inane Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 No, I see your point. I deal with bleeding hearts like you a lot. "lets just build and build public transportation projects because its good for the environment" lol. I think its time for you to grow up. Everything is a business. Money talks, and Translink isn't getting enough so people will have to walk I know you think that public transportation is morally and politically forrect, therefore it should be built no matter what. But the government doesn't see it that way. Everything is a business. If it isn't sustainable financially, its not going to last. ahh, 'bleeding hearts'--nitro, is that you? I don't remember ever saying anything about transit being good for the environment..... That's a great tactic though, one your ilk use a lot. Reply to my point by making something up and arguing against that. Good stuff. Stay in school kiddo, you *might* learn a thing or two. But if I can give one piece of advise. When building a case for something, really try not to provide a source like the one you provided that directly contradicts and refutes the very point you're trying to make. It kinda makes you look like you have no idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Kind of like infinite highway expansion and urban sprawl. Look at LA. Look how well that worked out for them. Yes look at LA. Its a world renowned city and an economic giant. LA county has a median home income and standard of living that we here in the lower mainland can only dream of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 ahh, 'bleeding hearts'--nitro, is that you? I don't remember ever saying anything about transit being good for the environment..... That's a great tactic though, one your ilk use a lot. Reply to my point by making something up and arguing against that. Good stuff. Hmm. I guess I'm not sure what your argument is then. Something about different factors being taken into consideration when discussing public transportation? You never really elaborated. And please don't accuse me of being that tool nitronuts aka Mr. X on other forums. He's my sworn enemy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Pictures of the new Highway 1 Oh baby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 (edited) Yes look at LA. Its a world renowned city and an economic giant. LA county has a median home income and standard of living that we here in the lower mainland can only dream of. You're impressive! edit--a quick check LA is 43rd among US Cities in median household income. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_...tates_by_income Worse than Sheboygan, WI and Burlington, VT among others.... Edited September 17, 2009 by inane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonnaWin Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Yes look at LA. Its a world renowned city and an economic giant. LA county has a median home income and standard of living that we here in the lower mainland can only dream of. Have you ever tried driving around L.A.? P.S. What makes you think building highways is economically sustainable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jd22_ Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Yes look at LA. Its a world renowned city and an economic giant. LA county has a median home income and standard of living that we here in the lower mainland can only dream of. LA is a tumor on the face of the earth. Vancouver certainly isn't a world renowned city. Certainly not in the top five rated cities to live in the world for the past 10 years? Last year, the highest ranked U.S. city was 28th. And it sure wasn't L.A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahzdeen Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 When did I say we have too much rapid transit? I was using our rapid transit as an example of the huge amount of money this city has spent on public transportation. We have spent a huge amount on rapid transit and buses. I've been saying since the beginning that our transit system as a whole is too big and to extensive. Now it will be trimmed. 40% of all bus service lol. Thank god I drive. And I have shown you that our rapid transit system has the necessary ridership figures to justify its construction and cost. And I'm glad you ignored the part where I said that 40% cut is just a scare tactic. Translink said something along the lines of "if we don't find the funding for this, we might have to cut bu service by up to 40%". Now, does it make sense to you that a company, which spends over a billion a year, would need to cut 40% of its bus service in order to make back 10%? Would that not indicate that the bus service isn't that big a drain on resources as you are implying? Read between the lines man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonnaWin Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Have you ever tried driving around L.A.? P.S. What makes you think building highways is economically sustainable? Let me frame this correctly. Building roads and highways to support regional movement of goods and freight makes sense. EXPANDING it so everyone can drive around in their Camry is not sustainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahzdeen Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Yes look at LA. Its a world renowned city and an economic giant. LA county has a median home income and standard of living that we here in the lower mainland can only dream of. You've never been to LA other than disneyland have you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jd22_ Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Take a look at this. http://www.mercer.com/referencecontent.htm?idContent=1173105 Vancouver is 4th best to live in globally, and 6th best for infrastructure LA doesn't even make the list. Either list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 LA is a tumor on the face of the earth. Vancouver certainly isn't a world renowned city. Certainly not in the top five rated cities to live in the world for the past 10 years? Last year, the highest ranked U.S. city was 28th. And it sure wasn't L.A. I beg to differ. LA is a shining example of excellent highway design and architecture. One of the driving factors behind it's economic power. It's a great city with a real economy. Not one that relies on cruise ships and tourism. And those rankings are bogus. All american cities are weighed down in the rankings by "possibilties of terror threats". Without that terror threat crap they would rank a lot higher. LA county is ranked for having the best drinking water in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Hmm. I guess I'm not sure what your argument is then. Something about different factors being taken into consideration when discussing public transportation? You never really elaborated. And please don't accuse me of being that tool nitronuts aka Mr. X on other forums. He's my sworn enemy oh god you're telling me you and nitro do this on other forums? which one? My argument is that developing transit, or anything other public good is NOT based completely and solely on $$$. If it were why would we have any public goods, we would have just exported them all to private companies as per the theory they are only interested in $$$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahzdeen Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I beg to differ. LA is a shining example of excellent highway design and architecture. One of the driving factors behind it's economic power. It's a great city with a real economy. Not one that relies on cruise ships and tourism. And those rankings are bogus. All american cities are weighed down in the rankings by "possibilties of terror threats". Without that terror threat crap they would rank a lot higher. LA county is ranked for having the best drinking water in the world. ok.... now we know you're a troll. I know people who won't even rinse their mouth out in LA drinking water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jd22_ Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I beg to differ. LA is a shining example of excellent highway design and architecture. One of the driving factors behind it's economic power. It's a great city with a real economy. Not one that relies on cruise ships and tourism. And those rankings are bogus. All american cities are weighed down in the rankings by "possibilties of terror threats". Without that terror threat crap they would rank a lot higher. LA county is ranked for having the best drinking water in the world. HAH. Are you kidding me? Give me some proof. That is absolutely bogus, NOWHERE in the southern US is anywhere close to having 'the best drinking water' in the world. If by best drinking water you mean the most heavily polluted, chlorinated, and farthest to travel, then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 And I have shown you that our rapid transit system has the necessary ridership figures to justify its construction and cost. And I'm glad you ignored the part where I said that 40% cut is just a scare tactic. Translink said something along the lines of "if we don't find the funding for this, we might have to cut bu service by up to 40%". Now, does it make sense to you that a company, which spends over a billion a year, would need to cut 40% of its bus service in order to make back 10%? Would that not indicate that the bus service isn't that big a drain on resources as you are implying? Read between the lines man. I'm going by facts. Translink is threatening 40% of bus services to be cut. Something is seriously wrong. You can read between the lines all you want. I go by facts. You have no proof that its a scare tactic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I beg to differ. LA is a shining example of excellent highway design and architecture. One of the driving factors behind it's economic power. It's a great city with a real economy. Not one that relies on cruise ships and tourism. And those rankings are bogus. All american cities are weighed down in the rankings by "possibilties of terror threats". Without that terror threat crap they would rank a lot higher. LA county is ranked for having the best drinking water in the world. wtf you are just going off the rocker now buddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jd22_ Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I'm going by facts. Translink is threatening 40% of bus services to be cut. Something is seriously wrong. You can read between the lines all you want. I go by facts. You have no proof that its a scare tactic. Yes, judging by your "LA has the best drinking water" ' fact ', we all know your facts are 100% accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 ok.... now we know you're a troll. I know people who won't even rinse their mouth out in LA drinking water Google it. It tied with some small town in BC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invermere Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 oh god you're telling me you and nitro do this on other forums? which one? My argument is that developing transit, or anything other public good is NOT based completely and solely on $$$. If it were why would we have any public goods, we would have just exported them all to private companies as per the theory they are only interested in $$$. And I'm saying public transportation has to be economically sustainable, or it won't last. Which is true. Vancouver's transit network is not sustainable, which is also true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now