^Quite.
So, if you were advising the Eisenbergers and McHatties of this world, how would you suggest they spin their support for LRT? When you've got somebody screaming about taxes, it's pretty hard to counter that. |
Quote:
|
Easy spin.
We, in Hamilton, are paying anyway. The city has absolutely no say in that matter. We've been told we cannot opt out. Do you want us to lobby for as much of that money as possible for Hamilton, or should we just say no thanks and pay for higher order transit for the rest of 905 and GTA? |
Quote:
AEGD is no good unless you can move your goods efficiently. It's really very fundamental. |
Of late, this thread has gotten a little off track. The discussion has become about debating LRT and has moved away from its original intention as a forum for attacking Mayor Bratina. Can we please get back on topic?
edit:no tongues were harmed while being planted firmly in one's cheek while typing this post |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's always assumed that transit exists to solve motorists' problems. That it does, but as well as helping cars move a bit easier, it helps a lot of people move who otherwise wouldn't. If the transit itself is congested, that's as much of a problem as general traffic congestion. But yeah, people on the mountain don't give a f*&k, right? Problem is it affects them anyway. People need to get to schools and hospitals (our top two employers). The new meat and bread plants that are saving our economy need their employees to show up. Many if not most need transit to get there. Because the economy depends on mobility for all citizens, good transit is necessary for economic development. In a metro our size, this means moving past the limits of a bus-only transit system. |
Quote:
Provincial politics is another matter. Do you get that? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
The way to spin it is to use examples in other cities where investment in LRT has boosted investment along the route, resulting in more business, more jobs, more taxes, more residential and more vibrancy.
Improved transit is just the gravy here. |
But this is the 20-minute city. And besides, what works in other cities (i.e. 'fancy' European ones), won't work here. Every right-minded Hamiltonian knows that. LRT is the antithesis of hardhats and lunch buckets. It WON'T-WORK-HERE.
|
Quote:
You put it very well. People can't get to jobs, they can't earn money, they can't pay taxes, they can't spend money, our economy suffers. Simple. |
The problem is, HSR is currently treated by the city as a type of social service. Ridership is driven primarily from their subsidizing monthly student, senior and welfare passes. Service is geared to serve these demographics first and foremost. Even the advertising acknowledges this demographic preference as practically all transit advertising is used to promote social services. It is the permeation of the welfare industrial complex that holds back the city in so many ways. Until service is adjusted to serve people outside this demographic (as well as within it), then the HSR is doomed to continue to languish.
LRT would be a lot easier sell if it was designed to appeal to the non-traditional demographic and attracted a full-fare ridership demographic to the service. Without the full fare ridership, LRT will not succeed. |
Quote:
|
Ask MPPs for their view on amalgamation, Bratina tells Flamborough chamber
(Flamborough Review, Kevin Werner, Mar 28 2014) Never say never to Flamborough de-amalgamating from the city of Hamilton, says Mayor Bob Bratina. Bratina, who recently announced he won’t seek re-election this fall, says it’s not inconceivable that someday Flamborough may not be part of Hamilton in the future, citing pushes for separation in both Quebec and Scotland. “To say no way ever again will Flamborough ever be disconnected from the city I’m not prepared to say that,” Bratina told about 30 residents during a Flamborough Chamber of Commerce round table event March 18 at the North Wentworth Arena. While he isn’t encouraging de-amalgamation, all Bratina wants is the province to review amalgamation to see if it has helped or hurt the six municipalities that merged in 2001. “I’m prepared to say I’m working hard to see Flamborough and Waterdown gets treated fairly and we will see where we will go from there,” he said. Bratina pointed out one oddity that Flamborough residents can relate to. Carlisle’s water supply is not fluoridated. But should Carlisle residents be charged for paying to fluoridate water for the rest of Hamilton? “I was never in favour of (amalgamation),” he told the gathering in a wide-ranging talk. “I’m proud to be a mayor of a city that is working well. Still there may be some inequities that need to be addressed.” During his State of the City address in downtown Hamilton in January, Bratina was criticized for bringing up the idea of amalgamation after years of relatively peaceful co-existence between the suburban and urban politicians. He hosted a university professor who has studied the impact of amalgamated municipalities in Ontario the same day after delivering his State of the City address. He felt the severe complaints were unjustified since he believes it’s time the impact of amalgamation on Hamilton should be investigated. Read it in full here. |
No disrespect to the people of Flamborough, but :rolleyes:
How many times is this clown going to bring this up? How many people actually believe what he says on the issue any more? Maybe the speculation he'll run federally against Christopherson was premature... and he really has his sights set on a Sweet district slightly to the west. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.