive to work. You're doing better than at least 65% of Western Europe.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Filthy yard-haver here. The primary reason that I live in a suburb is that for the same price I pay on mortgage and taxes for a very nice 2 story house with an attic, basement, and yard, I could afford a tiny studio apartment in NYC with the toilet in the kitchen. Scary brown people had nothing to do with the decision. This discussion always gets dragged into the mud because people interpret attacks on the suburbs as personal attacks on themselves. The problem with the subrubs isn't people making irrational decisions to live there, it's the last 60 years of policies that have made the suburbs the only rational choice. So cool, you made a choice that makes sense for you. I can't fault anybody for that. The problem is that you've made a choice that, along with so many other people making that choice, doesn't really make sense for society. But the onus shouldn't be on any one person to reverse the 60 years of policy that have made the suburbs the rational choice. The onus is on the policy to change, not on the millions of people making rational choices. In this particular case, it's a failing of policy that housing in the city proper is so drat expensive. I can't fault anyone for making the choice you made when presented with the kind of lovely options you've been presented with. And all that being said, locating yourself near a train so you don't have to drive to work puts you in like the top 1% of "not ruining the world." I also live in a single family home steps away from a train that I take to work.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
And I'm gonna double post to add, because it still sounds a little bit like I'm attacking you Volmarias, even though I'm not, is that "suburbs" is such a nebulous term. I think a streetcar or commuter suburb (what you're most likely in) is drastically different from car oriented cul-de-sac single use suburbs.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Filthy yard-haver here. The primary reason that I live in a suburb is that for the same price I pay on mortgage and taxes for a very nice 2 story house with an attic, basement, and yard, I could afford a tiny studio apartment in NYC with the toilet in the kitchen. Scary brown people had nothing to do with the decision. Like FISHMANPET said, don't take my post as an attack on everyone living in the suburbs. As he says, there are wide differences in the kinds of suburbs out there. Before moving to Connecticut, I was born and spent ten years in Queens in NYC. We had a small, two-story house with a tiny backyard. I liked that and I think people can have yards. But there is a difference between super cul-de-sac suburb and something like Brookline. If the redevelopment plan in my town keeps on track, I'll have a train I can take to work soon too. That'd be great. I still have to drive to work. The regional bus network doesn't connect to the bus network serving the city I work in despite being 20 miles away. Mr. and Mrs. Minenfeld! have already decided that when we move, we're moving somewhere with transit within walking distance. We're looking at Massachusetts thus far. Minenfeld! fucked around with this message at 21:46 on May 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:And I'm gonna double post to add, because it still sounds a little bit like I'm attacking you Volmarias, even though I'm not, is that "suburbs" is such a nebulous term. I think a streetcar or commuter suburb (what you're most likely in) is drastically different from car oriented cul-de-sac single use suburbs. It's fine, I understand your point. Given how expensive it is to live NEAR NYC, and how that jumps up to  pricing in the city proper, I don't think it's just an issue of zoning policies, but also of logistical constraints. I'm guessing that you just can't jam that many more people into NYC without slashing standards of living.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:And I'm gonna double post to add, because it still sounds a little bit like I'm attacking you Volmarias, even though I'm not, is that "suburbs" is such a nebulous term. I think a streetcar or commuter suburb (what you're most likely in) is drastically different from car oriented cul-de-sac single use suburbs.  The only difference between where he lives and "typical" suburbs, is that the rail line happens to go through it.Your typical suburb could work just the same if someone bothered to eminent domain a rail line through it. At worst people would need to drive a short way to park at the station, as half the people using the same station as him do anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Without knowing specifically where Volmarias is, there is a higher chance for him compared to the rest of the country that his suburb was built before the car, meaning it's more likely to have a walkable grid and some older style development, then a standard post war suburb. And that's more amenable not just to walking to work, but in general leading a more car-lite lifestyle. I bought a new car in August of 2013 and it has only 5600 miles on it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Without knowing specifically where Volmarias is, there is a higher chance for him compared to the rest of the country that his suburb was built before the car, meaning it's more likely to have a walkable grid and some older style development, then a standard post war suburb. And that's more amenable not just to walking to work, but in general leading a more car-lite lifestyle. I bought a new car in August of 2013 and it has only 5600 miles on it. He lives out on the Raritan line, I can assure you that's typical suburbia out there that just happens to have rail through it with some minor clusters of what used to be small town around the rail stops dating back to the 19th century.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Let me tell you about the state of Michigan. I'm studying civil engineering up at Michigan Tech. I'm really upset about all of it. The roads seem a lot worse in the south part of the state. The region around Alpena down to Saginaw is pretty okay (But no one lives here). Cichlidae posted:It's not the state of the roads, it's where they are and where people live. Nothing is where it should be, and there's no hope of things ever getting fixed because people are too stupid and selfish to do things properly. Now you sound like one of my older professors. After he gave a few guest lectures he's left me pretty pessimistic (There's actually a lot of antagonism underneath the surface of the rest of department). Eskaton fucked around with this message at 23:38 on May 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Without knowing specifically where Volmarias is, there is a higher chance for him compared to the rest of the country that his suburb was built before the car, meaning it's more likely to have a walkable grid and some older style development, then a standard post war suburb. And that's more amenable not just to walking to work, but in general leading a more car-lite lifestyle. I bought a new car in August of 2013 and it has only 5600 miles on it. Conversely, living in Miami, my brand new car purchase, also in August of 2013, is about to tick over 30,000 miles. And I bought a second (fun, weekend,) car in October 2014, which I occasionally commute in, so by rights, the "new" car would have just over 31,000 miles already. I personally find much of the loathing of suburbs in this thread to be a little overblown, and every Municipality shouldn't be striving to closely resemble Manhattan, but Miami (and south/central Florida in general,) is clearly broken.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Eskaton posted:I'm studying civil engineering up at Michigan Tech. I'm really upset about all of it. The roads seem a lot worse in the south part of the state. The region around Alpena down to Saginaw is pretty okay (But no one lives here). Even if you stick it through with civil engineering, consider a side gig in politics just so that there's someone to direct the projects that need doing through the political mill and on to the engineers.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Let me tell you about the state of Michigan. Try Vancouver right now. The referendum for the 0.5% sales tax increase to sort out the transit system (and build new roads and bike infrastructure) is just ending now, but I'm not holding out much hope. I've had the following conversation too many times: Person who always takes the bus: Man, it took forever to get here. The transit system in this city sucks. Me: Well, we'll have to see how the referendum goes. Maybe it'll get better. Person who always takes the bus: What? I don't think giving more money to the transit authority will solve the problems. 
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Try Vancouver right now. The referendum for the 0.5% sales tax increase to sort out the transit system (and build new roads and bike infrastructure) is just ending now, but I'm not holding out much hope. I've had the following conversation too many times: Varance fucked around with this message at 07:56 on May 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
Varance posted:I'm a transit dispatcher and have quite a few thoughts on this topic, but it's early morning and I just worked a bunch of intense 10 hour shifts in a row without so much as a lunch break so I'm going to bed now. Maybe tomorrow. Yeah, really. My understanding is that the transit authority is actually pretty tightly run for the money it gets. It just makes good copy for the local papers to push a narrative of waste, and people believe it. There's also a narrative of the money disappearing into a hole, despite the existence of a hundred-page document detailing exactly what it's all earmarked for. So you get a referendum that is literally about running more and more frequent bus and train services, with people who want exactly that voting against it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:He lives out on the Raritan line, I can assure you that's typical suburbia out there that just happens to have rail through it with some minor clusters of what used to be small town around the rail stops dating back to the 19th century. While not untrue, FISHMANPET is also right in that my town has a walkable grid layout and a nice local downtown. The supermarket is even walkable if I am inclined. This is definitely a detail though so let's drop it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Yeah, really. My understanding is that the transit authority is actually pretty tightly run for the money it gets. It just makes good copy for the local papers to push a narrative of waste, and people believe it. There's also a narrative of the money disappearing into a hole, despite the existence of a hundred-page document detailing exactly what it's all earmarked for. This, times a thousand. Going low floor to satisfy ADA, as noble a goal as it is, completely cash-strapped every transit agency in the country. Low floors are 2.5x more expensive than the older high buses that were in use pre-2000. Now that most agencies are 100% Low Floor, the Feds are only willing to give agencies money to maintain existing fleet sizes with $0 for expansion unless it's New Starts/Small Starts. Varance fucked around with this message at 05:42 on May 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
2.5x? That seems... like a lot. What makes them so much more expensive? As far as I know the GIllig Phantom and the Gillig low floor buses were basically identical mechanically.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:2.5x? That seems... like a lot. What makes them so much more expensive? As far as I know the GIllig Phantom and the Gillig low floor buses were basically identical mechanically. Your options as a larger transit agency are: $100k 30ft cutaway that won't make it past 5 years in typical transit service before falling apart. $150k 30ft high floor that the feds won't give you money for because it's not ADA-friendly. Also, lifts aren't the safest/fastest thing around. $350k 30ft "mid-duty" low floor that has minimal capacity and won't make it past 5 years in typical transit service before falling apart. $450k 30-35ft low floor that doesn't have enough capacity for larger agencies, plus the feds won't give you money for it unless it's replacing another bus $490k 40ft low floor that will get the job done for 12 years, but the feds won't give you money for it unless it's replacing another bus $500-700k CNG/LNG/Fuel Cell/Electric low floor bus, that you can try to get a 25% rebate out of the government for << cheapest viable option for most transit agencies. $770k 60ft articulated bus that carries a ton of people and is the only viable option for most transit agencies on routes that would otherwise need sub-10 minute headways << you can get a Small Starts grant as "BRT lite" for these Your options as a small town/university transit agency: $100k 30ft cutaway that won't make it past 5 years in typical transit service before falling apart. <<< small towns and universities usually do this $150k 30ft high floor that the feds won't give you money for because it's not ADA-friendly. Also, lifts aren't the safest/fastest thing around. <<< small towns and universities also do this $350k 30ft "mid-duty" low floor that has minimal capacity and won't make it past 5 years in typical transit service before falling apart. << well-funded smaller agencies do this Buy retired 40ft buses from junkyards for $10k and refurbish them. <<< what less affluent smaller systems do when 30ft isn't enough Varance fucked around with this message at 06:49 on May 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
I guess I should be thankful my local agency (Metro Transit, Minneapolis/St Paul, Minnesota) is well run enough that none of this is really a problem. I think all of our high floor buses cycled out last year or maybe this year (we seem to run them on a 7 year schedule) and we've had the money to keep growing the fleet, and include a good number of Gillig Hybrids in addition to the regular Gillig low platforms. And we (presumably) pay extra for the BRT styling on all our Gillig buses, because we're cool like that. And the big University has a bunch of 40 ft Orion buses and I think 60 foot New Flyers as well. And a couple of those 30 foot cutaways (those are just vans with the back cutoff and replaced with a big body, right?). And surprise, those smaller buses are pretty much falling apart.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:I guess I should be thankful my local agency (Metro Transit, Minneapolis/St Paul, Minnesota) is well run enough that none of this is really a problem. I think all of our high floor buses cycled out last year or maybe this year (we seem to run them on a 7 year schedule) and we've had the money to keep growing the fleet, and include a good number of Gillig Hybrids in addition to the regular Gillig low platforms. And we (presumably) pay extra for the BRT styling on all our Gillig buses, because we're cool like that. Most 30/35ft buses are referred to as mid duty. 10 year lifespan at best, though you're going to be hard-pressed to reach that if you're carrying standing loads with them. ElDo EZ-Riders and Flyer MiDis fall into this category. You'll get 350k miles out of these before they start falling apart. Most sub-30 buses are conversion/"cutaway" vans. Made out of cheap plywood and plastic, typically with a Ford or Chevy frontend. Max lifespan of 5 years, by which point they'll be falling apart at the seams. Rare that one will get past 150k miles without developing major issues. As far as being able to afford heavy duty buses, it depends on how well the agency is funded at the local level. Expansion units usually have to be paid for by the local agency with local funding, after which FTA will help replace them when they reach end of life. The exception to the above is if you manage to snag a Small Starts grant for "BRT lite" to create high frequency limited stop routes. Even then, you're still going to need local money for that, but usually you can claim local road improvements/repaving/ATMS/ITS installations related to something like a water main or freeway project as the local match to get the buses for "free." To keep it short, a lot of agencies have a "chicken and egg" problem: They can't get more buses for improvement because they aren't getting enough funding at the local level to afford them. Meanwhile, people at the local level won't give the local agency more money because there's a large perception that federal money that isn't actually coming in is somehow massively wasted along the line. Until FTA develops a program to help transit agencies in that kind of position (with the state of FTA funding, lol?), nothing will improve until the local level steps up to the plate with more funding. Varance fucked around with this message at 06:16 on May 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I'm not really familiar with the state of roads in the US, is it pretty bad outside of rich areas? I don't think I've ever driven a road locally that made me think "hmm this road could use some maintenance" and all the roads I drove on in europe were even better, the cobbles vibrate your car but they're always in perfect shape. No pot holes, no dangerous bridges and overpasses, no roads with their crumbling shoulders encroaching into the travel lanes.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
I hope nobody put money down on "peak car" being behind us. The FHWA's latest report shows that we just had the strongest Q1 VMTs ever, demolishing the previous record (2006) and recording almost a 4% year-over-year gain. This is despite the horrendous winter we had up here in New England, which saw RI, CT, and MA lose volumes. It's positive news for a couple reasons: first, it means the recession is (mostly) behind us, and us millennials can now afford cars and vacations. It also means I'm going to have more work to do, since we'll be hitting more and more bottlenecks that need smoothing out. Of course, in the long term, it's bad news, because it means more energy expenditure less efficient use of resources. But hey, can't have perfectly manicured suburban lawns and a three-car garage loaded with SUVs without breaking a few eggs, right?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Try Vancouver right now. The referendum for the 0.5% sales tax increase to sort out the transit system (and build new roads and bike infrastructure) is just ending now, but I'm not holding out much hope. I've had the following conversation too many times: I'm hearing poo poo like this from self-identified Vancouver progressives. "I'm all for transit but the plan has *minor weird single-issue* so I'm not voting for it because of that single issue" or "Yeah I take transit every day, it's so badly run I'm not voting to give them more money to waste!!!" or "sales taxes are regressive so I'm voting against this!". Perfect really is the enemy of the good.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:If it's your first time taking it, don't sweat it Bumping this quote from last month. I passed! I genuinely thought it could go either way when I left the exam but I'm so happy I don't have to do that poo poo again (until I start working for the FS/PS next year).
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:13
|
|
Chances are you'll pass, and most people I know who passed on their first try said it was a lot easier than they expected. If you've been prepping with something like Six Minute Solutions and/or still have your old college texts and notebooks, you should be in great shape.
|
Baronjutter posted:sales taxes are regressive so I'm voting against this!". Perfect really is the enemy of the good. Transportation funding coming out of specifically regressive tax grant is really lovely though, and IMO in a totally different qualitative class of arguments than the others you were paraphrasing.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Bumping this quote from last month. I passed! I genuinely thought it could go either way when I left the exam but I'm so happy I don't have to do that poo poo again (until I start working for the FS/PS next year). Congrats! Now you can get your stamp and mash it against every piece of paper you have lying around.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Koesj posted:Transportation funding coming out of specifically regressive tax grant is really lovely though, and IMO in a totally different qualitative class of arguments than the others you were paraphrasing. In that vein, I'd say it's also acceptable to be against increased funding for transit if it's bundled with road funding orders of magnitude greater than the transit funding.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:Come to Dallas where every road is full of potholes and revenue is shrinking because all the wealthy are slowly leaving the city. Huh? I dont exactly see vacant, dilapidated homes in Preston Hollow or around White Rock. Also all the potholes are from the huge amount of rain after years of severe drought and the city has solve all it revenue problems with the plastic bag fee didn't you know.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Well, the wealthy of any Texas city typically only manage to leave for a few years until each city annexes another 500 square miles.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 08:36 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I hope nobody put money down on "peak car" being behind us. Personally I think theres still good money on it. Especially in light of a federal court finding the Wisconsin DoT guilty of using faulty and inaccurate traffic data to justify widening a highway. Streetsblog Article posted:(...) A federal court sided with the organization in a suit against WisDOT that challenged the traffic data used to justify the $146 million widening of Highway 23: And while the following chart isnt from WDoT data it does show how widespread the issue is. Vehicle Miles Traveled from the FHWA’s Travel Volume Trends (“Actual”) and the U.S. DOT’s projections from their annual Conditions and Performance Report to Congress. (source) 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 05:47
|
|