Mayor aboard subway to NJ: Supports No. 7 extension to Secaucus

[IntExp]

Well ... what can I say B35? Thanks for illustrating my point? Your argument, or what there is of it, is a perfect example of what is both petty AND provincial about all of the opposition to the running under the Hudson.

 

First of all, they are two different commutes. One is East to West, the other West to East. What that means is that they have zero effect on overcrowding. Even at times other than morning and evening rush hours, they have no impact whatsoever. What you're suggesting is the equivalent of Brooklyn train riders complaining about the fact that after it drops them off in Manhattan, the train goes on to the Bronx. Who cares? What's the difference? If overcrowding were really your concern, then you wouldn't want the going further East, because then it would be already full when you got on it in the morning, and more commuters would be jamming it up at night. And as for "arriving later", it's the same nonsense. When it arrives is a scheduling issue, and has nothing to do with the train going to New Jersey.

 

And how does it help folks in Queens? Well, for one thing, if they happen to be flying into or out of Newark Airport it's a FANTASTIC improvement. And are you suggesting that there are no Jets or Giants fans out in Queens who would benefit enormously by getting to and from Secaucus both faster and cheaper? Have you even thought this through at all?

 

No my friend, the fact is that EVERYONE benefits - win-win-win-win - because the people in New Jersey are going to commute into New York City whether you like it or not. They work here, they pay taxes here, they shop here, they spend a ton of money on restaurants, clubs, bars, plays, musicals, museums and other cultural events here, and making it easier, cheaper and cleaner for them to get here DOES benefit the people of Queens.

 

The right questions to ask are: Will there be less auto traffic in the city because less Jersey commuters decided to jam the streets, tunnels and bridges? Yes. Will there be less fossil fuel consumption and air pollution? Yes. Will the MTA run more profitably by running full-fare trains for the two or three extra stops in the other direction? Most decidedly Yes.

 

As regards the fact that it's called the "New York City Subway" system, it will not cease to be that by running a train to Lautenberg Station. In fact, if anything, the MTA should subsume the entire PATH System, annex that to the SIR, and run the whole thing as an FRA division. Here again, after the planned resumption of service on the North Branch of the SIR, the shortest distance - in time, in money, in infrastructure - to connecting Staten Island to the city via subway, is to run it through New Jersey.

 

That's why the fifth borough has never been connected by subway - MONEY !!! Well, subsuming the PATH into the MTA could connect Staten Island to the rest of the boroughs for BILLIONS OF DOLLARS LESS than running two tunnels across the Narrows. AND it could be done in less than a decade, instead of waiting another two generations.

 

We cannot afford petty and provincial thinking. It's just too expensive, in both time and money, to think in those severely limiting ways. It's time to think outside the box ...

 

... or in this case, outside the State.

 

Have you seem some of the stations of , most of which which are falling apart? :mad: How about when Hudson Yards develops, eh? What about all those people who get on on 42nd Street to go to Queens, eh? TSQ & GCT and are crowded enough already, they sure as hell can't take 250,000 more customers per day- it'll just crush those stations, and the . B35 takes it on this one. Bloomberg ain't the mayor of Secaucus- he's the mayor of NYC, and he should be looking to extend subway service HERE, not NJ. We need to finish out the Archer Ave extension, or better yet, how about the extend the the right way, toward NE Queens, where it terminates abruptly at Main Street-Flushing, where 18,630,490 use the station, making it the 10th busiest, mostly from people transferring from crushloaded buses to get to the line, eh? How about extend it the right way, toward NE Queens, where he is the mayor, not to NJ.

[CenSin]

Well ... what can I say B35? Thanks for illustrating my point? Your argument, or what there is of it, is a perfect example of what is both petty AND provincial about all of the opposition to the running under the Hudson.

 

First of all, they are two different commutes. One is East to West, the other West to East. What that means is that they have zero effect on overcrowding. Even at times other than morning and evening rush hours, they have no impact whatsoever. What you're suggesting is the equivalent of Brooklyn train riders complaining about the fact that after it drops them off in Manhattan, the train goes on to the Bronx. Who cares? What's the difference? If overcrowding were really your concern, then you wouldn't want the going further East, because then it would be already full when you got on it in the morning, and more commuters would be jamming it up at night. And as for "arriving later", it's the same nonsense. When it arrives is a scheduling issue, and has nothing to do with the train going to New Jersey.

 

And how does it help folks in Queens? Well, for one thing, if they happen to be flying into or out of Newark Airport it's a FANTASTIC improvement. And are you suggesting that there are no Jets or Giants fans out in Queens who would benefit enormously by getting to and from Secaucus both faster and cheaper? Have you even thought this through at all?

 

No my friend, the fact is that EVERYONE benefits - win-win-win-win - because the people in New Jersey are going to commute into New York City whether you like it or not. They work here, they pay taxes here, they shop here, they spend a ton of money on restaurants, clubs, bars, plays, musicals, museums and other cultural events here, and making it easier, cheaper and cleaner for them to get here DOES benefit the people of Queens.

 

The right questions to ask are: Will there be less auto traffic in the city because less Jersey commuters decided to jam the streets, tunnels and bridges? Yes. Will there be less fossil fuel consumption and air pollution? Yes. Will the MTA run more profitably by running full-fare trains for the two or three extra stops in the other direction? Most decidedly Yes.

 

As regards the fact that it's called the "New York City Subway" system, it will not cease to be that by running a train to Lautenberg Station. In fact, if anything, the MTA should subsume the entire PATH System, annex that to the SIR, and run the whole thing as an FRA division. Here again, after the planned resumption of service on the North Branch of the SIR, the shortest distance - in time, in money, in infrastructure - to connecting Staten Island to the city via subway, is to run it through New Jersey.

 

That's why the fifth borough has never been connected by subway - MONEY !!! Well, subsuming the PATH into the MTA could connect Staten Island to the rest of the boroughs for BILLIONS OF DOLLARS LESS than running two tunnels across the Narrows. AND it could be done in less than a decade, instead of waiting another two generations.

 

We cannot afford petty and provincial thinking. It's just too expensive, in both time and money, to think in those severely limiting ways. It's time to think outside the box ...

 

... or in this case, outside the State.

Let's not build half-assed lines everywhere. We can barely complete a project such as the Second Avenue Subway and you want to advocate extending a single line out to New Jersey? Let's fix the problems at hand before we create more problems for ourselves. If anything needs to be extended, it's the Second Avenue line (to the Bronx), Flushing line (northeast), or Astoria line (to the LaGuardia Airport) to better serve the travel patterns of the masses.

[Santa Fe via Willow]

1) But they're receiving Student MetroCards. Therefore, they have transportation to school. The fact that it takes a long time is a call for more direct bus service on the South Shore (at least during school times), not for school buses.

 

And I bet now that you realize that people in Arlington had their school bus service taken away, you don't care about the school busees either.

 

2) I was jumping for joy at the beginning of the year when my classes had 36 or 37 students (and were legally overcrowded). In fact my music class has around 38 students but they made an exception because it's band (the teacher said she usually has around 50)

 

Besides, you know how I love crowds. I was jumping for joy Tuesday afternoon when the S44 had a bunch of kids crammed in the back of the bus, and also this Friday when there were actually people standing in the back on the S96 (usually the driver just flags everybody, but it was a different driver today. :tup: )

 

34 students isn't overcrowded because the state says it isn't overcrowded. Period and end of story.

 

And believe me, at my school they're really strict about people getting put into the correct classes. Some of the classes have an AP version, so you might get forced out of AP and placed into Honors, but you're not going to get forced out of Honors and put into a regular class.

 

3) I never denied that but whatever...

 

4) Yeah, and what exactly are they teaching me? This isn't kindergarden when they teach you things like sharing and getting along with others in addition to whatever math and reading skills they show you.

 

As far as sleeping goes, that's why I pick a corner seat. Not only is it (generally) out of view of the teacher, but it saves the prime seats for the people who need them.

 

And yeah, the teacher has called me out. Didn't phase me one bit. I always joke around with my friends afterwards. Hell, my teacher has even joked around with me afterwards (the class where I did it most was Biology/Chemistry, both with the same teacher).

 

As far as your last comment, you just love to misinterpret everything I say. I don't sleep in all classes, just the ones where I know all of the material. I never slept in a History class because all 3 teachers (3 years) made it interesting. Plus, I like history but don't have the full understanding that I have of my math and science classes.

 

So if you take out the classes I sleep in, you still have classes that I'm still using my Student MetroCard for. (And I'm not sleeping out of disrespect. I'm sleeping because I don't get enough sleep at home)

 

Plus, you're not paying for me to take a class (and sleep in it). You're paying for me to meet the requirements for a high school diploma (which are supposedly enough to make me well-rounded). The fact that the taxpayers choose to do it the expensive way (by having me sit in a class) instead of the cheap way (by having me test out of the class) is what you should be protesting, not the fact that I have a Student MetroCard.

 

And just so you can't misinterpret what I'm saying, I'm only referring to the classes where I have a full understanding of the subject on my own (no teacher's assistance)

 

 

 

There's probably some mandate that it has to be used for a NY-NJ connection, so the West Shore Light Rail would be a better use of this money (since it would go right back to the federal government otherwise)

 

That would work:tup: Better to invest in SI rails, whether North Shore SIR or West Shore Lightrail, than execute this Secaucus 7 extension.

[nyland8]

IntExp ... None of what you're ranting about makes any sense whatsoever, and none of it applies. Whatever stations might be built in New Jersey are new, the station at the Javitts will be brand new, there's nothing wrong with any of the stations in Manhattan (I've been to all of them) and the ones out in Queens are not affected by any of this - at all. And what about the development at the yards? That's going to happen in time, no matter if the train goes to Jersey or not. And going to New Jersey has no impact on it whatsoever!

 

As for TSQ and GST - WTF? The people who are going there now will be the same people who'll be headed there after the goes to Secaucus. Nothing changes. And what about the people who get on at 42nd Street and go to Queens? How does that change if the doesn't go to Secaucus? Answer: It doesn't. Not at all. And anybody who's already coming from New Jersey to take the out to Queens will just be getting on the same train - only two stations sooner than 42nd Street ... which is where they get on now !!!

 

Crushing stations ?!?!? LMAO ... what on Earth are you talking about? Even if the DID bring in 250,000 riders a day - and it won't, because that's the TOTAL projected to come off NJTransit, INCLUDING the bulk of them that will continue to come into Penn Station - then it still wouldn't matter. Because the overwhelming number of commuters - upwards of 98% - are just going to redistribute themselves across the Manhattan trunk lines anyway - which they already DO !!

 

And where Bloomberg is the mayor of is the biggest non-sequitor of all. I couldn't help but notice that you didn't suggest extending the train to Staten Island. They're still the red-headed step-child of the boroughs when it comes to subway connections, and you know, Bloomberg is the mayor there, too. But he could be the mayor of Tokyo for all that it matters in this instance, because it's not an either/or situation. If the doesn't go to Lautenberg Station, it doesn't mean you get what you want instead - get it?

 

The fact that there are two-dozen reasonable, desirable and much needed expansions throughout the subway system that should become future MTA Capitol expenditure projects has nothing to do with the current reality - which is that there is federal money available, New Jersey money available, and two TBM's already in the process of expanding the system - which just happen to be on the threshold of digging under the river. That convergence of events - that opportunity - may not come again in our lifetimes. And for the taxpayers, ratepayers and toll-payers of the region, not to mention the people who breathe the air, that actually IS a win-win-win-win situation.

 

Nope ... I'm afraid that B25 doesn't "take this one" ... and you certainly don't. There's nothing more provincial than resenting the fact that some people in New Jersey may benefit from this - they'd be funding their share - and there's nothing more petty than saying "If I can't get what I want out of the MTA, then nobody else should get anything either" ... and that's in effect what you're saying. If everybody thought as you do, then the SAS would stop again, the expansion would be stillborn, and the ESA would be left for yet another generation to finish.

 

Sure, we ALL have our pet projects that we'd love to see put on the front burner. I live in West Harlem and would love to see the "T" train - the SAS - cut right across 125th Street all the way to the Hudson. There are no cross-town trains north of Central Park, so people who come down the & lines have to go all the way to Midtown to get up the East Side. But the fact that I can identify system limitations, and the fact that I might have a vested interest in certain expansions over others doesn't render me incapable of seeing where golden opportunities arise and voicing my support.

 

Extending the over to Secaucus is brilliant. It serves the region AND it serves New York City. In every way it is a win-win-win-win ... for both States.

[nyland8]

Let's not build half-assed lines everywhere. We can barely complete a project such as the Second Avenue Subway and you want to advocate extending a single line out to New Jersey? Let's fix the problems at hand before we create more problems for ourselves. If anything needs to be extended, it's the Second Avenue line (to the Bronx), Flushing line (northeast), or Astoria line (to the LaGuardia Airport) to better serve the travel patterns of the masses.

First of all, it is not in the least "half-assed". Quite the contrary, it's a connection to what is already a major regional hub. It DOES serve the travel pattern of the masses.

 

Secondly, it's not a question of either/or. Whatever you're suggesting might be a worthy thing to do, but it isn't going to get done in lieu of this project. I, too, am in favor of extending the Astoria Line to La Guardia. I think it's a great idea - and long overdue. But stopping the to Lautenberg will not make that happen.

[IntExp]

IntExp ... None of what you're ranting about makes any sense whatsoever, and none of it applies. Whatever stations might be built in New Jersey are new, the station at the Javitts will be brand new, there's nothing wrong with any of the stations in Manhattan (I've been to all of them) and the ones out in Queens are not affected by any of this - at all. And what about the development at the yards? That's going to happen in time, no matter if the train goes to Jersey or not. And going to New Jersey has no impact on it whatsoever!

 

As for TSQ and GST - WTF? The people who are going there now will be the same people who'll be headed there after the goes to Secaucus. Nothing changes. And what about the people who get on at 42nd Street and go to Queens? How does that change if the doesn't go to Secaucus? Answer: It doesn't. Not at all. And anybody who's already coming from New Jersey to take the out to Queens will just be getting on the same train - only two stations sooner than 42nd Street ... which is where they get on now !!!

 

Crushing stations ?!?!? LMAO ... what on Earth are you talking about? Even if the DID bring in 250,000 riders a day - and it won't, because that's the TOTAL projected to come off NJTransit, INCLUDING the bulk of them that will continue to come into Penn Station - then it still wouldn't matter. Because the overwhelming number of commuters - upwards of 98% - are just going to redistribute themselves across the Manhattan trunk lines anyway - which they already DO !!

 

And where Bloomberg is the mayor of is the biggest non-sequitor of all. I couldn't help but notice that you didn't suggest extending the train to Staten Island. They're still the red-headed step-child of the boroughs when it comes to subway connections, and you know, Bloomberg is the mayor there, too. But he could be the mayor of Tokyo for all that it matters in this instance, because it's not an either/or situation. If the doesn't go to Lautenberg Station, it doesn't mean you get what you want instead - get it?

 

The fact that there are two-dozen reasonable, desirable and much needed expansions throughout the subway system that should become future MTA Capitol expenditure projects has nothing to do with the current reality - which is that there is federal money available, New Jersey money available, and two TBM's already in the process of expanding the system - which just happen to be on the threshold of digging under the river. That convergence of events - that opportunity - may not come again in our lifetimes. And for the taxpayers, ratepayers and toll-payers of the region, not to mention the people who breathe the air, that actually IS a win-win-win-win situation.

 

Nope ... I'm afraid that B25 doesn't "take this one" ... and you certainly don't. There's nothing more provincial than resenting the fact that some people in New Jersey may benefit from this - they'd be funding their share - and there's nothing more petty than saying "If I can't get what I want out of the MTA, then nobody else should get anything either" ... and that's in effect what you're saying. If everybody thought as you do, then the SAS would stop again, the expansion would be stillborn, and the ESA would be left for yet another generation to finish.

 

Sure, we ALL have our pet projects that we'd love to see put on the front burner. I live in West Harlem and would love to see the "T" train - the SAS - cut right across 125th Street all the way to the Hudson. There are no cross-town trains north of Central Park, so people who come down the & lines have to go all the way to Midtown to get up the East Side. But the fact that I can identify system limitations, and the fact that I might have a vested interest in certain expansions over others doesn't render me incapable of seeing where golden opportunities arise and voicing my support.

 

Extending the over to Secaucus is brilliant. It serves the region AND it serves New York City. In every way it is a win-win-win-win ... for both States.

 

The part in which you accuse me that I would halt ESA & SAS is BS. Why would I stop them? SAS Actually serves the city, and would provide a benefit to the residents here, and if it is completed fully with outerborough connections, even better- and second, for SI, well, Light Rail, along w/ a connection proposed w/ Triboro RX, which was proposed by the MTA a couple of years ago- where is the Mayor's support for that, eh, if that is a grand expansion that would serve the city and improve it- or if you want another subway connection, you could the extend the as well. Second, I'm not referring to the statins in Manhattan- I'm referring to the stations out there in Queens, most of which are falling apart. Will YOU provide better service for them, better trains and a better commute for Queens residents, as is the job of the Mayor of NYC, to improve the quality of life here in NYC, not in NJ? Is Bloomie doing that? NO! Improve the service here in NYC first, where we barely have it running normally! Oh, and the two TBM's? In case you didn't notice, one is under Second Ave, and the MTA plans to leave it there and seal it off, and the other one is deep under Park Ave, and the MTA also plans to that off as well- no where near the Hudson. The TBM's planned for use for ARC? Well, they are aren't there anymore. Where's that station @ 41st & 10th, which is being left out of the current extension, huh, leaving a gaping hole in it? And will you speak to angry NE Queens commuters, who are seething @ this b/c he won't provide better service here, yet wants to provide better service for NJ residents? Sounds like a loss for Queens residents, who do use the line everyday. NJ has money available? WHat? You're joking! :eek: Doesn't it claim that has zero money averrable- exactly the reason it canceled ARC? I'm not saying if that I can't have it, NJ, can't have it. No. All I'm asking is that they can better use the $10 Billion they want to waste on this on improving service here in NYC, before embarking on this fruitless extension right now. Then, after NYC is fully connected,, then we could talk about a extending a line to NJ. Not while stations are falling part in Queens. Not while we are barely able to run service properly. Not while are slashing service left and right. And what does extending the to NJ have to do with extending the to LGA? Nothing at all.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

IntExp ... None of what you're ranting about makes any sense whatsoever, and none of it applies. Whatever stations might be built in New Jersey are new, the station at the Javitts will be brand new, there's nothing wrong with any of the stations in Manhattan (I've been to all of them) and the ones out in Queens are not affected by any of this - at all. And what about the development at the yards? That's going to happen in time, no matter if the train goes to Jersey or not. And going to New Jersey has no impact on it whatsoever!

 

As for TSQ and GST - WTF? The people who are going there now will be the same people who'll be headed there after the goes to Secaucus. Nothing changes. And what about the people who get on at 42nd Street and go to Queens? How does that change if the doesn't go to Secaucus? Answer: It doesn't. Not at all. And anybody who's already coming from New Jersey to take the out to Queens will just be getting on the same train - only two stations sooner than 42nd Street ... which is where they get on now !!!

 

Yes it does. It absolutely does impact Queens commuters. It gives them much more crowded platforms to wait on at TSQ, 5th Ave and GC, especially if there's a Mets game, a U.S. Open tennis match, or even a minor train delay. And you know there will be delays. So please don't tell me, a person who rides that train every weekday, that extending it to Secaucus will have absolutely no effect on the commute of current riders to and from Queens.

 

And where Bloomberg is the mayor of is the biggest non-sequitor of all. I couldn't help but notice that you didn't suggest extending the train to Staten Island. They're still the red-headed step-child of the boroughs when it comes to subway connections, and you know, Bloomberg is the mayor there, too. But he could be the mayor of Tokyo for all that it matters in this instance, because it's not an either/or situation. If the doesn't go to Lautenberg Station, it doesn't mean you get what you want - get it?

 

No, you don't get it. Vast areas of the City (even a few parts of Manhattan, believe it or not) are far from the subway, yet densely populated. So much so that the people pack onto buses and ride them to the nearest subway station where everyone (and I do mean everyone) gets off to take the subway. Main Street-Flushing is the single biggest subway-to-bus transfer point for a reason - and has been for decades. It IS the mayor of NYC's job to focus on transit improvements for ALL of NYC and nowhere else.

 

Extending the to Staten Island is not a good idea because the is already a long route running local in three boroughs. Not very many people would change their commutes for a super-long local train. A subway route connecting SI to the 4th Avenue Express tracks in Brooklyn is a much better idea. Where is Mayor Bloomberg's support for a Brooklyn-SI subway connection?

 

... the current reality - which is that there is federal money available, New Jersey money available, and two TBM's already in the process of expanding the system - which just happen to be on the threshold of digging under the river. That convergence of events - that opportunity - may not come again in our lifetimes. And for the taxpayers, ratepayers and toll-payers of the region, not to mention the people who breathe the air, that actually IS a win-win-win-win situation

 

Ok, most of what you just said there is not true. First of all, as per the MTA website, the TBMs are already finished boring the tunnel for the current extension and are set to be disassembled. So no, they will have to obtain new TBMs for a trans-Hudson tunnel, an added expense. Sorry, no win there. Second, the Post's article stated that City Hall is seeking Federal money for the project. That means, there is NO Federal money involved right now. Nor are the PA or the State of NJ ponying up any money for this proposal right now. Why, didn't NJ have to pay money back to Washington for canceling ARC? So what money do they have? They are verbally in favor of the proposal and "working with the city." The last time I checked, words are not a currency and don't pay for subway extensions.

 

And as for the cleaner air and reduced auto traffic that a new trans-Hudson rail extension would (hopefully) bring, a new crosstown PATH service to/from Secaucus running under 50th Street could do it much better, especially if the PA does contribute and co-sponsor the project. It too would connect to all the Manhattan trunk lines and serve some of the dense Hudson River communities in Jersey. All while not overtaxing an already overtaxed NYC subway line.

 

But the fact that I can identify system limitations, and the fact that I might have a vested interest in certain expansions over others doesn't render me incapable of seeing where golden opportunities arise and voicing my support...

 

Extending the over to Secaucus is brilliant. It serves the region AND it serves New York City. In every way it is a win-win-win-win ... for both States.

No, that's your opinion. Saying "But the fact that I..." doesn't make it a fact. And if you really could identify system limitations, you would know exactly why extending the to Secaucus is not "brilliant" and why it will not be a "win-win-win-win" (jeez how many goddamn wins do you really need) like you think. A new PATH or NJ Transit line would be a real winner for the region.

 

Oh, and by the way, New York City is not a state.

[nyland8]

Yes it does. It absolutely does impact Queens commuters. It gives them much more crowded platforms to wait on at TSQ, 5th Ave and GC, especially if there's a Mets game, a U.S. Open tennis match, or even a minor train delay. And you know there will be delays. So please don't tell me, a person who rides that train every weekday, that extending it to Secaucus will have absolutely no effect on the commute of current riders to and from Queens.

 

... a platform with riders going in the other direction. (WHAAAA-WHAAA (sniffle-sniffle) Life is tough.

 

You should be embarrassed to even bring that up as a defining issue to oppose going to Lautenberg Station. Of all the arguments I've read here, this one is the most feeble. Where do you think the New Jersey Met fans and US Open fans are going now? They're wending their way from throughout the city, getting onto exactly the same platforms, and getting on the same damn train out to Flushing Meadow. And unless you live in some bizarro world, delays are no more likely to occur with a westward expansion than they would with an eastward expansion. Would you feel better waiting for an inbound train that never comes in your morning commute because it got delayed out in Murray Hill? LMAO.

 

If you can't even see the contradictions in your own argument, then you are irredeemably petty. On the one hand you bitch about having to share the platform with people going the other way, and on the other hand you're saying you prefer to be sharing it with crowds going the same way !!??!! Make up your mind. If you think crowds are REALLY a problem on the train, do you think they'd be diminished by extending the eastward ?!!? Give me a break! If that isn't the most disingenuous argument I've read, then it must be about the most intellectually dishonest position anyone has expressed so far.

 

Look, it doesn't matter to me if you tap dance 'til you open on Broadway, the fact still remains that it is not an either/or situation - and you know it. Stomping your feet won't change it. A westward expansion will be subsidized by federal funds, AND New Jersey State funds, in a way that extending the train eastward simply will not. It will be done in a fraction of the time, and the reduced commuting time will encourage more New Jerseyans to use mass-transit in lieu of clogging our bridges and tunnels, polluting the air that you and your children breathe. And it will be done without having to build the equivalent of Trump Tower under Manhattan, which means billions less for rate payers and taxpayers to shoulder.

 

Being petty and provincial doesn't serve the best interests of New York, of rate payers, of taxpayers ... of anyone on the planet. Having an open mind and recognizing when a good idea and a rare opportunity converge, and going all-in with wholehearted support for those ideas is a way to make them win-win-win-win.

 

Expanding into New Jersey may not serve YOUR narrow interests as much as other plans will, but expanding the system anywhere IS better than expanding the system nowhere. And thinking people - by that I mean people who are not intellectually dishonest - would rather not wait another generation for improvements to keep advancing.

 

You should reconsider you position.

[Roadcruiser1]

Once again this money shouldn't be going to expand our subway to NJ. This money should be going to the completion of the Second Avenue Subway . A NYC mass transit project not an NJ project that would offer real relief to NYC residents.

[IntExp]

... a platform with riders going in the other direction. (WHAAAA-WHAAA (sniffle-sniffle) Life is tough.

 

You should be embarrassed to even bring that up as a defining issue to oppose going to Lautenberg Station. Of all the arguments I've read here, this one is the most feeble. Where do you think the New Jersey Met fans and US Open fans are going now? They're wending their way from throughout the city, getting onto exactly the same platforms, and getting on the same damn train out to Flushing Meadow. And unless you live in some bizarro world, delays are no more likely to occur with a westward expansion than they would with an eastward expansion. Would you feel better waiting for an inbound train that never comes in your morning commute because it got delayed out in Murray Hill? LMAO.

And those same damn Trains are already packed to the gills w/ the average commuters going home from work in Manhattan. Me and T to Dyre already take the every single day. Let me you ask this- have you ever taken the line? Have you been to Main St? Delays that happen in NJ, certainly will affect the in Queens, b/c we would have to deal w/ NJ Transit in case they screw up, or if something happens w/ one of their lines that forces a massive influx of riders to the line. Case in point- right now, the terminal is TSQ. When TSQ f**ks up, the whole line suffers. It will only get worse of that happens in NJ.

 

If you can't even see the contradictions in your own argument, then you are irredeemably petty. On the one hand you bitch about having to share the platform with people going the other way, and on the other hand you're saying you prefer to be sharing it with crowds going the same way !!??!! Make up your mind. If you think crowds are REALLY a problem on the train, do you think they'd be diminished by extending the eastward ?!!? Give me a break! If that isn't the most disingenuous argument I've read, then it must be about the most intellectually dishonest position anyone has expressed so far.

No, you're bitching right now by saying possibly the most idiotic statement in this whole conservation so far. It is well documented that almost the all the riders getting on at Main Street are people who transfer from the buses that converge there. It's no simple accident that 19 bus routes either stop by or terminate there- can you read a map, for god's sake? They all stop there b/c of the train. They would be greatly diminished if the was extended eastward, no question about it. I would love to see you there at Main St-Flushing and look at all the buses that stop there, and look where the passengers who get off those buses go to- they go to the subway station, to go to Manhattan.

 

Look, it doesn't matter to me if you tap dance 'til you open on Broadway, the fact still remains that it is not an either/or situation - and you know it. Stomping your feet won't change it. A westward expansion will be subsidized by federal funds, AND New Jersey State funds, in a way that extending the train eastward simply will not. It will be done in a fraction of the time, and the reduced commuting time will encourage more New Jerseyans to use mass-transit in lieu of clogging our bridges and tunnels, polluting the air that you and your children breathe. And it will be done without having to build the equivalent of Trump Tower under Manhattan, which means billions less for rate payers and taxpayers to shoulder.

No, it won't be subsidized by Federal Funds. And if it does, it will be no where near the amount the Feds gave to ARC. After what NJ did, I doubt they will give us the same amount of funds for this. NJ is crying broke, the MTA is crying broke, and Bloomberg keeps ordering for more cuts. Where is the money coming from, eh? And don't say ARC funds, b/c that has been redistributed to California HSR and the Gateway project for Amtrak.

 

Being petty and provincial doesn't serve the best interests of New York, of rate payers, of taxpayers ... of anyone on the planet. Having an open mind and recognizing when a good idea and a rare opportunity converge, and going all-in with wholehearted support for those ideas is a way to make them win-win-win-win.

No, trying to make stupid extensions to NJ at a time in which we can barely keep the system running as it is, build just one phase of SAS on time or on budget, or improve transit options here in the city doesn't serve the best interests of New Yorker's.

 

Expanding into New Jersey may not serve YOUR narrow interests as much as other plans will, but expanding the system anywhere IS better than expanding the system nowhere. And thinking people - by that I mean people who are not intellectually dishonest - would rather not wait another generation for improvements to keep advancing.

 

Oh, we don't have narrow interests- we actually do think about where the subway should actually extended, like finishing out the Archer Ave Extension, or building out the rest of SAS with connections to the Bronx and Brooklyn, or extending the Nostrand Ave Line further south, instead of extending the toward NJ.

 

You should reconsider you position.

Nah, we'll keep our position as it is right now. Because we do think, contrary to your opinion.

[B35 via Church]

First of all, they are two different commutes. One is East to West, the other West to East. What that means is that they have zero effect on overcrowding

 

Zero effect on overcrowding... yeah right...

You say that as if EVERY rider coming from secaucus will ALL disembark @ TSQ... You say that as if such an extension would result in no delays whatsoever, from either direction the train is traveling in....

 

delays = more ppl. waiting for trains.... meaning, more people tryna cram on a solitary train....

The 7 is already overcrowded... meaning, it will worsen overcrowding....

 

You really mean to tell me folks that already bombard (7)'s @ TSQ heading eastbound.... PLUS the riders that'd come in from NJ seeking service to the east side, won't make crowding worse....

 

 

Well ... what can I say B35? Thanks for illustrating my point? Your argument, or what there is of it, is a perfect example of what is both petty AND provincial about all of the opposition to the running under the Hudson.

Even at times other than morning and evening rush hours, they have no impact whatsoever. What you're suggesting is the equivalent of Brooklyn train riders complaining about the fact that after it drops them off in Manhattan, the train goes on to the Bronx. Who cares? What's the difference? If overcrowding were really your concern, then you wouldn't want the going further East, because then it would be already full when you got on it in the morning, and more commuters would be jamming it up at night. And as for "arriving later", it's the same nonsense. When it arrives is a scheduling issue, and has nothing to do with the train going to New Jersey.

Not a good comparison....

 

- On the , there are Bronx riders that commute to (downtown) Brooklyn, and there are college students in Brooklyn that go to school in the Bronx..... Don't try to somehow convince me that there will be a significant amt. of Queens riders that'd benefit from service to Secaucus on the , moreso or equally than there are Brooklyn-Bronx (or vice versa) riders on the ...

 

- There are other subway lines in brooklyn that can get you to manhattan, outside of the .... There are other subway lines in the bronx that can get you to manhattan, outside of the ..... All for the same cost of 2.25.....

 

to get from NJ directly to manhattan via rail, you're either taking NJT, or this extension when it comes about.... the fare is definitely not the same (between secaucus & NYC on NJT... and that of the subway fare), and there won't be any subway alternative.....

 

 

Addressing the rest of your quote.... this whole "who cares" & "...the same nonsense" & "what's the difference" attitude you're exuding... Just because you refuse to refute (outside of simply being dismissive about) the problems that such an extension would yield, doesn't mean it's an absolute win...

 

I am not implying that there are no OVERALL pros to the extension.... What I have a problem with is, this idea that there are no cons to the extension... that is the nature of your stance, one of which I find unrealistic & absolutely ridiculous.... especially when you sit up there on a high horse talkin about every thinking taxpaying citizen should back this proposal....

 

 

And how does it help folks in Queens? Well, for one thing, if they happen to be flying into or out of Newark Airport it's a FANTASTIC improvement. And are you suggesting that there are no Jets or Giants fans out in Queens who would benefit enormously by getting to and from Secaucus both faster and cheaper? Have you even thought this through at all?

Monetarily/Economically, yeah it benefits the city overall (not just the county of Queens)....

 

SUBWAY service to these random points of interest you list... all this does is add ridership to the - the vast majority of which would be NJ patrons....

 

PATH is what you'd call a win-win (pick any of the lines you'd like), b/c you have a mass amt. of COMMUTERS takin ppl. b/w multiple points on both sides of the hudson in both directions in the AM & the PM rushes (not to mention middays).... This extension benefits NJ commuters, far more so than any NYC commuter... weekly jet/giant games & w/e few airport commuters that'd end up taking the subway (to the NJT to get to EWR) aint enough.... sorry, that doesn't quantify as a win-win for me....

 

so thanks for proving MY point.

 

 

 

No my friend, the fact is that EVERYONE benefits - win-win-win-win - because the people in New Jersey are going to commute into New York City whether you like it or not. They work here, they pay taxes here, they shop here, they spend a ton of money on restaurants, clubs, bars, plays, musicals, museums and other cultural events here, and making it easier, cheaper and cleaner for them to get here DOES benefit the people of Queens.

NJ patrons been commuting to NY, what are you talkin about.... don't try to spin this as if I'm anti NJ; "whether I like it or not"..... miss me with that...

 

Again, EVERYONE does not benefit b/c you only wanna address the positives....

 

 

The right questions to ask are: Will there be less auto traffic in the city because less Jersey commuters decided to jam the streets, tunnels and bridges? Yes. Will there be less fossil fuel consumption and air pollution? Yes. Will the MTA run more profitably by running full-fare trains for the two or three extra stops in the other direction? Most decidedly Yes.

Don't tell me what the "right" questions to ask are.... As a taxpaying citizen in this city, I'll ask what I want, and will raise concerns as I feel fit.....

 

What you're arguing here is on an environmental tip.... that's more of a argument against bus vs train or car vs train..... If this 7 extension was the first rail option to be implemented b/w NY & NJ, then I could see this being brought up as a main point of contention... Otherwise, bringing this up is nothin more than an appeal to emotion argument - on some ole "greener is cleaner" tip :tup:

 

Again, this will be more NJ cars being taken off the road..... but on the most basic level, yes taking cars off the board is a benefit... not denying that.

 

 

As regards the fact that it's called the "New York City Subway" system, it will not cease to be that by running a train to Lautenberg Station. In fact, if anything, the MTA should subsume the entire PATH System, annex that to the SIR, and run the whole thing as an FRA division. Here again, after the planned resumption of service on the North Branch of the SIR, the shortest distance - in time, in money, in infrastructure - to connecting Staten Island to the city via subway, is to run it through New Jersey.

The least of my worries with this extension is what the subway system will be called....

 

That's why the fifth borough has never been connected by subway - MONEY !!! Well, subsuming the PATH into the MTA could connect Staten Island to the rest of the boroughs for BILLIONS OF DOLLARS LESS than running two tunnels across the Narrows. AND it could be done in less than a decade, instead of waiting another two generations.

 

We cannot afford petty and provincial thinking. It's just too expensive, in both time and money, to think in those severely limiting ways. It's time to think outside the box...

 

...or in this case, outside the State.

nice try....

 

My reasoning (regardless of what & how YOU feel about it) behind my disapproval of this particular extension, doesn't mean that I don't approve of any other advancements (in the works/planned in the future) b/w NY & NJ.....

 

It aint about not thinking outside the box... and stop putting me IN that *pro NY, anti NJ box*... Everyone that doesn't approve of this extension aint on ole some f*** NJ shit....

[Mysterious2train]

To be perfectly honest I'd rather see East Side Access for the LIRR over the to New Jersey. Some might think it's a bit frivolous but I see it as the most important project behind the Second Avenue Subway. The LIRR could really use that extra capacity.

 

I'm probably over-hyping E.S.A., but I think it would be more beneficial for the region than a extension.

[B35 via Church]

Being petty and provincial doesn't serve the best interests of New York, of rate payers, of taxpayers ... of anyone on the planet. Having an open mind and recognizing when a good idea and a rare opportunity converge, and going all-in with wholehearted support for those ideas is a way to make them win-win-win-win.

In other words, as taxpayers, we should be a] open to & b] support 100% any proposal that's put on the table in front of us.... In this particular case, because you see it as a good idea....

 

The world doesn't revolve around you, chief.... Notice the people that are on here that DO support the extension aint even vocally backing you & your commentary on this.... your optimism for, and blatant dismissive tactics against anyone w/ an opposing opinion, is too far over the top for anyone to want to co-sign.... regardless if you claim to care about any of that or not....

 

- Those that disapprove of this extension aren't doing so *just because*....

- Those that disapprove of this extension aren't doing so b/c they lack intelligence & are dishonest somehow.....

 

 

Have you seem some of the stations of , most of which which are falling apart? :mad: How about when Hudson Yards develops, eh? What about all those people who get on on 42nd Street to go to Queens, eh? TSQ & GCT and are crowded enough already, they sure as hell can't take 250,000 more customers per day- it'll just crush those stations, and the .

 

B35 takes it on this one. Bloomberg ain't the mayor of Secaucus- he's the mayor of NYC, and he should be looking to extend subway service HERE, not NJ.

 

We need to finish out the Archer Ave extension, or better yet, how about the extend the the right way, toward NE Queens, where it terminates abruptly at Main Street-Flushing, where 18,630,490 use the station, making it the 10th busiest, mostly from people transferring from crushloaded buses to get to the line, eh? How about extend it the right way, toward NE Queens, where he is the mayor, not to NJ.

 

Let's not build half-assed lines everywhere. We can barely complete a project such as the Second Avenue Subway and you want to advocate extending a single line out to New Jersey? Let's fix the problems at hand before we create more problems for ourselves. If anything needs to be extended, it's the Second Avenue line (to the Bronx), Flushing line (northeast), or Astoria line (to the LaGuardia Airport) to better serve the travel patterns of the masses.

 

To be perfectly honest with ya I'd rather see East Side Access for the LIRR over the to New Jersey. Some might think it's a bit frivolous but I see it as the most important project behind the Second Avenue Subway. The LIRR could really use that extra capacity.

All 3 of you get it... it's about priority.

 

....and that general mindstate w/ which IntExp made a point of (the part in bold) is what's wrong w/ this entire country now... Getting into, and wanting to "fix" other ppl's endeavors/problems before we rectify our own....

[nyland8]

I was wrong. I thought that ALL of the arguments against the train going to Secaucus were only petty and provincial. I apologize. I should have said petty, provincial and dense - because all of the detractors seem unable or unwilling to grasp that there is no either/or being offered in this situation.

 

New Yorkers and New Jerseyans can have a train extension to Secaucus for a fraction of what it should cost for such an expansion - billions less than the ARC project - they can reduce pollution, they can reduce congestion, they can immediately create hundreds of high-paying construction jobs which benefit the entire region, they can improve Met, Jet, Giant and tennis fans times and costs to and from the games, they can shorten and cheapen trips to Newark Airport ... the list goes on and on - OR they can have nothing and wait another who-knows-how-long ... perhaps a generation ... for the next expansion opportunity.

 

Some of them choose the latter. I prefer the former. I guess time will tell which sentiment makes more sense for the region.

[B35 via Church]

New Yorkers and New Jerseyans can have a 7 train extension to Secaucus for a fraction of what it should cost for such an expansion - billions less than the ARC project....

So ?

 

Because a 7 extension to Secaucus would end up costing less than the ARC project, makes it a good idea overall...

 

 

I was wrong. I thought that ALL of the arguments against the train going to Secaucus were only petty and provincial. I apologize. I should have said petty, provincial and dense - because all of the detractors seem unable or unwilling to grasp that there is no either/or being offered in this situation.

so far we have petty, provincial, dense, unwilling to grasp, being dishonest, having narrow interests, not being thinking people....

 

The more adjectives you resort to considering anyone with an opposing opinion on this matter, reflects badly on you....

It doesn't strengthen your position none, and it sure as hell doesn't weaken ours....

[7LineFan]

I was wrong. I thought that ALL of the arguments against the train going to Secaucus were only petty and provincial. I apologize. I should have said petty, provincial and dense - because all of the detractors seem unable or unwilling to grasp that there is no either/or being offered in this situation.

 

If we're petty, provincial, and dense, then you're sure as hell being pretentious and condescending. Ever heard of differing opinions?

 

I would say something on the topic at hand... except B35 and IntExp have already articulated everything that I would have to say.

[Kriston Lewis]

...New Jersey...they'd be funding their share...

If you seriously believe that New Jersey will pay anything towards this, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Nexis4Jersey]

If you seriously believe that New Jersey will pay anything towards this, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

Most New Jerseyites would not support this , unlike the other Rail projects in the state. Most New Jerseyites just want the state finish said projects like the MOM network , Cape May line , West Trenton , Philpsburgh extensions and Northern Branch...

[qjtransitmaster]

all of you ppl win and have a point nyland8 those NJ ppl will most likely transfer to other lines therefore a NJ extension will HAVE NO EFFECT ON CROWDING. Ans will help better connect union city to nyc better and faster allowing ppl to bypass the traffic hell to PABT to reach NJT buses so B35 church is right about it benefiting more NJ commuters than NYC ones BUT it will cut down on car use a whole lot allowing manhattan buses to be slightly more reliable and transit travel times will decrease. I agree that the Subways like SAS need to be taken care of first though but I don't oppose the extension to NJ but I think it can be put off for other things. All of you have valid points so plz stop bashing each other.

 

 

besides nyland8 there is a bus to secaucus jct called NJT 129 done

[qjtransitmaster]

Most New Jerseyites would not support this , unlike the other Rail projects in the state. Most New Jerseyites just want the state finish said projects like the MOM network , Cape May line , West Trenton , Philpsburgh extensions and Northern Branch...

true jersey master so true those are more important extension is just icing on the cake really.

all it is is completion but the other projects need to come first or all at once

[7LineFan]

\I don't oppose the extension to NJ but I think it can be put off for other things.\

 

This.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

... a platform with riders going in the other direction. (WHAAAA-WHAAA (sniffle-sniffle) Life is tough.

 

You should be embarrassed to even bring that up as a defining issue to oppose going to Lautenberg Station. Of all the arguments I've read here, this one is the most feeble. Where do you think the New Jersey Met fans and US Open fans are going now? They're wending their way from throughout the city, getting onto exactly the same platforms, and getting on the same damn train out to Flushing Meadow. And unless you live in some bizarro world, delays are no more likely to occur with a westward expansion than they would with an eastward expansion. Would you feel better waiting for an inbound train that never comes in your morning commute because it got delayed out in Murray Hill? LMAO.

 

If you can't even see the contradictions in your own argument, then you are irredeemably petty. On the one hand you bitch about having to share the platform with people going the other way, and on the other hand you're saying you prefer to be sharing it with crowds going the same way !!??!! Make up your mind. If you think crowds are REALLY a problem on the train, do you think they'd be diminished by extending the eastward ?!!? Give me a break! If that isn't the most disingenuous argument I've read, then it must be about the most intellectually dishonest position anyone has expressed so far.

 

Look, it doesn't matter to me if you tap dance 'til you open on Broadway, the fact still remains that it is not an either/or situation - and you know it. Stomping your feet won't change it. A westward expansion will be subsidized by federal funds, AND New Jersey State funds, in a way that extending the train eastward simply will not. It will be done in a fraction of the time, and the reduced commuting time will encourage more New Jerseyans to use mass-transit in lieu of clogging our bridges and tunnels, polluting the air that you and your children breathe. And it will be done without having to build the equivalent of Trump Tower under Manhattan, which means billions less for rate payers and taxpayers to shoulder.

 

Being petty and provincial doesn't serve the best interests of New York, of rate payers, of taxpayers ... of anyone on the planet. Having an open mind and recognizing when a good idea and a rare opportunity converge, and going all-in with wholehearted support for those ideas is a way to make them win-win-win-win.

 

Expanding into New Jersey may not serve YOUR narrow interests as much as other plans will, but expanding the system anywhere IS better than expanding the system nowhere. And thinking people - by that I mean people who are not intellectually dishonest - would rather not wait another generation for improvements to keep advancing.

 

You should reconsider you position.

No. You need to reconsider your petty, condescending attitude towards IntExp, B35, Roadcruiser, myself and anyone else who you have mouthed off to on this topic. You DON'T ride the on a regular basis. So you DON'T know what it's really like to ridie it. Many of us do. So don't you dismiss our valid concerns as just petty crying and bitching! You got that? What you're doing is downright disgusting and completely unnecessary, so knock it off and find a much better and calmer way of expressing your point of view.

 

Now, as for this not-very-well-thought out extension, only the mayor is seriously on board with it. If you had read the Post article, you would know that the Port Authority and Gov. Christie are "intrigued" by this proposal. Nothing more, nothing less. Have either the PA or the NJ Gov committed any money for even a formal study? Let me know if they have because all I've heard from the PA and Christie are words of support, but no real action, except that they are "working" with the Mayor's office. Actions speak louder than words. The fact (it is a fact, look it up) that Christie had to pay money back to Washington after he pulled NJ out of the ARC casts serious doubt on NJ making any serious commitment (i.e. money) toward a extension to Secaucus in the near future.

[B35 via Church]

all of you ppl win and have a point nyland8 those NJ ppl will most likely transfer to other lines therefore a NJ extension will HAVE NO EFFECT ON CROWDING. Ans will help better connect union city to nyc better and faster allowing ppl to bypass the traffic hell to PABT to reach NJT buses so B35 church is right about it benefiting more NJ commuters than NYC ones BUT it will cut down on car use a whole lot allowing manhattan buses to be slightly more reliable and transit travel times will decrease. I agree that the Subways like SAS need to be taken care of first though but I don't oppose the extension to NJ but I think it can be put off for other things. All of you have valid points so plz stop bashing each other.

 

besides nyland8 there is a bus to secaucus jct called NJT 129 done

Who you now, DJ Khaled or somethin....

 

lol @ I'm right about benefitting NJ commuters, but it'll cut down on car use; as if I said anything to the contrary to that....

 

Furthermore, I aint "bashing" the guy... What I am doing is attacking his stance on this matter... and man listen, I aint tryna "win" in an exchange of opinions, when we're discussing an extension that IN REALITY would worsen matters for real, actual, factual train riders - like a T to Dyre av & a IntExp....

 

So the mediator act... kill it.

[nyland8]

Well ... what can I say. I've reread the entire thread now a couple of times, and the only opinion that I'm left with is that every argument I've read opposing the extension into New Jersey has been either petty, provincial or dense. None of the many positives I've mentioned have been cogently rebutted, and the only "defense" I've seen proffered is that people are entitled to their opinion.

 

So be it. We've found something we can all agree on. People ARE entitled to their opinion.

 

And my opinion is that I still haven't heard a single argument against the train extension into New Jersey that isn't piffling, parochial or obtuse.

 

Thank you all for respecting my opinion.

[E train line]

This is not going happen at all