SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

j korzeniowski Aug 31, 2007 2:28 AM

well, here is what I wrote to a bunch of people, though some of the links may not transfer over ...

Hello All,

For some of you, nevermind how I got your email address, I have it. I think that you probably live in Chicago or the Chicago region if you got this, now let's just move on.

If you have been following the local news, you are probably aware that the Regional Transportation Authority, which includes the CTA, Metra and Pace, is strapped for cash. As this is public transportation it, like any other transit system in any other city in the world, requires government subsidies. The return on the investment is business, a vital city, cleaner air, less cars on the road, and so on. It simply enhances the quality of life -- while Chicago's system is not perfect and could use expansion, it is a very good system that, with upkeep and an injection of cash, could be among the nation's best.

There is a bill that will be voted on in the Illinois Legislature on September 4th called Senate Bill 572, and I urge all of you who live in this great city, and who take pride in this city and region, to take action in showing your support for this bill.

Before I get to my main "Targets", whom I have chosen based on my prior correspondence with their offices, or by just having read about them in the news regarding Chicago-area transit, let me say a few things about contacting these elected officials. First of all, it is easy. Just either call or email, and you are one more person they can flout (or consider if they are not a supporter of the bill) as someone who supports the bill. Secondly, I don't expect you to contact every single one of the below officials; in fact, I would suggest contacting either Governor Blagojevich, or one of Representative Hamos or Mathias for reasons listed below. Lastly, they don't have to be your representative. Still, you can let them know you are out there, and that you feel strongly about this bill

Targets:

* Governor Rod Blagojevich (D)

Governor Blagojevich is threatening a veto of Senate Bill 572 should it make it through the legislature. While I believe the Governor's intentions are good, now is no time to be an ideologue. As a populist, it sounds good to say close "corporate tax loopholes" as the Governor has suggested, but that also makes it more of a state issue, which would erode the needed support of officials from the rest of the state. Also, as Rep. Julie Hamos has pointed out, one man's corporate tax loophole is another man's business expansion incentive. Call or write Governor Blagojevich and tell him to support S.B. 572!

* State Representative Michael Madigan (D-Chicago)

Michael Madigan, the House Speaker from Chicago's South Side, has thrown his considerable weight behind S.B. 572 after no funding was provided for the CTA in the state budget recently passed following months of gridlock in Springfield. Call or write Speaker Madigan and tell him you are behind him in his support S.B. 572!

* State Representative Julie Hamos (D-Evanston)

S.B. 572 is Ms. Hamos' baby, and she deserves a call or a note of thanks and support.

* State Representative Sidney Mathias (R-Buffalo Grove)

LIke Ms. Hamos, Representative Mathias has put in a tremendous amount of effort in supporting this bill. He also deserves a call of support. (I am unable to locate an email address.)

* State Representative Tom Cross (R-Plainfield)

Rep. Cross seems to be holding S.B. 572 hostage in favor of holding out for more money for roads in the area. The purpose of this email is not for me to be (too) preachy, and I strongly disagree with Rep. Cross. This bill is just too important at this time in the region's history to hold up for any reason. This isn't just about having nice, shiny new trains, it is about the region's economic survival. Call or write Representative Cross and tell him to support S.B. 572 unequivocally!

* State Representative Brent Hassert (R-Romeoville)

Admittedly, I had not heard of Representative Hassert in following the developments regarding the region's transit funding. In a story in the August 30th online edition of the Daily Herald, however, he was quoted as saying that this bill was " ... a dog and pony show ..." Personally, I would call the remark flippant if it was not so nonsensical. I already emailed his office regarding this remark, and I have yet to hear back from anybody.

* Senator Emil Jones Jr. (D-Chicago)

The lead Democrat in the Democratic-led Illinois Senate. As a Democrat from Chicago, Senator Jones has been noticeably quiet during transit talks. Call or write Senator Jones to support S.B. 572!

* Senator Frank Watson (R-Greenville)

Senator Watson holds the highest ranking of Illinois Senate Republicans. Greenville is in southern Illinois, east of St. Louis; so, while his silence is not necessarily surprising, call or write the highest ranking Republican Senator to support S.B. 572

Remember, these are not rate hikes because inflation has caught up with costs, or because the CTA has some great new plans it just needs a little more money for, they are being proposed because there is a budget shortfall. This means that the fares will go up, and the service will actually get worse if no new funding is allotted to the RTA.

Please take action. Please feel free to forward this or any email on the subject to friends and RTA customers.

Other resources:

http://www.transitchicago.com/

http://savechicagolandtransit.com/actnow.asp

http://drivelesslivemore.com/index.php

http://movingbeyondcongestion.org/

http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/sb572

Cheers,
Matthew

whyhuhwhy Aug 31, 2007 5:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rail Claimore (Post 3035944)
I'm assuming IDOT will be taking care of the "Avenues" problem next time the Ike is due for rebuilding. But the bigger problem is that you have 3 lanes of traffic dumping into an existing expressway with 4 lanes in each direction reduced to 3. I think the Ike extension was completely unnecessary and only built to serve the then (and still now) wealthy suburbs of northeastern DuPage County. That road is redundant and needs to go, especially with the planned O'Hare Ring Road.

The Stevenson needs to be widened to 8 lanes all the way to Joliet. They have the room to do it, and IDOT chose not to back in the 90's, ridiculous.

The Edens Junction can be fixed by doing away with the express lanes and adding two lanes in each direction, bringing the total on each side to 6, and they have room to do it, considering the amount of shoulder room express lanes require. Each of those is like already adding a 5th lane to each side, then the 6th comes in by way of shoulder work.

As for transit, I don't think you can equate Chicago's L to newer systems such as the Washington Metro or MARTA. The L has to work with what it has because building new rail lines in such an exisiting developed area is almost counterproductive. It's better in the long term to preserve current ROWs.

Wow you need to be in charge of IDOT. I agree with everything you said.

j korzeniowski Sep 1, 2007 1:17 AM

we're fucked, and i think i might try to get transferred back to europe. fuck suburbanites and chicago is just what most of us chicagoans know deep down: we are a provincial backwater, with the cultural centers on the coasts.

rest of the rust belt, here we come ...

http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/loca...243192315.html

whyhuhwhy Sep 1, 2007 2:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j korzeniowski (Post 3042814)
we're fucked, and i think i might try to get transferred back to europe. fuck suburbanites and chicago is just what most of us chicagoans know deep down: we are a provincial backwater, with the cultural centers on the coasts.

rest of the rust belt, here we come ...

http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/loca...243192315.html

I moved to Chicago from Europe 4 years ago and you can have the 17.5% sales tax and the unbearable cost of living there just so you can ride a train more often. Either that or do us all a favor and move to the "cultural meccas" on the coasts immediately where you can feel better about yourself. It's not like you are going to escape government funding problems and declining services. Welcome to the rest of the world 2007.

Bottom line is suburbanites shouldn't have to cover the cost of the El anymore than we should have to cover the cost of their highways. Neither is right. Tell me why you should have to pay for their highway needs out there. It is hilarious watching some of us complain when our El system is f*cked due to mismanagement and then go ahead and blame it on the suburbanites because they won't bail the CTA out. Ridiculous.

What's unbelievable to me is the solution some of us expect is to raise the already record setting sales tax in Cook County. I believe Chicago with it's 9.0% sales tax is the highest in the nation. Let's raise it again shall we because CTA employees have huge pensions and retirement benefits.

I hope the bill does not pass so the CTA can get streamlined. We need a doomsday scenario to wake the management up. There needs to be a lot of firing going on, and a wake up call for Daley. It's a bureaucratic mess that is not even coming close to paying for itself. So the solution? Let's become the UK and just get it over with. Let's raise the Cook County sales tax to 17.5% and continue to fund loss leading mismanaged transit services and just be done with it.

Blago was a complete idiot for never matching federal funds for transit/highway, but I have to agree with him that raising the sales tax on the entire county in order to pay for a bureaucratic mess, when our sales tax is #1 in the nation already, is just ludicrous. What's funny is most of us don't even use the CTA but we all pay for it. I'm a firm believer that people should pay for what they use in government outside of emergency services. I'm not really sure why we need larger government in order to manage and funnel our money. I shouldn't have to subsidize exurban highways like I do and they shouldn't have to subsidize a broken CTA. All the highways in this region need to get converted to tolls and the CTA fare should match at the least the cost of running it. But instead we have this attitude that other people should pay for it.

The one area I agree with you is Chicago is f*cked when it comes to transporation lately. There is very little on the table and very little planned to ease traffic congestion, get rid of bottlenecks, and shake up a completely mismanaged CTA system. The only area of our transporation/highway network that seems to be working and adequate is Metra (save for their horrible parking wait list).

Have fun in Europe.

Busy Bee Sep 1, 2007 3:47 PM

CTA explores Block 37 deal
Millions over budget, city talks privatization with Skyway firm

(Crain’s) — The massive subway station under construction at Block 37 is running as much as $150 million over budget, a shortfall that has prompted city officials to move to privatize the project.

Sources close to the matter say the city has begun discussions with Macquarie — the Australian investment bank that two years ago paid the city $1.82 billion to lease the Chicago Skyway — about buying or leasing the Chicago Transit Authority station underneath the high-profile retail and office complex now being built.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-b...26228&seenIt=1

j korzeniowski Sep 1, 2007 4:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy (Post 3043443)
I moved to Chicago from Europe 4 years ago and you can have the 17.5% sales tax and the unbearable cost of living there just so you can ride a train more often. Either that or do us all a favor and move to the "cultural meccas" on the coasts immediately where you can feel better about yourself. It's not like you are going to escape government funding problems and declining services. Welcome to the rest of the world 2007.

Bottom line is suburbanites shouldn't have to cover the cost of the El anymore than we should have to cover the cost of their highways. Neither is right. Tell me why you should have to pay for their highway needs out there. It is hilarious watching some of us complain when our El system is f*cked due to mismanagement and then go ahead and blame it on the suburbanites because they won't bail the CTA out. Ridiculous.

What's unbelievable to me is the solution some of us expect is to raise the already record setting sales tax in Cook County. I believe Chicago with it's 9.0% sales tax is the highest in the nation. Let's raise it again shall we because CTA employees have huge pensions and retirement benefits.

I hope the bill does not pass so the CTA can get streamlined. We need a doomsday scenario to wake the management up. There needs to be a lot of firing going on, and a wake up call for Daley. It's a bureaucratic mess that is not even coming close to paying for itself. So the solution? Let's become the UK and just get it over with. Let's raise the Cook County sales tax to 17.5% and continue to fund loss leading mismanaged transit services and just be done with it.

Blago was a complete idiot for never matching federal funds for transit/highway, but I have to agree with him that raising the sales tax on the entire county in order to pay for a bureaucratic mess, when our sales tax is #1 in the nation already, is just ludicrous. What's funny is most of us don't even use the CTA but we all pay for it. I'm a firm believer that people should pay for what they use in government outside of emergency services. I'm not really sure why we need larger government in order to manage and funnel our money. I shouldn't have to subsidize exurban highways like I do and they shouldn't have to subsidize a broken CTA. All the highways in this region need to get converted to tolls and the CTA fare should match at the least the cost of running it. But instead we have this attitude that other people should pay for it.

The one area I agree with you is Chicago is f*cked when it comes to transporation lately. There is very little on the table and very little planned to ease traffic congestion, get rid of bottlenecks, and shake up a completely mismanaged CTA system. The only area of our transporation/highway network that seems to be working and adequate is Metra (save for their horrible parking wait list).

Have fun in Europe.

eh, i haven't liked your posts at all since you started posting. you have the completely wrong outlook on how government should work, i.e., "i don't use it why should i pay for it?", and i'll respond to your silly post later. (also, you don't even have the slightest idea of how this funding bill works, nor what is at stake. actually, "taking the train more often" is exactly the point.)

i will have fun in europe, cheers.

whyhuhwhy Sep 1, 2007 8:10 PM

^

No offense but I could care less if someone I never met "doesn't like my posts." Especially someone who calls Chicago "backwater." What do I care what some self loather who thinks Europe and "the coasts" are cultural meccas with no funding problems or declining services of their own thinks of my opinions on government funding.

The bottom line is that the money to run anything has to come from somewhere. Your entire argument boils down to that we should have everyone pay for things you like, but you shouldn't have to pay for anything you don't like--i.e., because j korzeniowski lives nearby, uses it, likes it, and thinks it makes us more cool "like Europe," other people should pay for it 40 miles away, but he shouldn't have to pay for anything he doesn't use or like out there no matter how important it is to the region, like I-94, go figure.

I prefer a world where I don't have to help fund highways out in the exurbs and since I don't live by a double standard I don't expect them to fund the new Pink Line on a system where most of our cash fares goes to employee pensions. And that's the point. Not the transit versus highway part of it, it's that you like the idea of "trains" at any costs, even faced with the reality that the agency is mismanaged and we are paying more for their pension plans than the actual system. We need far more than suburbanites who live 40 miles away to help continue to fund a loss leader. We need a real shake up. We need Daley to get involved and the pension situation needs to be fixed. If $1.55 of every cash fare goes to CTA employee retirement benefits and health care than I'm sorry, but I don't consider raising already record setting sales taxes on everyone to be a real solution to the much more glaring core problem.

Who are you to say who has the "wrong view" of government anyway. It's all philosophy and opinion. I have no doubt my method would work better than your's and I'm sure you feel the same way.

Good luck in Europe. You certainly won't escape increasing automobiles, funding politics, and aging and declining infrastructure, that's bloody sure. But I hope you find what you are looking for.

j korzeniowski Sep 1, 2007 9:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy (Post 3043833)
^

No offense but I could care less if someone I never met "doesn't like my posts." Especially someone who calls Chicago "backwater." What do I care what some self loather who thinks Europe and "the coasts" are cultural meccas with no funding problems or declining services of their own thinks of my opinions on government funding.

The bottom line is that the money to run anything has to come from somewhere. Your entire argument boils down to that we should have everyone pay for things you like, but you shouldn't have to pay for anything you don't like--i.e., because j korzeniowski lives nearby, uses it, likes it, and thinks it makes us more cool "like Europe," other people should pay for it 40 miles away, but he shouldn't have to pay for anything he doesn't use or like out there no matter how important it is to the region, like I-94, go figure.

I prefer a world where I don't have to help fund highways out in the exurbs and since I don't live by a double standard I don't expect them to fund the new Pink Line on a system where most of our cash fares goes to employee pensions. And that's the point. Not the transit versus highway part of it, it's that you like the idea of "trains" at any costs, even faced with the reality that the agency is mismanaged and we are paying more for their pension plans than the actual system. We need far more than suburbanites who live 40 miles away to help continue to fund a loss leader. We need a real shake up. We need Daley to get involved and the pension situation needs to be fixed. If $1.55 of every cash fare goes to CTA employee retirement benefits and health care than I'm sorry, but I don't consider raising already record setting sales taxes on everyone to be a real solution to the much more glaring core problem.

Who are you to say who has the "wrong view" of government anyway. It's all philosophy and opinion. I have no doubt my method would work better than your's and I'm sure you feel the same way.

Good luck in Europe. You certainly won't escape increasing automobiles, funding politics, and aging and declining infrastructure, that's bloody sure. But I hope you find what you are looking for.

eek ... your reading comprehension sucks and you talk out of both sides of your mouth. and you still really don't know what your talking about. my calling my beloved chicago a "backwater" was more out of frustration, but i lived in europe for 3.5 years myself, and i travel there regularly. they actually invest in mass transit, and your characterizing my advocacy of transit as my love of getting on trains is silly. if you don't understand the importance of mass transit to a region then i can't help you.

whyhuhwhy Sep 2, 2007 3:12 AM

^

Why do you continue to quote my entire posts and take up so much thread space.

I hope you don't act this way toward people you know when they disagree with you or you don't get what you want. Your solution to someone who disagrees with you seems to be to throw a tantrum at them.

Your argument basically boils down to this: We need to fund trains at any cost and use anybody's money to do it, and since you disagree with me then you are not only wrong, but you can't read, you talk out of both sides of your mouth, your previous posts suck, you just don't understand government, you just don't understand transit, I just can't help you get it, insert next ad hominem attack here. I guess that is political discourse in the world of j korzeniowski's government. It's no wonder I have a problem with your form of government--it is clearly j korzeniowski's government and no one elses.

In the end, you missed my entire point. It's not mass transit I am against. I ride the CTA every week (buses). My prior home was EC1N London and I didn't own a car. I have grown up with transit. Why the hell would I be interested and talking about transit on an online forum dedicated to urban discussion if I wasn't interested in solutions.

But I can admit when I see a big turkey. When most of my cash fare for a train ride goes to pension and health benefits, then we have to think more deeply on what exactly we are funding here. And yet you continue to ignore this and offer no solutions. Since the end result of the management is a train ride you are willing to ignore any and all MISmanagement. CTA is a mess not only because it doesn't get funding, it's also a mess because of decades of inaccountability and mismanagement.

Either way, get real. You want Chicago to be London or Paris or Berlin. Chicago is not Europe and you can't alter its history. Most of its metropolitan area has developed within the last 50 years when the automobile was affordable and commonplace. European cities were pedestrian-only cities long before the automobile (or Chicago!) even existed. Of course they are going to invest in transit more--they don't have a choice. What are they going to do--widen High Holburn to 8 lanes and plow right through the middle of some of the most expensive real estate in the country with a highway?

Either way I have to put you on my ignore list. I have little doubt you will attack me for my opinions and I'm a vet on online forums enough to where I know when you can't win with someone and they aren't interested in discourse. Yeah yeah I get it, I just don't get it, I don't understand, etc.

Busy Bee Sep 2, 2007 3:17 AM

Does anyone else remember personal chat rooms? Can people still do that?

nomarandlee Sep 2, 2007 9:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy (Post 3043833)
^

Not the transit versus highway part of it, it's that you like the idea of "trains" at any costs, even faced with the reality that the agency is mismanaged and we are paying more for their pension plans than the actual system. We need far more than suburbanites who live 40 miles away to help continue to fund a loss leader. We need a real shake up. We need Daley to get involved and the pension situation needs to be fixed. If $1.55 of every cash fare goes to CTA employee retirement benefits and health care than I'm sorry, but I don't consider raising already record setting sales taxes on everyone to be a real solution to the much more glaring core problem. .

I agree, but didn't Huberman renegotiate the pensions with the unions as part of his shake up ? Maybe it is still not adequate but I think he said he was or did worked on that aspect which I agree was a major impediment.

Anyone who knows the labor financials of the CTA maybe could answer?

the urban politician Sep 2, 2007 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j korzeniowski (Post 3043906)
eek ... your reading comprehension sucks and you talk out of both sides of your mouth. and you still really don't know what your talking about. my calling my beloved chicago a "backwater" was more out of frustration, but i lived in europe for 3.5 years myself, and i travel there regularly. they actually invest in mass transit, and your characterizing my advocacy of transit as my love of getting on trains is silly. if you don't understand the importance of mass transit to a region then i can't help you.

^ While I agree that Chicago is a mess, do you think cities on America's coasts don't have similar problems? :haha:

This is America, my friend. Land of the free, home of the brave. We don't ride trains, nor do we pay for them. You already knew that. Americans don't want to pay for things that help a lot of black people and immigrants, even if a sizeable chunk of whites and affluent people use it.

Europe is nice, too, but expensive beyond belief. Get convenient train rides, pay 8$ for a loaf of bread.

It all balances out--you just have to choose what's important to you.

mikeelm Sep 3, 2007 12:30 AM

Amazing how silly people can be here sometimes.

whyhuhwhy Sep 4, 2007 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 3045127)
^ While I agree that Chicago is a mess, do you think cities on America's coasts don't have similar problems? :haha:

This is America, my friend. Land of the free, home of the brave. We don't ride trains, nor do we pay for them. You already knew that. Americans don't want to pay for things that help a lot of black people and immigrants, even if a sizeable chunk of whites and affluent people use it.

Europe is nice, too, but expensive beyond belief. Get convenient train rides, pay 8$ for a loaf of bread.

It all balances out--you just have to choose what's important to you.


Good post but I can't help if you are being sarcastic or just overly simplistic. The reason everyone I know that doesn't ride or want to fund trains en generale has little to do with fear of other races or immigrants. It's just that these people don't have a pressing need for one as they own an automobile and in reality have absolutely no trouble using it. For the vast majority of Americans, heck even here in the middle of Lakeview one of the densest neighborhoods in the country, the roads are plenty adequate even for the dense population and an automobile is the preferred way to get to and from work (especially in February). It's just the way it is. Thank God we have the bus system and the El though.

As for the suburbanites, I think of my parents. White, middle class suburbanites who would never agree to have their taxes raised for mass transit around where they live in Milwaukee, even though it's been proposed by several politicians there many times. Why? Because they would never use it. It's really as simple as that. Why would they want to have their taxes raised on something they don't need and would never use. You can't blame people for that. Nothing to do with not wanting "black people" coming to their suburb, which is happening anyway regardless of any transit links (suburbs are becoming VERY diverse lately if you haven't noticed).

On the other hand these same people ride and love the Amtrak Hiawatha from General Mitchell to downtown Chicago and use that as their preferred method over the automobile to travel the 80 miles from Milwaukee to Chicago, so they are very pro-train. But like anyone they need to see some pull factor (such as the convenience of the Hiawatha).

Marcu Sep 4, 2007 3:16 AM

I really don't see a problem with paying $2.50 or $3 to ride the el. Especially if it actually runs adequately (see blue line). I'll take that over an increase in the outrageously high as it is sales tax any day for the same reasons I would take tollways over income tax funded/property tax funded highways.

And we really have to think about implementing a DC-style system so that people commuting from 95th to Lake don't pay the same rate as people commuting from Harrison to Lake. Although there is the major political hurdle of a huge chunk of city workers living on the far nw or far sw sides.

pip Sep 4, 2007 3:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whyhuhwhy
heck even here in the middle of Lakeview one of the densest neighborhoods in the country, the roads are plenty adequate even for the dense population

Maybe at 3am the roads are adequate.


So lets get rid of the CTA and dump a million plus cars on the road each day. You think traffic is bad now. Gridlock is bad for the economy, btw.

And using your train of thought. I require no governemnt services. So I don't want to pay taxes for schools, I have health insurance so no taxes for medicaid or any health service, I want financial aid for college gone, etc. You see where I am going with this?

VivaLFuego Sep 4, 2007 3:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcu (Post 3046556)
I really don't see a problem with paying $2.50 or $3 to ride the el. Especially if it actually runs adequately (see blue line). I'll take that over an increase in the outrageously high as it is sales tax any day for the same reasons I would take tollways over income tax funded/property tax funded highways.

And we really have to think about implementing a DC-style system so that people commuting from 95th to Lake don't pay the same rate as people commuting from Harrison to Lake. Although there is the major political hurdle of a huge chunk of city workers living on the far nw or far sw sides.

The 'problem' with this way of thinking is that many people consider it to be a regressive pricing structure, by hitting the lowest-income people the hardest. In contrast to simply higher fares or distance-based fares, using peak/off-peak pricing is generally considered more 'progressive', as low-income people take a disproportionately higher share of off-peak rides.

It's also important to remember that part of why sales taxes are so high is because income tax and property tax are so low. The overall tax burden living in Chicago is not at all unfavorable compared to most other older major cities, we just load up on the consumption (sales) tax as opposed to the productivity (income/gross receipts) and wealth (property) that most other locations use.

j korzeniowski Sep 4, 2007 4:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip (Post 3046563)
Maybe at 3am the roads are adequate.


So lets get rid of the CTA and dump a million plus cars on the road each day. You think traffic is bad now. Gridlock is bad for the economy, btw.

And using your train of thought. I require no governemnt services. So I don't want to pay taxes for schools, I have health insurance so no taxes for medicaid or any health service, I want financial aid for college gone, etc. You see where I am going with this?

thank you, sir, you saved me a lot of time in going back and responding to whyhuh' in earnest.

cheers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 3046564)
The 'problem' with this way of thinking is that many people consider it to be a regressive pricing structure, by hitting the lowest-income people the hardest. In contrast to simply higher fares or distance-based fares, using peak/off-peak pricing is generally considered more 'progressive', as low-income people take a disproportionately higher share of off-peak rides.

It's also important to remember that part of why sales taxes are so high is because income tax and property tax are so low. The overall tax burden living in Chicago is not at all unfavorable compared to most other older major cities, we just load up on the consumption (sales) tax as opposed to the productivity (income/gross receipts) and wealth (property) that most other locations use.

the other problem i often see is the notion that people have that, with increased fares, the service will become better. the rates are going up because the is a budget shortfall. you will pay more for the same service you get now. actually, it could get worse, as there will be more broken down trains and buses as i believe they will start using money originally designated for maintenance for day-to-day operations.

it's crunchtime, people, please visit this site:
http://www.savechicagolandtransit.com/actnow.asp

j korzeniowski Sep 4, 2007 4:48 PM

eek .. triplicate post ... forum slow for me today ...

j korzeniowski Sep 4, 2007 4:48 PM

see above


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.