Is the Obama economic plan working?

[Fobbon Lazyfoot]

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that buses, light rail and trains still run in California.

I'm curious to hear how often you ride the bus, hm?

[Embar Angylwrath]

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that buses, light rail and trains still run in California.

I'm curious to hear how often you ride the bus, hm?

I don't. And what does that have to do with anything?

[Lurker]

Fobbon is probably wondering how you can make a statement like this.

Trains still powered down the tracks. Some fares went up, and local public transit re-did their own budgets to compensate. When faced with the hardship of weaning themselves from the public teat, those local agencies found a way to do it. Apparently they didn't need a large nanny state government after all.

Seeing how you don't use public transport, he's probably wondering how you'd know if the cuts were painless and the lost subsidies were really un-needed after all. Now, someone working the graveyard shift who saw their overnight bus route eliminated, they would be a good source of information. You... not so much.

As you said, the solution will require spending cuts and tax increases. That's exactly what the Democrats in the State legislature have been proposing but those efforts have been blocked. The workaround that Kulaf posted, which did not violate the State Constitution, has no chance of becoming law because Arnold has promised a veto.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I never said the cuts were painless. Can you show me where I said or inferred that? What I said is that the elimination of the subsidies didn't close transit agencies. Those transit agencies found a way to deal with the subsidy cut. How do I know? I still see the buses, trolleys and trains running.

[Lurker]

I never said the cuts were painless. Can you show me where I said or inferred that?

Saying, "Apparently they didn't need a large nanny state government after all" strongly infers that you think the money wasn't needed and that any rate increases and service cuts were reasonable. I find that an odd stance coming from someone who doesn't use, and probably has zero interest in, the service being discussed.

You have no empathy. You seem unable to recognize that the person who depends on overnight buses or expanded routes might think the subsidy from the "large nanny state government" was needed after all. There's some massive disconnect required to think the money wasn't needed just because you still see buses and trains on your drive to the office.

You like to talk about class warfare and spreading the pain around, but with you it always seems to go in one direction.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Government policies aren't supposed to be about empathy.

[Harlowe]

Government policies aren't supposed to be about empathy.

Not entirely true, they shouldn't be motivated by empathy, but policies have to take into consideration the people who those policies are there for. Our government is there by and for the people of it's nation. It's not a business.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Harlowe hit what I meant... 'shouldn't be motivated by'.

I hardly ever word things how I mean them. Though that does generally get me into trouble with the wife...

[Kulaf]

The workaround that Kulaf posted, which did not violate the State Constitution, has no chance of becoming law because Arnold has promised a veto.

How does passing several tax increases by simple majority vote not violate the CA Constitution?

[Lurker]

Because the tax changes were revenue neutral. They eliminated one tax, added several other taxes so the change was revenue neutral, and then replaced the original tax with a fee. Fee's don't require 2/3 approval. Trickery maybe, but not a violation.

They had little choice. The Democrats had already agreed to massive spending cuts while the Republicans refused to budge an inch on tax increases. As Embar said, both are needed. Unfortunately none of this will make it into law because Arnold will likely veto it.

[Kulaf]

They had little choice. The Democrats had already agreed to massive spending cuts while the Republicans refused to budge an inch on tax increases. As Embar said, both are needed. Unfortunately none of this will make it into law because Arnold will likely veto it.

To illustrate how differently we read things:

2) state revenues largely dependent on income tax. California is getting what it deserves, and it will have to make needed cuts to government programs in order to balance its budget. Or it will have to raise taxes. (It will be both)

To you Embar is saying both are needed. To me the raising of taxes is more of a resigning to the fact that with a Democraticaly controlled Legislature......it is somewhat inevitable.

We can let Embar tell us which one is reading him correctly.

[Lurker]

I wouldn't argue with your reading of that.

[Fobbon Lazyfoot]

I never said the cuts were painless. Can you show me where I said or inferred that? What I said is that the elimination of the subsidies didn't close transit agencies. Those transit agencies found a way to deal with the subsidy cut. How do I know? I still see the buses, trolleys and trains running.

See? You said it again!

Just because you see a bus once in a while doesn't mean that the system wasn't profoundly effected. How much did fares go up? Can you name that off the top of your head? Or how about how much bus passes went up? Re-zoning? What about the relative passenger density on running lines after other lines were cut? I don't know if California has lightrails, but what about them? I know here in Portland if you close one bus route then the MAX red/blue line will double in use. Standing room only in off hours, thats how goddamn packed those trains will be.

Equating anecdotal evidence such as bus sightings with overall system integrity is like looking at Nazi germany and saying "Whelp, there's still some Jews left, its all gravy". You don't usually make the mistake of oversimplifying things like that, though, so I'm wondering if I'm just misreading you.

Anyway, I don't think I'm qualified to say whether the budget cut to public transit in California was beneficial or not. I'd assume it was just less detrimental than a lot of other things that could have been cut. I had an easy time envisioning what you might say, however, if someone like me - who up until a year ago used public transportation as his sole means of transportation - started talking about cutting funding to road projects because, well, there's still cars on the road, right?

[Embar Angylwrath]

Well.. what I can tell you from direct observation is:

Buses aren't full (never have been)
Trains aren't full (never have been)
The trolley/light rail is only really utilized during football and baseball games, otherwise its mostly empty (always has been)

[Harlowe]

You know, cuts have to be made and it's not going to be painless. If people are still able to get to work and there isn't rampant overcrowding, I don't see this an issue.

Look at the big picture in CA - they had an economic boom and definitely starting spending at that level. Then you have the the housing boom beginning it's slump in 2007, the financial market meltdown last year, their loss of credit rating, flood of foreclosures and rapid unemployment, the state is down by at least 27% of it's tax revenue. That's huge, that requires some pretty painful large cuts. They can't operate on I.O.U's indefinitely and spending as they did during an economic boom is just crazy, you can't do it.

Painful cuts have to happen and should prior to tax increases, but I am afraid they are in a situation that is going to require both, because cuts alone aren't going to help their situation with unemployment and the economy in general.

[Ddrak]

Well.. what I can tell you from direct observation is:

Buses aren't full (never have been)
Trains aren't full (never have been)
The trolley/light rail is only really utilized during football and baseball games, otherwise its mostly empty (always has been)

Even at peak? That's pretty sad if so...

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

To further address Fobbons questions:

(These are all San Diego area transit issues)
http://www.10news.com/news/19190291/detail.html

However, with a lack of public input, some have to wonder if people really care.

There were about an equal number of SANDAG board members at the meeting as there were members of the public, and even then only one person chose to address the board.

http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ride ... 9q1rep.pdf

Look at ridership in Oceanside and San Diego. Doesn't seem to be much of an impact due to the economy. Many ridership levels DECREASED. (The one note in Oceanside that shows >100% increase is because they opened up a new trolley line, and its the only trolly line, so without historical levels to compare to, any number, even if its one passenger, would be >100%). By the way, as far as I can tell, no route elimination or fare increases had been implemented during the timespan covered by the report. Those changes may happen in this quarter though.

My comments apply to only the San Diego area, I have no idea what things are like in Portland or some other place (although that report might tell you something about those places)

[Partha]

I'm amazed at Embar's ability to note how full buses and trains are without ever physically using them.

[Fobbon Lazyfoot]

I'm amazed at Embar's ability to note how full buses and trains are without ever physically using them.

Yup - that was the third time.

Lightner said she understands cuts have to come from somewhere, but she wondered if the board members really understand what it means.

"The people that comp up here, we're the ones who take it. How many of the board members actually depend on it?" said Lightner

By the way, as far as I can tell, no route elimination or fare increases had been implemented during the timespan covered by the report. Those changes may happen in this quarter though.

What's "as far as you can tell" mean?

Many ridership levels DECREASED.

And that indicates a healthy transit system?

[Embar Angylwrath]

I'm amazed at Embar's ability to note how full buses and trains are without ever physically using them.

Those weren't my statistice Partial..

Also... you, I or Fobbon can glance at a bus or train or trolly, see the empty seats, and make a conclusion. Kinda the same way you don't have to fly on a passenger jet that is heading on a vertical trajectory towards the ground to know the jet is in trouble. You can beeleive your eyes, or you can beleive your delusions. I prefer to beleive my eyes.