Metro mayors ready to pass Evergreen Line gas tax
 

Metro mayors ready to pass Evergreen Line gas tax

This is gonna be fun, increase in gas tax + Portmann bridge toll. :fuuuuu:

:fuckthatshit:

I wonder how much revenue could be generated annually by installing turn stiles at skytrain stations.

"In another 20 years there will be another million people in the region"

This line can be use over and over in a loop to rape us in the ass with fee for the rest of our life. 20 years later....
"in another 20 years there will be another 10 million people in the region, Now you'll have to give us half of what you earn, increase property tax, and we'll have to charge your ass for breathing the city air tax blah fucking blah".

Not if them guys keep coming up with shit we have to pay and raping our pocket with every chance they get. Fucking life is hard already here as it is. Having a bachelor degree here will most likely get you minimum pay jobs or 30ishK earning per year. Some people are already having a hard time to meet end meets. Watch once the project is finish they'll start raising the fare price. Is not gonna end. Next time they'll cry to bchyrdo/harrison gas and start taxing you for using water in the house just so they can build new shit that some of us don't even us. I don't know like a fucking sidewalk for dog and cat only.

Nothing we can do about. And they said turnstiles cost 170million. It always cost Translink so much to do anything.

fucking pointless, just take the 97 to coquitlam station, its not like every bus is jammed pack

meh, i am okay with it, cost of everything is going up and this is just the beginning.

gas taxes to places I go a handful of times per year? :fuckthatshit:

how bout they just raise prices in the cities that will be getting these services; property taxes, gas taxes, tolls, fares, for cities like coquitlam and surrey

leave the rest of us alone

Turnstiles should have been installed with the construction of each of the new stations. Octopus cards should have been adopted when we went away from the old tear strips.

Translink is stupid, they should have weighed the costs of removing the current system and reinstalling something different.



As for toll bridges. The more tolls throughout the city, the better.
We need to do everything we can do to put pressure on the cities to grow vertically. Having to commute from Langley to Downtown is just a waste of time. It's also a waste of environmental resources in everything from refining the petroleum, the pollution from the cars, even added wear on the tires.

I'm for anything that forces us become proper stewards of our environment.
And before any of you say that's too harsh, it's time our generation stepped up to bite the bullet or we are just as bad as all the ones that came before us.

FRAK!

FUCK YOU TRANSLINK

Raising taxes and tolling bridges is not the only way to balance your books (at least attempt to)
it's the hefty bonuses you hand out to execs who stand there and make non-educated decisions. (please see Peter Griffin taking a SAT test with the animal sound toy)
Also, trying to get people to ride transit does NOT immediately mean raising taxes and tolling bridges. How about re-thinking existing bus lanes such that they run through areas at need, and perhaps develop ACTUAL bus loops and not have 4 stops in a row BLOCKING TRAFFIC and call it a day (see No.3 Road Richmond Centre, Partially Dunbar... et al.)

You could start by getting rid of the carbon tax since it's compeltely bogus, yet yuppies like you "feel better" about paying a tax that you "think" is helping the enviroment.

Translink needs more advertising revenue. They need to stop making the stations look "unique" and "green" and start whoring themselves out to major corporations.


Does anybody have any objections to riding in a skytrain car that has wall to wall Coca-Cola ads? The benefits could mean reduced fares and new infrastructure. This is where the money should come from. :smug:

I agree with everything you said in your post, except that commuting is a waste of time. Commuting from Langley isn't a waste of time if you prefer the lifestyle in that area, but the lack of transit available makes it difficult or impossible to not use a vehicle, which is a waste of environmental resources. Translink needs to expand eastward and begin offering the necessary services to all areas, before they just work on improving existing infrastructure.

and $170,000,000 million for turnstiles, how is that even possible.. did they release a cost break down?

probably from the need of having 4 supervisors supervise one dude drilling holes or some shit like that.
oh, and who can forget the abundance of traffic flaggers! unions require so many redundancy checks it's more comprehensive than launching a fucking space shuttle.


get rid of redundancy personnel you ask?

:fuckthatshit: go on strike

This is a silly argument.

How about we raise taxes for people that use the health care system disproportionately? Like smokers who will develop lung cancer? Or alcoholics? Or the people who eat too much white bread and sugar and develop type-II diabetes?

why not just tax all the rich people instead... like all the mainlanders buying up all the damn houses...

I respectfully disagree. It makes sense for Translink to increase services where there is density because more people means greater use of transit services. I know this is a deeply unpopular statement, but ultimately if you choose to live in a low density neighbourhood, you should bear the costs of living in that neighbourhood.

$170 million includes the cost of implementing the smart card system that goes along with the fare gates. Technology ain't cheap; we won't be getting old style turnstiles where we buy tokens to get access. The smart card will be able to track usage across the system so Translink will be able to understand what areas need more services.

Sorry, I had a typo.

Should have read:
By the city, I mean Vancouver.
But by vertical growth, I mean less urban sprawl, more high rises like the ones that have popped up around Edmonds, Brentwood, Gilmore and Holdom.

I think you took it as to mean to commute out to Langley is a waste of time. Quite the opposite actually. I have nothing against you living in Langley.
I meant to say that living in Langley and commuting out to Downtown is a waste of time.

I totally agree with you on transit. But before that can happen, we need to push more jobs out of the downtown core, and into the other cities. Wouldn't you rather work in your own city than to drive across 3 to get to work?

you could and we do in some cases (like with the fat foods tax many countries are proposing/implementing even canada) but i wouldn't go any further than we are.

smokers do pay higher taxes (cigs are taxed heavily) alcohol is taxed and the govt controls/profits from it

i wouldnt go any further in that regard as i feel we're targeting it accordingly

But can't you see? THOSE Who USE those items/services are taxed more heavily (so what you proposed sarcastically is actually already in place)

What we're already doing in other facets of our economy should be used here as well but its like translinks targeting system is broken; with my argument coquitlam is the only one getting the evergreen line it would be easy to target coquitlam residents and those who will be using the transport

what translink is doing would be like the govt imposing another sales tax on goods to cover smokes (instead of simply raising taxes on smokes)



we already pay taxes towards translink in general like we do for healthcare for optional services/treatment we should target those who would be using it specifically like we do smokes/alcohol/cosmetic (we dont cover cosmetic surgeries) as we should do for things like the evergreen line and bridges (gondola lifts? sfu)

You guys need to stop focusing on what should have, could have been done. Bitching about how "we should have had an octopus system" is useless. PWC did an audit back in 2008, and found that the fare evasion only costs translink about $4-5 million a year. It would have cost us $170 million, plus $15 million a year to run a system similar to Octopus. That said - part of the fare evasion includes people hoping onto buses as well, which is not going to be stopped completely by having an octopus card.

Even with the sophisticated system that London has - I saw on a daily basis people jumping over turnstiles, people going in two at a time. Turnstiles won't stop all fare evaders.

And honestly, I'm happy to pay a few cents a litre if it means that it takes more drivers off the road.

Transit in Langley = waste of money. Don't underestimate just busy a route has to be in order for it to break even. We're not paying for Chinese drivers, Chinese buses, Chinese construction, and Chinese maintenance.

If you live out there, drive your car then park 'n ride.

Agree, I think smokes, and booze is taxed acceptably right now.
We've got plenty of non-smoking programs that have done wonders for our generation.


As for targeting just Coquitlam for the Evergreen line is not something I can agree with. Like StylinRed already said, Coquitlam citizens have already paid translink. It's not like only Richmond or Vancouver got hit with the Canada line. We all carried the burden.


My agenda here is to reward green and sustainable and to punish what isn't (obviously in a way that is feasible of course). Thus I think smokes, booze and cosmetic surgeries is fine. It doesn't really help anybody or solve anything. However, the Evergreen line definitely can help bring vertical growth right along the line.


We have to think of public transport as a shared system. Just because you don't live in Coquitlam doesn't mean the GVRD as a whole doesn't benefit. Even if you're only commuting from Burnaby to Downtown, with the Evergreen in place, there will be less cars in Burnaby and Vancouver.



If Translink was smart, they would build us some real freaking park and rides. :swear:
Who am I kidding? They are just going to continue sending our money down the drain.

Respectfully, I doubt either of you have ever spent a substantial amount of time in Langley, much less lived there. Your comments are based on assumption, not actual knowledge.

The density in the majority of Langley is equal to any other city in the GVRD outside of the DT core and continually growing, the demand for transit exists, is massive and only growing. The areas that are low density are farmland and acreage, on the outer cusps of Langley and relatively insignificant.