Twin Cities Central Corridor / Dealmakers hold ticket to new li...

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
The metro area will pay for the lion's share of the cost.

Actually, the FEDS seem to be paying the lions share. If LRT cannot support itself, why should the rest of the country pay for even more Oberstar pork?

TAC wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe you don't want light rail, but that doesn't mean there isn't a majority of people that won't use it. Go to any other larger metropolitan city and you will find some form of Light Rail, be it subway or trolley cars. The numbers will only grow as the system becomes larger and the places that the train will take you become more accessible.

Just how much do you think people should be taxed for the light rail
boondoggle. And as for the silly statement a majority of people will ride it
is so far beyond common sense and logical comprehension. New York
subsidizes their transit system in the sum of 20 billion dollars a year plus, and we subsidize the light rail we have a 14 million dollars a year. These are amounts that will only keep getting larger and larger and the tax payer keeps getting shafted more and more.

Years back the Twin Cities had tracks laid and Street Cars running everywhere, and if light rail such a great deal and something we
need then, WHERE DID THE STREET CAR GO!!!!!!!!!!

The U doesn't want it
Business on University doesn't want it.
La la land planners and the Coleman's goofy staff
want it. The gov doesn't particularly lie it.
Try it again in 2014 when everyone has their $%#^
together. Minnesota units of government have to come up with over 450 million for this thing not just $70 mil

Tax dollars wrote:

<quoted text>Years back the Twin Cities had tracks laid and Street Cars running everywhere, and if light rail such a great deal and something we
need then, WHERE DID THE STREET CAR GO!!!!!!!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_City_Rapid_...
Look at the Company Takeover and Decline section, and the section that follows it. Our street car system was very successful. It was not replaced because it didn't work well.

Disgruntled Outstater wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, the FEDS seem to be paying the lions share. If LRT cannot support itself, why should the rest of the country pay for even more Oberstar pork?

Why shouldn't Minnesota get back from Washington some of the money we send there?? Minnesota currently gets way less money back from Washington than we send there in tax revenue. Check out this website:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/...

Minnesota is number 6 on the list of states receiving the least in Federal spending per dollar of Federal taxes paid. We get back only 77 cents for every dollar we send to Washington.

Disgruntled Outstater wrote:

<quoted text>
Then the metro area (perhaps the Met Council) should PAY for it. Those of us out in the boonies are tired of footing the bill to make the metro more "livable," all the while watching all of the jobs disappear from rural MN

That's funny. Let us know when you outstate guys want to stop being subsidized by the Cities.

D'oh! Didn't mean to post twice.

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
A poll done in 2007 showed 85% of Twin Cities residents support building a network of light rail and commuter rail lines.

What a crock...Show me a valid poll where an unbaised, neutral question ask if people wanted light rail and 85% said yes...You're full of B.S..

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
The metro area will pay for the lion's share of the cost.

Whoever wants to join this boondogge should pay for ALL the costs, both upfront and operating costs..

Funny...who do you suppose pays for all the roads and bridges in outstate MN? You got it! ALL of the residents in MN. So...how about we here in the Metro area decide we want to stop paying for YOUR infrastructure. There's goes 3/5 of the funding for your projects. Please...get a clue. We're all in this together.

Ranger47 wrote:

<quoted text>
What a crock...Show me a valid poll where an unbaised, neutral question ask if people wanted light rail and 85% said yes...You're full of B.S..

http://www.mncenter.org/minnesota_center_for_...

Look at question 11. Now, you show me a valid poll with much lower support, blowhard.

Ranger47 wrote:

<quoted text>
Whoever wants to join this boondogge should pay for ALL the costs, both upfront and operating costs..

Why stop at transit? I think all the people who support the war in Iraq should be the only ones to pay for it. How does 200 million dollars a day sound to you? In just 5 days that's as much as the total cost of this light rail line.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/

And only Republicans should pay for the Medicare Prescription Drug plan. That's an 8.4 trillion dollar unfunded liability we can thank the Republicans for.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp...

KILL IT!!!!!

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
And only Republicans should pay for the Medicare Prescription Drug plan. That's an 8.4 trillion dollar unfunded liability we can thank the Republicans for.

Republicans pay most of the taxes anyway.

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
Our street car system was very successful. It was not replaced because it didn't work well.

It was ripped out by Mayor Hubert Humphrey.

Disgruntled Outstater wrote:

<quoted text>
Then the metro area (perhaps the Met Council) should PAY for it. Those of us out in the boonies are tired of footing the bill to make the metro more "livable," all the while watching all of the jobs disappear from rural MN

When the outstate starts paying more in taxes than it receives in benefits, then it will have something to complain about. As it is, the suburbs are paying the vast majority of the bills in Minnesota. We don't mind, but there are limits as to how stupidly the state spends our money.

Phil wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.mncenter.org/minnesota_center_for_...
Look at question 11. Now, you show me a valid poll with much lower support, blowhard.

It is interesting that the survey you cited says that 'controlling taxes' is twice as important as anything else, including 'improving transportation'.

The fact is that if people realized that each and every rail line is going to cost their family $500 to build plus $8 per year to operate, I think they will reiterate that 'controlling taxes' is more important.

jcf817 wrote:

Please...get a clue. We're all in this together.

The trouble is that we are not all pulling the same weight. The urban and rural areas are being carried by the suburbs.

Missing in everyone of these stories is what a complete boondoggle building new roads. Where are the stories about how how few people go across the Hastings a or Stillwater bridges? How about the fact that when they add more off ramps every mile it would not meet any cost benefit measures. How about the fact that best case senerio new roads or bridges will lose a min of $20 million per year. What about stories that regardless of predictions nowhere near
projections will people ride in this can.

Rebuilding the 35w bridge is a waste of money. It impacts so few people and people have been smart enough to find alternative ways home.

Stop the building and return the money to tax payers.

CyBear wrote:

<quoted text>
It is interesting that the survey you cited says that 'controlling taxes' is twice as important as anything else, including 'improving transportation'.
The fact is that if people realized that each and every rail line is going to cost their family $500 to build plus $8 per year to operate, I think they will reiterate that 'controlling taxes' is more important.

But only 56 percent of the respondents cited controlling taxes as their most or second most important issue, as compared to 85 percent of the respondents saying they support light rail and commuter rail. You can speculate about what people might have said all you want, but these are the facts about what they actually said.