2015 Metro Vancouver Transportation and Transit Plebiscite - Result In - 62% NO

[hsedin33]

Seems like this thread is getting derailed. No pun intended.

But no, our tax money will be squandered on terrible contracts and mismanagement as all tax money does. This is no different. I sense if the vote was yes, we wouldn't see very much happen anyways.

Politicians always promise the world in exchange for votes or money, and never deliver.

[aGENT]

I still don't like the precedent a yes vote would set. How long until local school districts or hospitals start asking for their extra hit on the PST too?

It's a poor fix for a problem that people would otherwise support and SHOULD be supported. Better public transit is a VERY good thing. This is just a piss poor way of implementing it IMO.

I keep going back to the reality that people should be holding the provincial government accountable for all of this and that there's already plenty of tax dollars if people would only ensure they run things anything close to efficiently. I lay that blame at the feet of the people and their ignorance and apathy.

I'm still stuck here.

I don't like the precedent it sets.

I don't like band-aids for otherwise poor planning/governance. Especially when the band aid is applied as poorly as it is being here.

All the "Translink are actually efficient!" posts don't really address those issues.

Basically I don't have (realistic anyway) answer of what to do but that doesn't mean I have to like the answer I've been given either. There's a better way and I might not be smart enough to know what it is but I am smart enough to know it's not this.

[inane]

Seems like this thread is getting derailed. No pun intended.

But no, our tax money will be squandered on terrible contracts and mismanagement as all tax money does. This is no different. I sense if the vote was yes, we wouldn't see very much happen anyways.

Politicians always promise the world in exchange for votes or money, and never deliver.

I agree, but that's why this is different. Normally they make promises without any clue how they'll do it, or it's vague, based on if's and maybe's. This plan has specific projects, and specific funding. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than the usual empty promises one gets.

[RWMc1]

Of course I do, but would you believe me? This is the point. You'd rather rant on a hockey forum and vote no over educating yourself on the issue and making an informed decision.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm not attacking you. Why is it when you're challenged you just scream 'i'm being attacked!'?

I'm saying go find out the answers yourself. Why is taking personal responsibility for your own education on an issue so hard?

Liar!!!! You make slimy assumptions regularly. Why are you lurking on here? You pretend to be on here to educate people on the issues. Then when someone disagrees with you you assume they are ignorant, then tell them to go educate themselves. I know the issues. My problem is I don't trust any of the parties involved. There is nothing you can say that will make me trust that the monies will be utilized properly.

[inane]

I'm still stuck here.

I don't like the precedent it sets.

I don't like band-aids for otherwise poor planning/governance. Especially when the band aid is applied as poorly as it is being here.

All the "Translink are actually efficient!" posts don't really address those issues.

Basically I don't have (realistic anyway) answer of what to do but that doesn't mean I have to like the answer I've been given either. There's a better way and I might not be smart enough to know what it is but I am smart enough to know it's not this.

It's change at the Provincial level. Not just in government, but in the way we fund public amenities whether it's schools, transit, health, whatever. We need a grown up conversation about all that. But, without some kind of catastrophe, that ain't happening.

[inane]

Liar!!!! You make slimy assumptions regularly. Why are you lurking on here? You pretend to be on here to educate people on the issues. Then when someone disagrees with you you assume they are ignorant, then tell them to go educate themselves. I know the issues. My problem is I don't trust any of the parties involved. There is nothing you can say that will make me trust that the monies will be utilized properly.

Liar!!!

Relax bud lol. Again, I'm not disagreeing with you. I don't even know what your point is to disagree with.

I'm not here to pretend anything. You asked a question that you clearly don't actually want the answer to. If you did, you'd go find out yourself. If you know the issues, you wouldn't ask basic questions about them now would you.

Your last sentence sums it up quite well, I don't think there's anything anyone could say that would make you change your mind.

[aGENT]

It's change at the Provincial level. Not just in government, but in the way we fund public amenities whether it's schools, transit, health, whatever. We need a grown up conversation about all that. But, without some kind of catastrophe, that ain't happening.

Hence my "(realistic anyway)" comment.

We need a paradigm shift in public awareness and participation that leads to those governance changes though.

Basically we need people to stop being so short sighted and ignorant.

I actually find it funny that someone who constantly preaches "long term" is in favour of such a short sighted and obvious band-aid for something that needs actual long term planning and commitment. It is by definition what you frequently argue against. Funny.

[RWMc1]

Relax bud lol. Again, I'm not disagreeing with you. I don't even know what your point is to disagree with.

I'm not here to pretend anything. You asked a question that you clearly don't actually want the answer to. If you did, you'd go find out yourself. If you know the issues, you wouldn't ask basic questions about them now would you.

Your last sentence sums it up quite well, I don't think there's anything anyone could say that would make you change your mind.

Once again, Liar!!!!! I'm on the No side. Or you agree that it is a bad idea to vote yes and start a precedent that could come back to bite us again and again in the future.

[inane]

Hence my "(realistic anyway)" comment.

We need a paradigm shift in public awareness and participation that leads to those governance changes though.

Basically we need people to stop being so short sighted and ignorant.

I actually find it funny that someone who constantly preaches "long term" is in favour of such a short sighted and obvious band-aid for something that needs actual long term planning and commitment. It is by definition what you frequently argue against. Funny.

It's two things. First, the plan continues to build off the long range LRSP vision first established in the 1970's. Here's a quick blurb about that: http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/Four_Decades_of_Integrating_Land_Use_and_Transportation_in_MV.pdf So, this is the realization and continuation of long term planning. This is the current 40 year plan. http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/RGSAdoptedbyGVRDBoardJuly292011.pdf

As for the funding, yeah, it's not perfect and by no means the way it should be. But, currently, it's the best we got. So to achieve the long term vision that we've been working for, we gotta take what we can get, when we can get it. Again, not ideal, but that's the reality we live in.

[inane]

Once again, Liar!!!!! I'm on the No side. Or you agree that it is a bad idea to vote yes and start a precedent that could come back to bite us again and again in the future.

Whatever, now you're just all over the map. You want to actually discuss the issues, let's do it.

[RWMc1]

You people really need to understand who does what and what funds come from where before ranting about executive pay or whatever....

Saying no to this isn't just giving the finger to Translink or the government, it's setting back infrastructure in this city for at least a decade and is just going to cost a lot more later.

You guys and your salaries.... you could straight up fire half the execs and you might have enough for one bus route....

Stop just being lazy and think big picture.

Whatever, now you're just all over the map. You want to actually discuss the issues, let's do it.

Those are your 2nd and 3rd posts. Same old same old with you. I tried; you evaded.

[inane]

Those are your 2nd and 3rd posts. Same old same old with you. I tried; you evaded.

So....? You tried what? I don't even know what you are after here. I evaded what?

[RWMc1]

Even if we disregard the Translink side, there is still an issue that stops me from even considering voting yes. The extra revenue is slated for use in transportation infrastructure. They claim that every cent will be accounted for. My question is "will the existing monies used for that purpose be included?" Will the .5% be the only revenue used or will it be added to what is used already. I don't trust our Mayor!!!!

So....? You tried what? I don't even know what you are after here. I evaded what?

You only responded to the Mayor bit and ignored the rest. Will the formula be (existing monies+ the0.5% tax increase). Or will some of the existing monies be used elsewhere. What is in place to insure that. Vander Slam??? Please!!!!!!!!

[inane]

You only responded to the Mayor bit and ignored the rest. Will the formula be (existing monies+ the0.5% tax increase). Or will some of the existing monies be used elsewhere. What is in place to insure that. Vander Slam??? Please!!!!!!!!

I did not ignore it, I said go find out for yourself. Since you're clearly incapable of that, here you go: page 31. http://mayorscouncil.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Mayors-Council-Vision-Document-Mar-2015.pdf

Of course you've already read this and just happened to miss that piece of information because voting no on this without actually even reading the plan would just be stupid, right?

I don't know what vander slam means.

And what's with the exclamation and question marks, you come across like a teenage girl.

[RWMc1]

I did not ignore it, I said go find out for yourself. Since you're clearly incapable of that, here you go: page 31. http://mayorscouncil.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Mayors-Council-Vision-Document-Mar-2015.pdf

Of course you've already read this and just happened to miss that piece of information because voting no on this without actually even reading the plan would just be stupid, right?

I don't know what vander slam means.

And what's with the exclamation and question marks, you come across like a teenage girl.

Liar!!!!!!!!!! You are obviously slow on the uptake. You deny attacking, yet you continue to do so. You've attacked anyone who disagrees with you from your 2nd post in this thread. Grow up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[inane]

Liar!!!!!!!!!! You are obviously slow on the uptake. You deny attacking, yet you continue to do so. You've attacked anyone who disagrees with you from your 2nd post in this thread. Grow up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So you really never wanted to actually talk about the issues and were just trolling me. Got it.

[-DLC-]

Voted (no). Don't care about what I'm being force fed in mass quantity, here's how I see it. To DO all the things they're promising relies on additional funding coming from Government which is not in place. So, I foresee the money getting squandered away (as usual) with the plea "well, blame the Government because they didn't do their part". That Translink will blame a further inability to make good on promises on someone else. The compass card is my reminder of that.

That's what has been said here, in this very thread (that the issues aren't to be blamed on Translink). So what's stopping that from happening here, with yet another "well, it didn't work out"? Oh yeah, Jimmy Pattison. I trust him like I trust a coyote in a duck pen.

I don't like that we're being threatened with "well, this will happen" and that scare tactics are being used. The sky will fall if I don't give them more money. It's a sign of desperation but I've been desperate for accountability for some time now.

I don't care about the facts and figures that line us up with other places and that only extract positives without also looking at what isn't working. This is one of the most expensive places to live and my money won't get spent as long as there is squandering, even if on a scale that is a drop in the bucket compared to what's needed. Start there. And two CEO's are in place with the replacement not haven proved anything yet. So, we'll see how that goes. Until then, tighten up the ship and then look at tackling more "projects". Finish the ones you've started (first?), or are we giving up and sweeping them under the rug now?

No more money from me until this system stops being one of waste and problems.

[inane]

Tighten up the ship is a funny argument to make seeing as they've already done that and annual audits have shown that.

Also, the province already committed to their third of funding assuming the mayor's got theirs.

But all these facts are irrelevant as you said. People don't feel like they are true, so they aren't. I just don't know what alternative they expect to be better.

[RWMc1]

So you really never wanted to actually talk about the issues and were just trolling me. Got it.

You have issues. You responded to me.

http://mayorscouncil...nt-Mar-2015.pdf There are no guarantees in here. There is no legislation which would ensure that new monies would not be replacing old monies and old monies be used for other purposes. It leaves the door open for misuse.

[inane]

You have issues. You responded to me.

http://mayorscouncil...nt-Mar-2015.pdf There are no guarantees in here. There is no legislation which would ensure that new monies would not be replacing old monies and old monies be used for other purposes. It leaves the door open for misuse.

Life isn't full of guarantees, deal with it.