From: Brent on 11 Nov 2009 17:00
On 2009-11-11, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Brent wrote:
>> Nice editing. But it is a fair argument to point out that transit is
>> mostly funded by people who don't use it.
> This is a just-grabbed-out-of-my......hat opinion, but I would very
> surprised if most things that "tax-supported" are in fact supported by
> tax-payers who derive either no benefit or little benefit compared to
> amounts paid, even if you include indirect or secondary benefits.
That's the point of using government. To get what you want while having
someone else pay for it. If benefit matched what was paid government
would not be needed, it could all be private.
From: hancock4 on 11 Nov 2009 17:06
On Nov 11, 3:46 pm, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> Scammers always go after the cash. Democracy works by getting people to
> vote themselves money from the treasury. The political office holders
> just work the system.
So then run for office and make policies you want. As mentioned
before, anyone can run for entry-level office.
> When transit is nearly entirely funded by people who don't use it, it is
> quite fair. Roads are funded almost entirely by people who use roads
> directly. Then there is all the tax revenue generated by automotive
> and trucking businesses.
Others have pointed out those statements are not true and provided
official figures to substantiate those claims.
> A fair direct cost scheme would mean a tax savings for drivers. But
> nobody is proposing a fair scheme because that would mean less money for
> government overall.
What's odd is that no one every proposed, now or in the past, that the
private sector build, run, and maintain major roads and crossings,
instead of the government.
From: hancock4 on 11 Nov 2009 17:08
On Nov 11, 8:23 am, Jim Yanik <jya...(a)abuse.gov> wrote:
> Obama has said he'd like gas prices to climb to $10 a gallon,
Exactly when and where did he say this? In what context?
From: hancock4 on 11 Nov 2009 17:12
On Nov 11, 10:14 am, John S <joh...(a)no.spam> wrote:
> Two new light rail projects are moving forward, one in New Jersey, one
> in Philadelphia.
Actually, they most certainly NOT are moving forward; they are merely
in the talking stage. There is no money for them.
Odds are very high that they'll never be built.
> What do they have in common? They will be funded by
> the Delaware River Port Authority. Where does DRPA get its money? From
> road bridge tolls. Soak drivers, subsidize trains. In this case, one
> of the trains will roll on top of the Market St Subway. Why even build
> new routes when you can use bridge toll money to build transit systems
> right on top of existing ones?
There have been several posts right here about the DRPA and it's fund
diversions, as published in the newspaper. Interestingly, at least
here no one had a word of objection about there.
> For other examples of such subsidies from drivers, look at the finances
> at nearly every transit system in the USA, exhibit A is New York City.
Speaking of New Jersey, it should be noted that while NJ has the
lowest gasoline taxes in the country, it has the highest property
taxes. No surprise there because in NJ counties use that property tax
money to pay for a massive road network. In other states those types
of roads would be state roads, paid for by the state.
From: George Conklin on 11 Nov 2009 17:35
"Scott M. Kozel" <kozelsm(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Brent wrote:
> >> hancock4(a)bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4(a)bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> >>> Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Well then it's time for the users of the automobile pay for the full
> >>>>> price if providing it.
> >>>> They already do.
> >>> No, they do not.
> >> Motorists pay all the taxes directly on driving.
> >> Motorists also pay all the other taxes that aren't about driving. So,
> >> yes they do.
> > It is a concept that is impossible to get through--I think I'm about
> > done with the attempts with this.
> > Every thing that is done--boring holes in the earth, laing tracks or
> > pavement, you name it--has to be paid for. There is no "free" anything.
> > The value comes from people and organizations who create stuff. There
> > is no other source.
> > Sometimes the value flows efficiently from the person that wants
> > something to the person that can deliver it, sometimes we have stupidly
> > put in lossy paths where thieves steal some of the value but add
> > But in every case a good or service that is provided has to be paid for,
> > and the value to pay for it comes from, can come only from the providers
> > or other goods and services.
> You have to realize who you are dealing with ... these posters who
> constantly harp about the "car subsidy" are posting from the railroad
> newsgroup, most of them live in the concrete jungle, and they are
> victims of one-dimensional railroad-like thinking patterns ...
> Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
> Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
> Capital Beltway Projects http://www.capital-beltway.com
> Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
Scott, you forget that rail riders are MORALLY superior to car drivers,
and thus they can cook up secret subsidies every day and you can't object.