Well, yes, and?

On the fiscal front, Republican members of Congress appear content to let transit and other COVID-ravaged sectors languish. The perennial inability of Congress to act indicates that states and local communities increasingly will have to find their own way to pay for transit, though they will never have the sums at their disposal that the federal government can muster.

There is a reasonable sorta argument that if the people of an area want buses then the people of that area can pay for buses, right?

11 thoughts on “Well, yes, and?”

  1. As you say “*your* tax money …”.
    This is a demand for more subsidies from Federal taxes from Republican-voting rural areas to big-city public transport in Democrat-voting areas. Hence the smear that that the Republican minority in Congress is blocking the “vital need” for buses for which the passengers only pay a fraction of the cost.

  2. Of course the poor people in Podunk, Alabama should be paying for New Yorkers to transit to parks, museums and the seashore.

  3. Why is the writer pretending to be worried? The new administration will be chucking untold trillions at Democrats states and cities including their public transit authorities.

  4. They do realise that the US is a *federation* don’t they? So it’s the states that decide what happens in the states.

  5. though they will never have the sums at their disposal that the federal government can muster.

    But Federal government has to spread it sums over all the population, so the sums available are no bigger per person.

    A 10% tax at state level generates as much money as a 10% tax at federal level, rather obviously.

  6. @ Chester Draws
    But … but … that would mean spending *their own* money (or that of their neighbours) on the transport instead of somebody else’s. No respectable left-wing publication could possibly approve of that.

  7. though they will never have the sums at their disposal that the federal government can muster.

    Where does this idiot think the federal government gets that money from?

    Its entirely possible that if I were not paying TEN FUCKING TIMES my state taxes to the federal government then my state might be able to scrounge up some more tax revenue to do the things my state needs to do – rather than the things *other* states feel we should do to appease special interests in those other states.

    And no one still has made a coherent argument about why public transit should exist – rather than private transit, possibly subsidized through means-tested reimbursement.

  8. So Much For Subtlety

    It is not so much a rich-poor divide, nor a rural-urban or even a Republican-Democrat split.

    It is that these people think they know how to spend your money better than you do. You don’t want public transport but they do. So the Federal government should force you to pay for it.

    This year made it clear they want to ban cars, well cars with an internal combustion engine. I am going to enjoy seeing how that goes down.

  9. I find it amusing when they claim the capital cost of extended the light rail system will be split between the federal govt, provincial govt, local municipalities and the regional transit authority (state owned) All they are really arguing is about how much the users pay vs locals pay vs the rest of the province vs rest of the country, it’s all taxpayer money.
    The main argument should be which group has access to the lowest rate of debt

  10. The main argument should be which group has access to the lowest rate of debt

    I disagree. The main argument should be ‘do you want it badly enough to pay for it yourself?’

    I do not see why I should be stuck with the bill for public transit in another city or another state just because my area can get the loan cheaper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *