checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #76 Posted April 20, 2011 He didn't do anything with the B2 and B31. The B2 had weekend service eliminated, and the B31 had overnight service eliminated, as planned. I have the service reduction booklet from 2009 to prove it. As far as the B70 goes, I could believe that the MTA revised it on their own. It didn't really cost that much, and if you think about it, rerouting the B70 to serve Third Avenue actually makes a better grid system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak7 Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share #77 Posted April 20, 2011 Actually, the X1 comes close. If the frequency were reduced a little bit, it probably could break even (Of course, you might have some crushloaded buses, but it does show that it is possible). I know the X27 isn't going to come back (unless a politician can somehow manage to save it, but the cost wouldn't justify the restoration of the service like it did with the X37/X38), but I'm just saying that, if it came down to restoring one or the other, the X27 should be restored first. By the way, I just read that they only evaluate about 50% of the weekday schedules and 25% of the weekend schedules on the local bus every year. That doesn't seem to make sense to me: I think they should try to evaluate all local bus schedules to see where changes can be made. Wouldn't that mean that each route only has a chance to receive limited-stop service every 2 years, since that is how often they evaluate the schedules and make changes? Right, each route only has a chance for a major modernization every 2 years. When you consider that to be every other year, it doesn't seem that bad. But the x27/28 will never have the ridership of the x1. I, for one, know some people who used to take the x28 who no longer, they switched to the subway. He didn't do anything with the B2 and B31. I was going to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #78 Posted April 20, 2011 He didn't do anything with the B2 and B31. The B2 had weekend service eliminated, and the B31 had overnight service eliminated, as planned. I have the service reduction booklet from 2009 to prove it. As far as the B70 goes, I could believe that the MTA revised it on their own. It didn't really cost that much, and if you think about it, rerouting the B70 to serve Third Avenue actually makes a better grid system. If I recall correctly, the reductions were supposed to be worse than that and I do know that there was an outcry from Gerritsen Beach and Marine Park. He did try to get service re-routed... http://www.gerritsenbeach.net/2010/04/29/golden-to-try-and-save-overnight-b31/ But the x27/28 will never have the ridership of the x1. I, for one, know some people who used to take the x28 who no longer, they switched to the subway. That is such a insane comparison. The X1 takes up passengers from several express bus lines and also serves as a shuttle to get folks onto Staten Island. The X27/X28 run on their own and when you consider that they are right there with the X17 sitting 3rd and 4th respectively in terms of ridership numbers, that says something about how strong the ridership is in Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, Bath Beach and Bensonhurst. Middle class folks in Western Southern Brooklyn were robbed in every way possible by the and this is especially why I'm supporting them in getting their express buses back. They had the train lose express service in Manhattan. They lost weekend service on both the X27/X28. They lost the (B37) and had several other buses re-routed. Completely insane and unfair to target the middle class and then use their hard earned taxes to subsidize transportation for poorer neighbourhoods and give them nothing in return. It's ridiculous. So they have long commutes just like Staten Island and aren't supposed to have any rapid transit to get around?? That's basically what the is saying with the cuts that they implemented to the local buses, express buses and subways that folks in Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, etc. rely on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #79 Posted April 20, 2011 He tried, but he didn't succeed. Both reductions proceeded as planned. I'm through arguing with you regarding service in areas with different socioeconomic groups. You refuse to believe that poor and rich areas alike lost service, and refuse to believe that, especially in the outer boroughs, poorer areas tend to cover more of the costs through fares, and public transportation is supposed to be about what gives the public more value for their money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #80 Posted April 20, 2011 He tried, but he didn't succeed. Both reductions proceeded as planned. I'm through arguing with you regarding service in areas with different socioeconomic groups. You refuse to believe that poor and rich areas alike lost service, and refuse to believe that, especially in the outer boroughs, poorer areas tend to cover more of the costs through fares, and public transportation is supposed to be about what gives the public more value for their money. What I'm pointing out and what you don't want to acknowledge is that the middle class areas were hit harder. Name one poor neighbourhood that had all of their services reduced and/or axed like Bay Ridge? Now you're the first one to argue that trains carry more people, yet the goes and eliminates weekend express bus service and then turns around and makes the local in Manhattan, which is basically telling Bay Ridge folks that their commute doesn't matter. All of this service that you're talking about wouldn't be possible without the middle class. The poor couldn't subsidize the to have the service run to begin with and you know that and that's the big issue here, regardless of the farebox recovery. You can't take from one and give disproportionately to the other and give the one that is overwhelmingly subsidizing the system nothing in return when they're the ones subsidizing it. And let's face it. The poorer urban areas have far more transportation options than the suburban areas, so the cuts are felt harder in the suburbs. You admitted that more or less when you defended bus service for Long Island. Sometimes I don't understand you. Whether you want to accept it or not, you live in the suburbs buddy, yet you go along with those who would cut your service in a heartbeat in order to give more service to the urban areas, which already have numerous options. I've talked with other folks here in the suburbs about the (MTA)'s attitude towards suburban areas and they agree that the has disdain for the suburbs and that's why they treat us the way they do with such minimal service because they don't think we're equal to rest of the city. It's like yeah they're out there in the middle of nowhere so f*ck them. They don't need anything. It's this sort of thinking that explains my disdain for the overall and they don't have to say it. They say plenty with their actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #81 Posted April 20, 2011 What I'm pointing out and what you don't want to acknowledge is that the middle class areas were hit harder. Name one poor neighbourhood that had all of their services reduced and/or axed like Bay Ridge? Now you're the first one to argue that trains carry more people, yet the goes and eliminates weekend express bus service and then turns around and makes the local in Manhattan, which is basically telling Bay Ridge folks that their commute doesn't matter. All of this service that you're talking about wouldn't be possible without the middle class. The poor couldn't subsidize the to have the service run to begin with and you know that and that's the big issue here, regardless of the farebox recovery. You can't take from one and give disproportionately to the other and give the one that is overwhelmingly subsidizing the system nothing in return when they're the ones subsidizing it. And let's face it. The poorer urban areas have far more transportation options than the suburban areas, so the cuts are felt harder in the suburbs. You admitted that more or less when you defended bus service for Long Island. Sometimes I don't understand you. Whether you want to accept it or not, you live in the suburbs buddy, yet you go along with those who would cut your service in a heartbeat in order to give more service to the urban areas, which already have numerous options. I've talked with other folks here in the suburbs about the (MTA)'s attitude towards suburban areas and they agree that the has disdain for the suburbs and that's why they treat us the way they do with such minimal service because they don't think we're equal to rest of the city. It's like yeah they're out there in the middle of nowhere so f*ck them. They don't need anything. It's this sort of thinking that explains my disdain for the overall and they don't have to say it. They say plenty with their actions. Coney Island lost the B64 East NY lost the B12 (though that is the more middle class part of East NY) Bushwick lost the Q24 South Jamaica lost the Q89 Bedford Park lost the Bx34 on weekends The Third Avenue corridor in The Bronx lost the Bx55 on weekends Park Hill lost the S76 Note that there were supposed to be other eliminations in 2009 that were prevented that affected poor neighborhoods. Those would be the elimination of the B25, Q56, M10, and Bx4. As far as the going local, the important part is that it still travels via 4th Avenue Express and the Manhattan Bridge. The fact that it was made local means that riders only have to spend an extra 5 minutes (if even that much) stopping at the local stops. In any case, that is what was done when the Manhattan Bridge was being reconstructed. As far as poor areas getting better service, you have to consider that, if the MTA decided to just dismantle itself and let private companies pick and choose the routes they want (and just let the other routes disappear), the routes in the urban neighborhoods would do better (lets say urban instead of poor, since any urban area is going to have better transit service). In Peru, we have "combis" going down the streets, and which areas do you think the operators are fighting for? That's right: The urban areas. Do they have good service? It's frequent, but it definitely isn't safe. And when I look at the map, I see which routes should and shouldn't exist, based on ridership, not based on who rides it. If a person is wealthy, and transportation means that much to them, they should move to a more urban area. There are plenty of wealthy urban areas in NYC. Even a middle-class person shouldn't move to an area that will be hard to serve. Do I support people who would reduce my service to give more service to an urban area? Well, if the buses are better-used elsewhere, I'm all for it. You've seen me complain about excess buses going down Richmond Avenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #82 Posted April 20, 2011 Coney Island lost the B64East NY lost the B12 (though that is the more middle class part of East NY) Bushwick lost the Q24 South Jamaica lost the Q89 Bedford Park lost the Bx34 on weekends The Third Avenue corridor in The Bronx lost the Bx55 on weekends Park Hill lost the S76 Note that there were supposed to be other eliminations in 2009 that were prevented that affected poor neighborhoods. Those would be the elimination of the B25, Q56, M10, and Bx4. As far as the going local, the important part is that it still travels via 4th Avenue Express and the Manhattan Bridge. The fact that it was made local means that riders only have to spend an extra 5 minutes (if even that much) stopping at the local stops. In any case, that is what was done when the Manhattan Bridge was being reconstructed. As far as poor areas getting better service, you have to consider that, if the MTA decided to just dismantle itself and let private companies pick and choose the routes they want (and just let the other routes disappear), the routes in the urban neighborhoods would do better (lets say urban instead of poor, since any urban area is going to have better transit service). In Peru, we have "combis" going down the streets, and which areas do you think the operators are fighting for? That's right: The urban areas. Do they have good service? It's frequent, but it definitely isn't safe. And when I look at the map, I see which routes should and shouldn't exist, based on ridership, not based on who rides it. If a person is wealthy, and transportation means that much to them, they should move to a more urban area. There are plenty of wealthy urban areas in NYC. Even a middle-class person shouldn't move to an area that will be hard to serve. Do I support people who would reduce my service to give more service to an urban area? Well, if the buses are better-used elsewhere, I'm all for it. You've seen me complain about excess buses going down Richmond Avenue. LOL... Better you than me... The (B64) isn't really a Coney Island bus, but a Bath Beach bus that gave folks with few transportation options multiple connections with the subway at the Coney Island terminal, which they now don't have. Another terrible move by the IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #83 Posted April 20, 2011 And another thing: Most of those "suburban areas" still have decent service after the reductions. You complained that the S46 has better service than the S48, but the S48 still has good service. The same thing with Bay Ridge: They lost the B37 and X37/X38 (which need I remind you that they're getting back), but they're service is still good: They have a subway, and, for the most part, everybody is within walking distance of a frequent bus (and, if you notice, the frequent buses in those areas weren't touched) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 20, 2011 Share #84 Posted April 20, 2011 wait a minute... I'm gonna interject here for a second.... Coney Island lost the B64East NY lost the B12 (though that is the more middle class part of East NY) Bushwick lost the Q24 South Jamaica lost the Q89 Bedford Park lost the Bx34 on weekends The Third Avenue corridor in The Bronx lost the Bx55 on weekends Park Hill lost the S76 - as via said, the B64 was mainly used by Bath beach riders.... while people have shown their disapproval of the route no longer going to Stillwell av, that doesn't mean that the loss of the route towards Stillwell, greatly affected a significant # of CI riders... - ENY didn't suffer, or cry foul over the loss of the B12.... - (that part of) Bushwick, those ppl. seldom used the Q24... - Bedford Park aint poor... - There's still the Bx15 along 3rd av.... AFAIC, The only legitimate route you really have on this list (or the route you can make the strongest case for, regarding his question you're answering here), is the Q89.... -------- as for via, I don't agree w/ this whole thing about how the MTA is somehow catering (or didn't go as hard w/ the cuts) to us urban folks, while the suburbs have gotten screwed that much more.... That is what I'm gathering, and seems to be what you are implying, in this lil exchange b/w you & checkmate here... I mean, let's not forget the # of routes that have underwent span reductions, and weekday cuts all throughout the 5 boroughs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinePower Posted April 20, 2011 Share #85 Posted April 20, 2011 Meanwhile we get this... http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/mta-set-to-end-li-bus-lease-with-nassau-1.2827217 Transit advocates and union leaders have made a last-ditch effort to stop the MTA from ending its nearly 40-year working agreement with Nassau County, which plans to turn over Long Island Bus to a private operator. The board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is set to vote April 27 to discontinue its lease agreement with Nassau County for the operation of Long Island Bus, which is owned by Nassau but has been run by the MTA since 1973. Nassau this year paid $9.1 million to the MTA to operate the bus service. If approved, the contract between the county and the MTA would terminate at the end of this year. Nassau has said it will turn over its bus system to a private operator in January. There are currently three bus companies competing for the contract. In a letter to MTA chairman Jay Walder, representatives from organizations including the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and the Long Island Federation of Labor said a vote next week would be "premature." "In order to make an informed decision, MTA board members must know additional details about Nassau County's plan to privatize the system," the letter said. Opponents of the privatization effort have said bus service in Nassau will decline and fares could go up. Union officials fear a loss of jobs and salary cuts. The MTA needs to give 60 days notice before ending its agreement with Nassau. The MTA has said Nassau has not lived up to its obligation to properly fund its bus system. Nassau says the MTA does not run the system efficiently. "Nassau County has informed the MTA of its intention to privatize, so we must now take steps to help ensure the transition is as orderly as possible at the end of the year," MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin said Tuesday. Tri-State Transportation Campaign spokesman Ryan Lynch said the letter was sent with the belief "that there's still time to come to a solution that really puts bus riders first and is in the best interest for all parties." It really looks like the end for us. I wont deal with a crappy private operator. Maybe time to move to the city like so many LI'ers my age have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 20, 2011 Share #86 Posted April 20, 2011 Meanwhile we get this...http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/mta-set-to-end-li-bus-lease-with-nassau-1.2827217 Transit advocates and union leaders have made a last-ditch effort to stop the MTA from ending its nearly 40-year working agreement with Nassau County, which plans to turn over Long Island Bus to a private operator. The board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is set to vote April 27 to discontinue its lease agreement with Nassau County for the operation of Long Island Bus, which is owned by Nassau but has been run by the MTA since 1973. Nassau this year paid $9.1 million to the MTA to operate the bus service. If approved, the contract between the county and the MTA would terminate at the end of this year. Nassau has said it will turn over its bus system to a private operator in January. There are currently three bus companies competing for the contract. In a letter to MTA chairman Jay Walder, representatives from organizations including the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and the Long Island Federation of Labor said a vote next week would be "premature." "In order to make an informed decision, MTA board members must know additional details about Nassau County's plan to privatize the system," the letter said. Opponents of the privatization effort have said bus service in Nassau will decline and fares could go up. Union officials fear a loss of jobs and salary cuts. The MTA needs to give 60 days notice before ending its agreement with Nassau. The MTA has said Nassau has not lived up to its obligation to properly fund its bus system. Nassau says the MTA does not run the system efficiently. "Nassau County has informed the MTA of its intention to privatize, so we must now take steps to help ensure the transition is as orderly as possible at the end of the year," MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin said Tuesday. Tri-State Transportation Campaign spokesman Ryan Lynch said the letter was sent with the belief "that there's still time to come to a solution that really puts bus riders first and is in the best interest for all parties." It really looks like the end for us. I wont deal with a crappy private operator. Maybe time to move to the city like so many LI'ers my age have. *sigh* Hey Q43, to hell with Lucy... Johnny boy here's got some 'splainin to do.... - First you were raving over Suffolk Transit & how many leaps & bounds it's better over LIB.... Now you're over there dissin Suffolk transit (CBS Lines) in your recent clips.... - First you brought up, maybe it's time for some type of privatization in LI.... Now you're this big advocate against privatization.... - First you wanted to move to NJ, and complain about how LI has gone to shit.... meanwhile, shitting on NYC just about every chance you get.... then you have a change of heart, how LI is the only place for you, and how you can't see yourself living somewhere else, if it wasn't down in S. Jersey... Now you make that little remark about moving to the city.... I'll be damned if someone like you came here to the boroughs, shitting on our bus service the way you do Nassau & Suffolk.... Now THAT, I wont deal with !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #87 Posted April 20, 2011 And another thing: Most of those "suburban areas" still have decent service after the reductions. You complained that the S46 has better service than the S48, but the S48 still has good service. The same thing with Bay Ridge: They lost the B37 and X37/X38 (which need I remind you that they're getting back), but they're service is still good: They have a subway, and, for the most part, everybody is within walking distance of a frequent bus (and, if you notice, the frequent buses in those areas weren't touched) wait a minute...I'm gonna interject here for a second.... - as via said, the B64 was mainly used by Bath beach riders.... while people have shown their disapproval of the route no longer going to Stillwell av, that doesn't mean that the loss of the route towards Stillwell, greatly affected a significant # of CI riders... - ENY didn't suffer, or cry foul over the loss of the B12.... - (that part of) Bushwick, those ppl. seldom used the Q24... - Bedford Park aint poor... - There's still the Bx15 along 3rd av.... AFAIC, The only legitimate route you really have on this list (or the route you can make the strongest case for, regarding his question you're answering here), is the Q89.... -------- as for via, I don't agree w/ this whole thing about how the MTA is somehow catering (or didn't go as hard w/ the cuts) to us urban folks, while the suburbs have gotten screwed that much more.... That is what I'm gathering, and seems to be what you are implying, in this lil exchange b/w you & checkmate here... I mean, let's not forget the # of routes that have underwent span reductions, and weekday cuts all throughout the 5 boroughs.... On one hand checkmate argues that the suburbs will have anemic service because the demand for service is lower, but yet he says that service is still good overall. Based on what?? If service is anemic already then clearly there isn't much to cut to begin with, so to make the argument that the suburbs weren't hit that hard when some areas have little to no service is rather ironic. The urban areas have alternatives, where as in many cases the suburban areas are left with nothing when service is cut. You keep harping on how great service is on Staten Island overall and aside from the buses like the (S48), (S46), (S53), (S79), service really isn't all that great. Even the (S62) has pretty sh*tty service. You also refuse to factor in the fact that on many of these lines with so called "great service", many of the buses are no shows and/or late if they do come, so while on paper the service may be as frequent as every 15-20 minutes, the bus that doesn't show means really a 30 - 40 minute wait, with no alternative in some cases. Given the fact that most of Staten Island is on hills, the service isn't really that great. A line like the (S54) spends a decent amount of time on hills, so without it, that means folks will either have to walk long distances up hill or pay to take car service or use a car. On the North Shore, you have basically no North-South local bus service on weekends going from after Broadway all the way until Decker Avenue. And let's not even talk about the South Shore. You yourself even pointed out that many Staten Island lines have had the same exact schedule for several years now, which doesn't vote well for your argument that service is so good, esp. considering that Staten Island has had the largest population growth in the last few years. ^^ What am I supposedly contradicting..... I included your post simply because you argued that the is dulling out the pain equally between the suburban areas and the urban areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 20, 2011 Share #88 Posted April 20, 2011 ^^ What am I supposedly contradicting..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinePower Posted April 20, 2011 Share #89 Posted April 20, 2011 *sigh* Hey Q43, to hell with Lucy... Johnny boy here's got some 'splainin to do.... - First you were raving over Suffolk Transit & how many leaps & bounds it's better over LIB.... Now you're over there dissin Suffolk transit (CBS Lines) in your recent clips.... - First you brought up, maybe it's time for some type of privatization in LI.... Now you're this big advocate against privatization.... - First you wanted to move to NJ, and complain about how LI has gone to shit.... meanwhile, shitting on NYC just about every chance you get.... then you have a change of heart, how LI is the only place for you, and how you can't see yourself living somewhere else, if it wasn't down in S. Jersey... Now you make that little remark about moving to the city.... I'll be damned if someone like you came here to the boroughs, shitting on our bus service the way you do Nassau & Suffolk.... Now THAT, I wont deal with !! Never supported Privatization, I have supporting formaing a Long Island Transportation Authority, which would be LI's version of the MTA. Suffolk Transit style service would be a disaster in Nassau, period. How about we put private operators in charge of S.I. Bus service? And you can wait an hour for a bus that may or may not come to go to S.I. Mall. Because Staten Island is just like Nassau, in so many ways. I dont hate NYC, all I'm saying is if such an idea were proposed in NYC it'd be killed, but on LI its "OK" because "no one takes the bus". People in NYC have it very good with transit. Here on LI it's obvious you are worthless if you dont own a car.:tdown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilbluefoxie Posted April 20, 2011 Share #90 Posted April 20, 2011 what about the subway and LIRR? cant they get some restorations too, whys it just the buses getting all the love here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 20, 2011 Share #91 Posted April 20, 2011 Never supported Privatization, I have supporting formaing a Long Island Transportation Authority, which would be LI's version of the MTA.Suffolk Transit style service would be a disaster in Nassau, period. How about we put private operators in charge of S.I. Bus service? And you can wait an hour for a bus that may or may not come to go to S.I. Mall. Because Staten Island is just like Nassau, in so many ways. I dont hate NYC, all I'm saying is if such an idea were proposed in NYC it'd be killed, but on LI its "OK" because "no one takes the bus". People in NYC have it very good with transit. Here on LI it's obvious you are worthless if you dont own a car.:tdown: You're preaching to the choir with this... I am not defending the crummy service in Nassau County.... ...and envy is a form of hate - which you've clearly illustrated w/ that remark about putting private operators in Staten Island... who are already dealing w/ subpar bus service the MTA's providing them, compared to the rest of the city... Don't try to turn this into a Staten Island vs Long Island thing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #92 Posted April 20, 2011 wait a minute...I'm gonna interject here for a second.... - as via said, the B64 was mainly used by Bath beach riders.... while people have shown their disapproval of the route no longer going to Stillwell av, that doesn't mean that the loss of the route towards Stillwell, greatly affected a significant # of CI riders... - ENY didn't suffer, or cry foul over the loss of the B12.... - (that part of) Bushwick, those ppl. seldom used the Q24... - Bedford Park aint poor... - There's still the Bx15 along 3rd av.... AFAIC, The only legitimate route you really have on this list (or the route you can make the strongest case for, regarding his question you're answering here), is the Q89.... -------- as for via, I don't agree w/ this whole thing about how the MTA is somehow catering (or didn't go as hard w/ the cuts) to us urban folks, while the suburbs have gotten screwed that much more.... That is what I'm gathering, and seems to be what you are implying, in this lil exchange b/w you & checkmate here... I mean, let's not forget the # of routes that have underwent span reductions, and weekday cuts all throughout the 5 boroughs.... -The B12 and Q24 had a decent number of riders in that area. The B12 and Q24 (at least according to the MTA's stats) got 3,000 riders on their discontinued sections. By comparison, the B37 got 3,000 riders along the whole route. -Bedford Park is poor compared to the rest of the city. It isn't as poor as neighborhoods further south, but at best, you could consider it lower-middle class (the same for Fordham and Norwood, which are served by the Bx34). See these sites: http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Fordham-Bronx-NY.html http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Bedford-Park-Bronx-NY.html http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Norwood-Bronx-NY.html -Even if Third Avenue still has the Bx15, the point is that they lost a significant number of buses in the corridor. On one hand checkmate argues that the suburbs will have anemic service because the demand for service is lower, but yet he says that service is still good overall. Based on what?? If service is anemic already then clearly there isn't much to cut to begin with, so to make the argument that the suburbs weren't hit that hard when some areas have little to no service is rather ironic. The urban areas have alternatives, where as in many cases the suburban areas are left with nothing when service is cut. You keep harping on how great service is on Staten Island overall and aside from the buses like the (S48), (S46), (S53), (S79), service really isn't all that great. Even the (S62) has pretty sh*tty service. You also refuse to factor in the fact that on many of these lines with so called "great service", many of the buses are no shows and/or late if they do come, so while on paper the service may be as frequent as every 15-20 minutes, the bus that doesn't show means really a 30 - 40 minute wait, with no alternative in some cases. Given the fact that most of Staten Island is on hills, the service isn't really that great. A line like the (S54) spends a decent amount of time on hills, so without it, that means folks will either have to walk long distances up hill or pay to take car service or use a car. On the North Shore, you have basically no North-South local bus service on weekends going from after Broadway all the way until Decker Avenue. And let's not even talk about the South Shore. You yourself even pointed out that many Staten Island lines have had the same exact schedule for several years now, which doesn't vote well for your argument that service is so good, esp. considering that Staten Island has had the largest population growth in the last few years. Good based on the demand for it. We don't have as many overcrowded buses as the other boroughs. As far as the schedule increases go, you have to consider that Staten Island was even more suburban years ago, so a lot of the growth was able to be absorbed by the capacity in the system. Before, we had more "coverage" routes: We ran them just to provide an area with basic service, but the buses were never filled. Now, ridership is increasing, but on most routes, you're not seeing overcrowded buses as a result. As far as getting what you pay for in taxes: You have to consider what the purpose of taxes are. The purpose of taxes is to benefit the public overall Take public schools as an example: We provide public schools (with free lunch and transportation) to students in the hope that, by making education available, it will benefit society (overall) later on. The millionaire sending his kids to private school doesn't benefit, but the public overall benefits by having well-educated kids to fill jobs to benefit society. The same thing with transportation: Everybody pays taxes to ensure that everybody is mobile, and that boosts our economy, helps our environment, etc. You may have some people who are overcontributing, but society as a whole benefits by having buses running to meet demand (which is generally greater in urban areas than suburban areas), regardless of the areas that they run through. If we followed your logic that wealthy areas should get more service, we'd have overcrowded buses in poor neighborhoods, and excess buses in wealthy neighborhoods, and that wouldn't benefit society as a whole. Basically, somebody is always going to get the short end of the stick as far as paying extra for services they don't use, whether it is for public transportation, schools, welfare, police/fire/sanitation services, etc, but the point is that that money benefits the public overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #93 Posted April 20, 2011 You're preaching to the choir with this... I am not defending the crummy service in Nassau County.... ...and envy is a form of hate - which you've clearly illustrated w/ that remark about putting private operators in Staten Island... who are already dealing w/ subpar bus service the MTA's providing them, compared to the rest of the city... Don't try to turn this into a Staten Island vs Long Island thing.... Plus, he's forgetting one thing about Staten Island vs. Nassau: Staten Island's transit is partially subsidized by the tolls paid on the Verrazanno-Narrows Bridge. Nassau has no comparable source of revenue to cross-subsidize its transportation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinePower Posted April 20, 2011 Share #94 Posted April 20, 2011 what about the subway and LIRR? cant they get some restorations too, whys it just the buses getting all the love here? They should restore half-hourly service to the PW Branch off-peak. Since the cuts trains have been jam packed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinePower Posted April 20, 2011 Share #95 Posted April 20, 2011 Plus, he's forgetting one thing about Staten Island vs. Nassau: Staten Island's transit is partially subsidized by the tolls paid on the Verrazanno-Narrows Bridge. Nassau has no comparable source of revenue to cross-subsidize its transportation. Unfortunately Mangano refuses to create such a source of revenue. Something is seriously wrong that one county executive can dismantle years of work. Perhaps LI Bus should be purchased by the state and a tax collected by the state charged to Nassau residents for it's operation. Mangano wont have a say in the matter..period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinePower Posted April 20, 2011 Share #96 Posted April 20, 2011 You're preaching to the choir with this... I am not defending the crummy service in Nassau County.... ...and envy is a form of hate - which you've clearly illustrated w/ that remark about putting private operators in Staten Island... who are already dealing w/ subpar bus service the MTA's providing them, compared to the rest of the city... Don't try to turn this into a Staten Island vs Long Island thing.... All I'm saying is Staten Island is similar to Nassau in terms of population density and layout, and yet with the exception of a lack of a direct rail connection to Manhattan, the borough has better bus service compared to Nassau. So why should Nassau suffer with worsening service? The real thing that may need to happen, long term, is for Nassau to join NYC as the 6th borough, but Mangano and the backwards yokels that go to the polls in Nassau wont go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #97 Posted April 20, 2011 All I'm saying is Staten Island is similar to Nassau in terms of population density and layout, and yet with the exception of a lack of a direct rail connection to Manhattan, the borough has better bus service compared to Nassau.So why should Nassau suffer with worsening service? The real thing that may need to happen, long term, is for Nassau to join NYC as the 6th borough, but Mangano and the backwards yokels that go to the polls in Nassau wont go for it. There is better service in Staten Island because we aren't as anti-transit as Nassau is, and buses have a larger presence here than in Nassau. Transit service might be a factor when considering a move to the South Shore, but it isn't on the minds of people who decide to move to eastern Long Island. For example, look at the ridership of routes like the N73/N74, and N80/N81. A comparable part of Staten Island would be the South Shore, yet although ridership on the South Shore is low, it isn't as low as in those parts of Nassau. Part of it may be because students don't have school buses, like they do in Nassau, but it shows you the more pro-transit additude of the people and elected officials in Staten Island that they want students to use the existing transportation infrastructure. On a side note, Staten Island has slightly over twice the population density of Nassau County. That may be because Nassau County has more wide open areas, and areas with large mansions (areas that would be comparable to Todt Hill). For the purposes of bus service, you're right: Staten Island's density isn't much more than Nassau's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilbluefoxie Posted April 20, 2011 Share #98 Posted April 20, 2011 They should restore half-hourly service to the PW Branch off-peak. Since the cuts trains have been jam packed up. yea really, I dont know why they killed that off considering the Port Washington branch does have high ridership even on weekends. I'm also still an advocate for weekend west hempstead service or even just on saturdays, and improved East End service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilbluefoxie Posted April 20, 2011 Share #99 Posted April 20, 2011 All I'm saying is Staten Island is similar to Nassau in terms of population density and layout, and yet with the exception of a lack of a direct rail connection to Manhattan, the borough has better bus service compared to Nassau.So why should Nassau suffer with worsening service? The real thing that may need to happen, long term, is for Nassau to join NYC as the 6th borough, but Mangano and the backwards yokels that go to the polls in Nassau wont go for it. Nassau county was created because we didn't want to be part of New York city when Queens County was being annexed. There is no benefit to having Nassau County being part of New York city, the characteristic of nassau county is much much different than Queens. Suburban bus service is never going to match that of Urban bus service, they can increase headways but its a waste of money to have buses parading down the county with noone in them or a bus with 40 seats and only 1-2 people in them. Staten Island isn't as suburban as Nassau is, its comparable to Eastern Queens at best. and what exactly are you proposing as far as a source of revenue like the Verrazano bridge? the county exec can't put tolls on the highways they aren't under his jurisdiction, the LIE and the parkways are owned by the State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 20, 2011 Share #100 Posted April 20, 2011 Basically, somebody is always going to get the short end of the stick as far as paying extra for services they don't use, whether it is for public transportation, schools, welfare, police/fire/sanitation services, etc, but the point is that that money benefits the public overall. Okay, that's all I wanted you to admit... And that is exactly my point... For the few crumbs that the more affluent suburban areas get, we have every right to fight to get our express bus service back, as well as local service that may have been lost, considering what we forfeit by way of the taxes we pay to contribute to the "overall good of the system" as you put it, so my support of Bay Ridge as I've noted would benefit me, but I'm also supporting them because I am tired of my tax dollars benefiting the "overall good of the system" while the urban areas get the majority of the service and folks complain about express bus service being a waste, but it is okay for us middle class folks to sink our tax dollars into providing transportation for others who contribute far less. It is a form of overtaxation to say the least. I would be interested in seeing how much taxes is given to the per neighbourhood in each borough in comparison to the level of service given. That would be some very interesting stats to analyze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.