Friday, January 29, 2016

MN Transportation Funding

You will have to read the linked article  and the comments to see where the following comment came from.  I have to start working on taxes  :-( so I can fill out a FAFSA before March 1...  Likely we will get no College subsidies, however that score is needed to apply for some scholarships... MP Transportation
"How about the DFL reduce the income or sales tax to offset their gas tax increase. That way both the "dedicated funding stream" supporters and the people who want to keep government growth at or slightly above inflation will both be happy. :-)

Also, let's see them stop proposing government growth, and start proposing using the budget surplus to catch up on these supposed required maintenance tasks. Not much sense taking out a loan(ie bond) when you have the money in the bank...

Raising taxes/spending faster than the inflation rate AND adding more Taxes for Transportation seem like over reach to me..." G2A


John said...

Did you know that construction firms working on State funded projects in Hennepin county are required by State Law to pay the flag person $31 to $48 per hour?

MN Prevailing Wage Map

No wonder our transportation maintenance cost are so high.

jerrye92002 said...

I'm going to blame public schools for this one. When the "roads and bridges" amendment came up for a vote, anybody with what should be simple 5th grade math and reading skills would have told you that roads and bridges would henceforth receive NO MORE THAN 40% of the gas tax, and the rest went to build more choo-choo trains that we cannot afford. For instance, for the cost of the latest 10-mile line, we could have added 4 more lanes to every freeway in the metro, and improved traffic flow for the 98% who do NOT ride the train.

Anonymous said...

" more choo-choo trains that we cannot afford."

Right-wing buzz words. And false.

"...we could have added 4 more lanes to every freeway in the metro, and improved traffic flow for the 98% who do NOT ride the train."

Maybe you don't know about the fact that traffic volume always expands to fill new lanes. And who would you take the land away from to build these lanes? Probably the poorest neighborhoods, as right-wingers are wont to do.


jerrye92002 said...

Who do you take the land away from to build the train? Why would you want to benefit 2% of us when, for the same cost, you could benefit 98% of us? Explain why we should build trains that will never, ever pay for themselves and require a massive subsidy to draw riders?

False? When for the same price as said cho-choo we could have improved traffic for almost everybody? When we could have had a fleet of hybrid busses running the same route, two minutes apart,for the next 700 years? Or buy every potential rider a new car AND put gas in it, for life?

Sorry, but at some point transportation funding needs to be about solving people's transportation problems, not putting up glorious examples of government foolishness.