Americans traveled 3.7% less in May 2008 compared to 2007 - record drop

[benroethig]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Well, then let's get moving on giving MORE people that option.

Want your payroll taxes to double?

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by benroethig

Want your payroll taxes to double?

Whether we spent hundreds of billions upgrading highways, or hundreds of billions re-activating rail lines, taxes are going up anyway. Too many people, not enough road. I'd rather enjoy the most efficient and least stressful way to commute, thank you.

[Jesda]

Public transit is up as much as 50% in many places.

[GMC-70]

Originally Posted by wescoent

Whether we spent hundreds of billions upgrading highways, or hundreds of billions re-activating rail lines, taxes are going up anyway. Too many people, not enough road. I'd rather enjoy the most efficient and least stressful way to commute, thank you.

Then you should try to get a job that lets you work from home

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by GMC-70

Then you should try to get a job that lets you work from home

Or I could just continue using cheap, comfortable, stress-free, and clockwork-reliable commuter rail and subway.

Any idea how much oil this thing consumes per person in a commute?

[Orbit Orange]

Whether we spent hundreds of billions upgrading highways, or hundreds of billions re-activating rail lines, taxes are going up anyway. Too many people, not enough road. I'd rather enjoy the most efficient and least stressful way to commute, thank you.

While I agree we should be using mass transit for URBAN areas you're missing the point when it comes to RURAL areas. As for taxes if you want to pay higher just go ahead, I'd prefer to spend the money I earn for myself and my family. Taxes are high enough and letting the government spend my money inefficiently is not what I or MILLIONS of others want as well.

I'm glad you use mass transit, don't push it on others who either don't "enjoy" it or can't use it because it is NOT AVAILABLE.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

While I agree we should be using mass transit for URBAN areas you're missing the point when it comes to RURAL areas. As for taxes if you want to pay higher just go ahead, I'd prefer to spend the money I earn for myself and my family. Taxes are high enough and letting the government spend my money inefficiently is not what I or MILLIONS of others want as well.

I'm glad you use mass transit, don't push it on others who either don't "enjoy" it or can't use it because it is NOT AVAILABLE.

Obviously, mass transit doesn't work everywhere, and we do need cars.

However, wouldn't you rather get MILLIONS of cars off the road that don't need to be? That's all the less money we need to spend on upgrading highways to six lanes in each direction.

The less gas we consume in the cities means all the more cheap gas you can use out in the country.

If we upgrade MORE urban areas to have rail and light rail lines, yes, it will cost millions (billions) in taxes. However, you'll get that money back from the savings on highway upgrades and a significant dropoff in the price of gas.

It's all about choice, and if some people in the cities choose to continue driving, then they will get to enjoy congestion-free roads and cheap fuel.

[Orbit Orange]

It's all about choice

You are correct but just think about what you just said. If my taxes go up for mass transit in urban areas, what benefit do I receive from that? I avoid cities like the plague if possible. Gas prices MAY eventually go down, that is no guarantee, China and India are about to start consuming oil at an incredible amount. Less used rural highways then get less federal money to maintain so my state and local taxes increase to keep them repaired and functional. So now I'm paying more for something I don't use and more for something I do use as well. No thank you. Again, I'm all for urban areas increasing the use of mass transit, but not on the backs of people who will see no or little benefit from it. Choice is optional, not mandatory. For example if Chicago wants to increase their mass transit, I don't want Illinois to jack up the income tax rate, if they want it the city of Chicago itself needs to fund it through sales tax or property tax on it's citizens. Don't force people to pay for something they can't/won't use. That isn't choice that is government forced taxing.

Again, I'm glad you use MT. But if you use it YOU and others as yourself are the ones that need to fund it, NOT ME. Make sense?

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

You are correct but just think about what you just said. If my taxes go up for mass transit in urban areas, what benefit do I receive from that? I avoid cities like the plague if possible. Gas prices MAY eventually go down, that is no guarantee, China and India are about to start consuming oil at an incredible amount. Less used rural highways then get less federal money to maintain so my state and local taxes increase to keep them repaired and functional. So now I'm paying more for something I don't use and more for something I do use as well. No thank you. Again, I'm all for urban areas increasing the use of mass transit, but not on the backs of people who will see no or little benefit from it. Choice is optional, not mandatory. For example if Chicago wants to increase their mass transit, I don't want Illinois to jack up the income tax rate, if they want it the city of Chicago itself needs to fund it through sales tax or property tax on it's citizens. Don't force people to pay for something they can't/won't use. That isn't choice that is government forced taxing.

Again, I'm glad you use MT. But if you use it YOU and others as yourself are the ones that need to fund it, NOT ME. Make sense?

Then explain to me why it would be fine to install a highway leading into the city that's 6 lanes in both direction, but building a rail line isn't.

You need one or the other to alleviate gridlock, and either way, it doesn't help your rural highway.

[emh]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

Less used rural highways then get less federal money to maintain so my state and local taxes increase to keep them repaired and functional. So now I'm paying more for something I don't use and more for something I do use as well. No thank you. Again, I'm all for urban areas increasing the use of mass transit, but not on the backs of people who will see no or little benefit from it. Choice is optional, not mandatory. For example if Chicago wants to increase their mass transit, I don't want Illinois to jack up the income tax rate, if they want it the city of Chicago itself needs to fund it through sales tax or property tax on it's citizens.

Along the same lines of your argument, why should my federal tax money go to maintaining some rural road in Illinois? So your local taxes should go up for their maintenance.

[Orbit Orange]

Then explain to me why it would be fine to install a highway leading into the city that's 6 lanes in both direction, but building a rail line isn't.

You need one or the other to alleviate gridlock, and either way, it doesn't help your rural highway.

Right, it doesn't help me it helps the urban commuter. And it should be paid for by those who use it, not me. Noone is forcing the urban American to live there. It is your choice. Just like I choose to live in a rural setting. Gridlock is the urban areas problem, not mine. Just as an example, maybe I'd like to have a Museum of Fine Arts in my rural community. I'd have to travel about 100 miles to come to anything close to that (St. Louis). Now why would taxing everone in the state of Illinois, just to build this museum of fine arts be fair to those people upstate in the urban areas? People in Chicago would throw a $h@% fit that their money was going downstate to us "hayseeds" for something that they would never use. The same goes for us, why do I want my hard earned money going to Chicago for a mass transit system that I will NEVER use? The shoe fits both ways and we in rural areas often see urban people walking around with these blinders on. There is more to this country that just the city. You should really try to get out and see how the other half of America lives. It would give you a fresh perspective on things.

I think the idea of MT in urban areas is great, but I'll reiterate, I don't want to be the one paying for it in the form of higher taxes.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

Right, it doesn't help me it helps the urban commuter. And it should be paid for by those who use it, not me. Noone is forcing the urban American to live there. It is your choice. Just like I choose to live in a rural setting. Gridlock is the urban areas problem, not mine. Just as an example, maybe I'd like to have a Museum of Fine Arts in my rural community. I'd have to travel about 100 miles to come to anything close to that (St. Louis). Now why would taxing everone in the state of Illinois, just to build this museum of fine arts be fair to those people upstate in the urban areas? People in Chicago would throw a $h@% fit that their money was going downstate to us "hayseeds" for something that they would never use. The same goes for us, why do I want my hard earned money going to Chicago for a mass transit system that I will NEVER use? The shoe fits both ways and we in rural areas often see urban people walking around with these blinders on. There is more to this country that just the city. You should really try to get out and see how the other half of America lives. It would give you a fresh perspective on things.

I think the idea of MT in urban areas is great, but I'll reiterate, I don't want to be the one paying for it in the form of higher taxes.

How would one force only the city inhabitants to pay for a highway?

What if the rail line came through your town? My town isn't exactly close to Manhattan, but the rail line comes through here.

[Orbit Orange]

Along the same lines of your argument, why should my federal tax money go to maintaining some rural road in Illinois? So your local taxes should go up for their maintenance.

I saw this one coming and it is a fair argument. (Although if you saw the shape of disrepair our roads are in, in my area, you may change your mind on that statement) There are some things of course that everyone is going to have to pay for in the way of taxes. The thing is I'm drawing the line in the sand here at mass transit. We all have ideas where that line should be drawn. The MORE and MORE you decide to give to government to control and tax, the greater the road you follow to Socialism and that is not what the country was founded on. Of course we all share the burden for many things, as it should be, I'm no scrooge. But when it comes to something that myself, my family and members of my community will NEVER see the benefit of, I draw the line there. Especially when the urban community has the numbers, tax base and INTEREST to do it anyway.

[emh]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

I saw this one coming and it is a fair argument. (Although if you saw the shape of disrepair our roads are in, in my area, you may change your mind on that statement) There are some things of course that everyone is going to have to pay for in the way of taxes. The thing is I'm drawing the line in the sand here at mass transit. We all have ideas where that line should be drawn. The MORE and MORE you decide to give to government to control and tax, the greater the road you follow to Socialism and that is not what the country was founded on. Of course we all share the burden for many things, as it should be, I'm no scrooge. But when it comes to something that myself, my family and members of my community will NEVER see the benefit of, I draw the line there. Especially when the urban community has the numbers, tax base and INTEREST to do it anyway.

In other words, if it's something you use, you want everyone to pay for it. But if you don't use it, you don't want to pay anything for it. Got it!

Personally, I draw my line based on ROI, not some selfish "do I get any use of it" test. So I'd prefer my federal tax dollars be spent where it benefits the most people, even if it's not me. That's usually urban areas -- sot some under-used rural roads.

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by Orbit Orange

But when it comes to something that myself, my family and members of my community will NEVER see the benefit of, I draw the line there. Especially when the urban community has the numbers, tax base and INTEREST to do it anyway.

Ok... say as part of the deal, we put a train station in your town, and drop taxes in its immediate area to encourage business and residential development.