Minnesota rail advocates make pitch to Ramsey County

TeaSpeak wrote:

<quoted text>
What are the deficit numbers on I-94? I can't believe that beast is still open.
P.S.- Thou? Native born ESL student is my guess. Why can't baggers speak English?

Note: The MVST (Motor Vehicle Sales Tax) has been hijacked to pay for LRT.

There has NEVER been any mass transit fee or tax hijacked to pay for roads.

NEVER EVER!

Cost of rail wrote:

<quoted text>
Note: The MVST (Motor Vehicle Sales Tax) has been hijacked to pay for LRT.
There has NEVER been any mass transit fee or tax hijacked to pay for roads.
NEVER EVER!

Absolutely 100% totally wrong!

From 1956 until 1962 there was a 15% tax on rail passengers that was poured into the Highway Trust Fund to help build Ike's dream. That tax was originally enacted to help the WWII war effort, before being diverted in 1956 to the highways.

Additionally, from 1956 to 1993 there was a 4.3 cents per gallon tax on diesel fuel that the RR's paid, which also went directly into the Highway Trust Fund. Starting in 1993 that money went into the General fund, which the Highway Trust Fund continues to borrow money from.

Finally, as has been noted many times already on here, only 40% of the MVST goes to transit. And since "transit" includes buses and senior/handicapped services, that means that far less than 40% ends up going to trains.

Besides, it wasn't hijacked, the voters approved the plan and the State legislature signed off on it.

ahblid wrote:

<quoted text>
Absolutely 100% totally wrong!
From 1956 until 1962 there was a 15% tax on rail passengers that was poured into the Highway Trust Fund to help build Ike's dream. That tax was originally enacted to help the WWII war effort, before being diverted in 1956 to the highways.
Additionally, from 1956 to 1993 there was a 4.3 cents per gallon tax on diesel fuel that the RR's paid, which also went directly into the Highway Trust Fund. Starting in 1993 that money went into the General fund, which the Highway Trust Fund continues to borrow money from.
Finally, as has been noted many times already on here, only 40% of the MVST goes to transit. And since "transit" includes buses and senior/handicapped services, that means that far less than 40% ends up going to trains.
Besides, it wasn't hijacked, the voters approved the plan and the State legislature signed off on it.

Here we go again, ABIB is back talking about 70 years ago as thou it were today.

Cost of rail wrote:

<quoted text>
Here we go again, ABIB is back talking about 70 years ago as thou it were today.

Here we go again, the guy who can't get a single thing right. Can't get my name right and you can't even remember your own name as it keeps changing; can't get any facts right; can't get the MVST information right; and can't even do simple math!

2011 - 1993 = 18 year ago! Got that! Just 18 years ago rail was still paying for roads. This, despite your hugely false claim that rail has never, ever paid for a road.

Cost of rail wrote:

<quoted text>
Note: The MVST (Motor Vehicle Sales Tax) has been hijacked to pay for LRT.

And just to make things perfectly clear to the guy who can't get anything right:

When the voters approve a constitutional amendment to the State's Constitution to change how the MVST is handled, that's not hijacking something! That's the voters saying "this is what we want to have happen".

Hijacking would be if the Governor just decided to send some of the MVST money over to transit on his own whim. That didn't happen. WE THE PEOPLE decided to do that!

MVST is hijacked and wasted on rail.

Makes no difference how MVST got hijacked, it is hijacked just the same.

And now the Met Council is $450,000,000 IN THE WHOLE because rail is causing it to bleed to death.

The NorthStar is bleeding profusely and what is the Met Council doing: CUTTING BUS SERVICE.

Is that the future of mass transit in the Twin Cities?

IF you don't live on a rail line you will be walking?

Is that the future of mass transit?

Really, is rail the mass transit solution?

Makes a terrible solution because there simply isn't enough living quarters along the LRT line to house 3 MILLION people, is there?

Cost of rail wrote:

MVST is hijacked and wasted on rail.
Makes no difference how MVST got hijacked, it is hijacked just the same.

Well then I guess that we should just throw out the Constitution of the United States and the great State of Minnesota, give up all our rights and freedoms, to bow down at your feet because you know what is best and wish to be the dictator of the United States

The people voted for it and the people decided that you are WRONG! Get over it.

Cost of rail wrote:

And now the Met Council is $450,000,000 IN THE WHOLE because rail is causing it to bleed to death.

Another ridiculous statement with zero basis in fact. The Met Council's entire budget for 2010 was $738.6 Million. The entire transportation budget only accounts for 51.3% of the total budget. That means at most transportation could only account for a $378.9 Million deficit. And "transportation", as defined by the Met Council, includes roads, buses, bikes, air, and rail.

The deficit, if one actually occurs, will be $130 Million and it will be caused by the State reducing its payments to the Met Council.

Cost of rail wrote:

The NorthStar is bleeding profusely and what is the Met Council doing: CUTTING BUS SERVICE.`

Again, if you could do math, you'd know how ridiculous your statement is. If indeed the State cuts funding to the Met Council by $130 Million, shutting down Northstar entirely would net about $15 Million in savings.

That still leaves you short $115 Million to plug the deficit. Shutting down Hiawatha, in addition to bringing higher bus expenses to the table, would only save another $25 Million or so.

So you'd still be left with needing to find another $90 Million to plug the hole. In fact, the only single form of public transit that has a big enough budget to plug the hole in one shot is the buses. Their budget is $237.8 Million.

So if indeed the State cuts the funding the choices are cut funding to road projects, cut funding to the buses, cut funding to water & sewage, raise fares, or some combination of those things. Cutting out the trains entirely won't plug the hole! It won't even come close to plugging the hole!

Cost of rail wrote:

Is that the future of mass transit in the Twin Cities?
IF you don't live on a rail line you will be walking?
Is that the future of mass transit?
Really, is rail the mass transit solution?
Makes a terrible solution because there simply isn't enough living quarters along the LRT line to house 3 MILLION people, is there?

Rail is the perfect and cheapest long term solution. And we fix the "not enough living quarters" problem by building more lines.

Will ya get back to me when you have a logical argument.

Cost of rail wrote:

Will ya get back to me when you have a logical argument.

I already gave you a logical argument. You gave me nonsense. Here, let me simplify things for you.

1) You lied when you claimed that the deficit was $450M and that it was all due to rail.

2) We know that this is a lie, since $450M represents more than the entire $378M budget for all of the Met Council's transportation expenses. And those transportation expenses include: rail, bus, road, bike, and airport expenses.

3) The total combined operating budgets for all trains run by the Met Council is around $40 Million max. Therefore eliminating all trains won't close the budget hole if indeed the State cuts the funding by $130M.

ahblid wrote:

<quoted text>
I already gave you a logical argument. You gave me nonsense...

I acknowledge your patience in dealing with those whose minds are closed, sealed shut, impervious to Facts in conflict with their own beliefs. There is nothing more you can do with them -- and I acknowledge your good-faith effort.

None are so blind, as those who WILL NOT see!

Ahblid is so far ahead official record keeping has ceased.

Score Keeper wrote:

Ahblid is so far ahead official record keeping has ceased.

Agreed!

Again:

MVST is hijacked and wasted on rail.

Makes no difference how MVST got hijacked, it is hijacked just the same.

And now the Met Council is $450,000,000 IN THE WHOLE because rail is causing it to bleed to death.

The NorthStar is bleeding profusely and what is the Met Council doing: CUTTING BUS SERVICE.

Is that the future of mass transit in the Twin Cities?

IF you don't live on a rail line you will be walking?

Is that the future of mass transit?

Really, is rail the mass transit solution?

Makes a terrible solution because there simply isn't enough living quarters along the LRT line to house 3 MILLION people, is there?

Cost of rail wrote:

Again:
...

Why do you re-post the same demonstrated falsehoods, after someone patiently walks you through them and debunks each one?

Are you a slow learner, or just pig-headed stubborn?

Choose.

Cost of rail wrote:

Again:
MVST is hijacked and wasted on rail.
Makes no difference how MVST got hijacked, it is hijacked just the same.
And now the Met Council is $450,000,000 IN THE WHOLE because rail is causing it to bleed to death.
The NorthStar is bleeding profusely and what is the Met Council doing: CUTTING BUS SERVICE.
Is that the future of mass transit in the Twin Cities?
IF you don't live on a rail line you will be walking?
Is that the future of mass transit?
Really, is rail the mass transit solution?
Makes a terrible solution because there simply isn't enough living quarters along the LRT line to house 3 MILLION people, is there?

Hi, welcome to earth!

Please let me know what you start living in the real world and not the fantasy land where you currently reside. Because here in the real world in the great country of the United States of America, WE THE PEOPLE decide things.

You don't get to rewrite the laws and the Constitutions of our Governments on your own, just because you don't like them and live in fantasy land. You don't get to make up numbers out of thin air that just happen to sound good. You can't prove, and haven't proved, that the Met Council has a $450 deficit. And you certainly can't prove that rail and rail alone caused any deficit.

In fact, as the story at the link below proves, the only potential cause of a deficit would be the state reducing funding. It also proves that deficit would be $109 Million and not the $450 Million lie your telling.

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2011/07/07/metr...

The only thing that you have proved to date is that you're living in fantasyland and in denial.

Madaman wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you re-post the same demonstrated falsehoods, after someone patiently walks you through them and debunks each one?
Are you a slow learner, or just pig-headed stubborn?
Choose.

Man, you are one arrogant, hypocritical a s s. Pathetic too based on your 6000 posts that nobody agrees with. Get a life.