we need liberal carbon tax to fund public transit. history of fed gov't debt/deficits. infrastructure sacrificed.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080923.wtransit23/BNStory/National/home

TORONTO — A long-awaited master plan to boost public transit, unveiled Tuesday, pledges to transform the Toronto region over the next 25 years – but fails to detail how it would cover most of its $50-billion price tag.

The plan from the province's Metrolinx agency, chaired by former Burlington mayor Rob MacIsaac, comes after months of discussions about the need for radical measures to raise billions for public transit, including a 10-cent-a-kilometre toll on major expressways, a parking tax or a regional sales tax.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080518/carbontax_liberals_080518/20080518

D: Suzuki backs their platform too. I personally consider the man an extremist for some of his statements in the past about shooting people...

After hearing the NDP's criticism of Dion's plan, Suzuki said: "I'm really shocked with the NDP with this. I thought that they had a very progressive environmental outlook."

D: Though I did vote for Rae (]=...), I consider the federal NDP to be totally irrelevant. I still recall the Former federal New Democratic Party leader Audrey McLaughlin dropping the ball right before election day. A significant portion of the female voters were undecided - all she had to do was say their votes could propel the NDP into more riding seats. Instead, when asked if folks would be throwing their vote away, she tried harping on all the hot-button issues. Today, the NDP act like economic Luddites. Their platform is pretty much ban-bank-fees, when I see ads for that from the private sector anyway, and PC bank made inroads based on lower fees. Plus talk of looking into price fix of gas, with the implication of price controls. Which don't work, never have, never will. The negative informal side effects of that policy negate any benefits.

Leaving the Liberals as the party that would invest in public transit infrastructure.

Regarding the carbon tax: it *can* be a tax cut, dummy! Sadly, Dion is a 30-second soundbite guy in an age of 10 second soundbites (still with me? [=)

Liberal.ca :: Media Releases

18 Sep 2008 ... TORONTO – A new Liberal government will commit more than $70 billion over the next 10 years to improve the critical infrastructure that ...
www.liberal.ca/story_14704_e.aspx - 17k

D: so they'll essentially use private transit to subsidize public transit.
Since cars are not taxed to reflect their cost to society (see my blog entry, the very first one, "cars are not cost effective"), this is actually FAIR.

Aside: John Ralston Saul decries the lack of our linear historical memory. One of the reasons I love the Daily Show so is his ability to use sound clips from the past to point out the amoral flip- flopping politicians do. They count on the absence of linear historical memory in the populace.
Why do I mention this?
Because it was the 'debt slaying' Liberals Chretien and Martin that first cut payments to the provinces! The buck was passed to consecutively lower level of gov'ts. It never just 'went away'. It was swept under the rug.

Jesus fuck, how do I shut off these goddamn italics???

Oh. More cut 'n paste.
We're...
there.
Right.

Here is the order of events, from the beginning:
1) Trudeau.
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2000/10/trudeau_canadas.php
*In 1968, when Trudeau went from rich, socialist professor who had never held a real job in his life to prime minister, Canada’s national debt was a modest $11.3 billion; the federal deficit was zero. When Trudeau left office in 1984, the debt had mushroomed to $128 billion; the deficit to $25 billion annually. But this was just the beginning.

(wiki)
Some consider Trudeau's economic policies to have been a weak point. Inflation and unemployment marred much of his prime ministership. When Trudeau took office in 1968 Canada had a debt of $18 billion (24% of GDP) which was largely left over from World War II^{[citation needed]}; when he left office in 1984, that debt stood at $200 billion (46% of GDP), an increase of 83% in real terms.^[27] However, these trends were present in most western countries at the time, including the United States.
D: sounds pretty incriminating, huh? Keep reading.

http://www.andrewspicer.com/article388.html

Here's another way to look at it. If you take the surplus or debt from each year, and use the Bank of Canada's inflation calculator to convert them to constant dollars, the Tories borrowed over $400,000 in constant dollars, while Chretien's team borrowed under $80,000 (over one more year).

http://www43.statcan.ca/04/04a/04a_008_e.htm

As a result of persistent deficit financing, Canada's total debt load (the accumulation of all past deficits and surpluses since Confederation) had grown from $20 billion in 1971 to an all time high of $588 billion by 1996/97...

In 1994, the federal government undertook a massive program to reverse the nation's financial course. Because of a reduction in program spending and a growing economy, Canada was well on its way to achieving a financial turnaround before the decade ended. By 1997/98, the government recorded a surplus for the first time in 28 years.
--
D: so 2) Mulroney dramatically INCREASES debt.
So much for conservative small taxes/ small gov't.
Witness Reagon in the US. It was the North-Am debut of the NEO-conservative. NEO meaning not. Small taxes.... BIG gov't.

3) Chretien, in shining armour and on a white steed, slays the debt.
But not really.
Look up statscan consolidated multi-level gov't debt.
http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060425/d060425b.htm

March 31, 2004

Previous release

The consolidated net financial debt of the federal, provincial, territorial, and local governments, defined as the excess of liabilities over financial assets, increased to $798.4 billion as of March 31, 2004, up $3.9 billion or 0.5% from March 31, 2003. An increase of $17.2 billion in financial assets and $21.1 billion in liabilities accounted for the rise.

The federal government net financial debt declined by $2.8 billion, while the net financial debt of the provincial, territorial, and local governments rose by $6.7 billion.

D: do you see the old man operating the machine behind the curtain yet?

On a per capita basis, net financial debt fell from $25,164 in 2003 to $25,044. The highest per capita net financial debt was recorded in 1997 at $28,543.

D: not so impressive now, is it?

And the price?

When the municipal-level gov't finally has the buck stop there from federal debt-slaying exercises, they have 2 choices:

1) raise local taxes

2) reduce services. Don't maintain infrastructure.

And there you have it folks - the rest of the story.

The lack of public transit funding, going right back to when I was born.

The fact that the Liberals started deficit budgets the first time round.

The Conservatives aggravated it.

The Liberals (nominally) licked it.

And now... the Liberals are promising to fund infrastructure, largely in reaction to Mulroney.

Linear. Historical. Memory.

Yes, in real dollar terms, Mulroney's final-year deficit was 15% smaller than the deficit in 1983-84, but that left Chretien and Martin to do the other 85% of the job, and then continue on into surplus.

The overall accumulated debt, grew (as a % of GDP) in every Mulroney year, but fell consistently from 1995-96 until the present. In other words, Mulroney always grew the debt faster than the economy, and the tide was reversed only after his 9 years in office

crime and sidewalks and foliage

D: I was biking home the other night.
University is pretty good. I took the trail by the tracks by UW.
Went towards Westmount.
On either side, there are woods.
They are flush with the sidewalks on both sides.
This is right by UW.

http://www.nrps.com/community/cpted.asp

Natural Surveillance
The placement of physical features, activities, and people in a way that maximizes visibility is one concept directed toward keeping intruders easily observable, and therefore less likely to commit criminal acts. Features that maximize the visibility of people, parking areas, and building entrances are:

• unobstructed doors and windows,

• pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and streets,

• front porches,

• effective nighttime lighting

For instance, streets designed with gateway treatments, roundabouts, speed bumps, and other "traffic calming" devices establish territories and discourage speeding and cut-through traffic. By keeping public areas observable, you are telling potential offenders that they should think twice before committing a crime. Criminals prefer low-risk situations, and public visibility increases the chances a thief will be caught.

These measures are simple, inexpensive to implement, and will have a more positive effect on residents than gates and bars.

D: my suggestion? Trim the underbrush. 5 or 10' only.
I think the sidewalks along Albert has the same problem.

D.

how bad bike lane design/construction sabotage car bus and pedestrians.

D: Father David Bauer Drive was repaved this summer.
Nominally it has a bike lane. Nominally...

The top pic is as a good stretch. While the sewer grate is best recessed out of the bike lane entirely at least it is flush with the road surface.
The bottom pic is all too common. This is the result when the sewer grate does not line up with the pavement level. Asphalt, I should say.
The soothing stretch becomes a very unpleasant ride.
On a no-suspension bike with high-pressure tire, I imagine very much so.

A car driver would complain if a section of road felt like it would knock your fillings out.

The lip on the extra asphalt is also in line with my tire path.
Meaning I get nervous that my tire might skip sideways on it.

After rain, huge puddles form around these elevated sewer grates in the bike lane.
Now not only will my feet get soaked, even with fenders.
But now I cannot see what I am riding on, making me doubly nervous.

A cyclist is left with 2 options:
1) ride on the sidewalk
2) periodically swerve into the car lane, unexpectedly at least from a driver's point of view.
This undoubtedly results in grumbling about 'why should we bother building bikes lanes if the cyclist won't use them anyway'.

A coworker that drives offered a similar opinion about the Westmount/Northfield bike lane. Since I ride it, I can testify the construction if typically of high quality.
However, patches of broken glass from broken bottles are a regular appearance.
To be fair, the city has been good about cleaning it up every coupla weeks or so.
But after a couple weeks, there is so much debris in the lane that picking out broken glass on sight becomes difficult.
I switch to a different route to work in that final week before the street sweeper helps.

I reiterate, simply 'build it and they will come' is not true.
1) build it WELL and
2) maintain it well,
3) even if the quality is at the expense of quantity,
and only THEN is cycling not an exercise in masochism.

Leaving sewers in a bike lane implies that this bike lane won't last anyway, that it is a mere afterthought, that it simply exists as a temporary feature while in transition to additional car lanes.
With that attitude, of course sensible people will not cycle more.

how bad bike lane design/construction sabotage car bus and pedestrians.

make uptown waterloo one-lane each way only

D: I'm reading that book "Traffic".
Next stop: "The High Cost of Free Parking".
There is 3x more parking than cars.
More cars than people.
And it is 'free' on prime real estate.

http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=072
A good review.

www.city.waterloo.on.ca/.../57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/PWS_ROADS_documents/2008ParkingBrochure.pdf

Here's an aerial view of all parking in the uptown area.

D: I propose we lose the King Street roadside parking. We replace them with a view dropoff/pickup points. We expand the sidewalks and lay in bike lanes by sidewalks.
We add trees to that new huge sterile development across the street.
We add more bike stands.

"But it will slow traffic!", you say. No, it won't.
We presently NEED 2 lanes each way cuz we HAVE on-street parking.
The number of parking spaces cannot be more than a dozen per block - which considerably exceeds bike parking.
Every time somebody wants to parallel park, something most folks are terrible at, traffic backs up for a block. Ergo the right-hand lane is really just the parking lane.
Remove the parking and remove the lane.
See the feedback in a past post on what the public wants from uptown.
I just described it.

review: a book called "Traffic"

D: I sort of need to read this book.
The book is very readable, other than the author's pressing need to use "timorous", a word I have never heard before. I guess he was insecure.

It begins with a review of traffic patterns historically. The author mentions Pompeii, Rome, feudal London and so on.
He shows the impact of new modes of transportation, including chariots, bicycles and cars.
The book is *really* about the automobile.
The sections on driver habits and such are terrifying.

I find myself wanting to lobby to place a cam in every car, so drivers can get feedback about just how bad their driving is!
The level of narcissistic personality and matching aggressive driving (and a grimmer view of other drivers) can be demonstrated over recent decades.
We are getting WORSE.

The cell phone and I-pod deserve mention.
It is dialing and looking for a song that critically draw eyes and attention away from the road. But talking on the phone can reduce attention even though eyes are nominally on the road. The eyes, however, only look straight ahead.
Long conversations increase risk somewhat - the duration makes it serious though.
Essentially, talking on a cellphone introduces a bad habit into an already complex task.

Instead of banning it, why don't we just subsume cell-phone related accidents into existing demerit systems? Get in accident when on phone- get 'dangerous driving' demerit.

The risk pyramid was illuminating. It is based on workplace accident studies.
For each 300 unsafe acts, there are 30 near misses and finally ONE HIT.
1x30x10...
Think of it was the tip of the iceberg. We consistently ignore the vast number of factors that need to go wrong before one accident happens.
Then we call it an 'accident'.
A comet falling on you is an accident.
Somebody with sloppy driving habits is an accident waiting to happen.
Talking on a phone while fiddling with one's I-pod and then mowing down a pedestrian at crosswalk is not an accident.
It is somebody with no sense of their prowess, or else a disrespect for others' safety.

Perhaps police reports should not stop at reporting seat-belts and the presence of alcohol.
Ipods, cellphones, looking at baby in the back seat, et al - why don't we illustrate how accidents happen?
Even just 'an Ipod was present and on at the time'.
Or: a cellphone conversation was cut off on impact.

From a cyclist's point of view, the concept of 'safety in numbers' is valid.
An occasional biker is not watched for. A steady stream slows drivers who are then paying attention.

For this reason, I think we should not focus on LOTS of bike lanes, but rather upon the high quality of key ones.

review: a book called "Traffic"

GRT makes bus pass hard to get.

http://www.grt.ca/web/transit.nsf/DocID/7C4554FA47B2B074852571730059AEC8?OpenDocument

D: update: a new Shoppers may also sell them.

D: My pal Ron went to the downtown bus terminal to by a bus pass yesterday (Sunday).
There was ONE teller.
The waiting line went around the CORNER.

That is one helluva way to run a business...