This not a joke! Read on.
GET ON THE STIMULUS BUS (http://www.mcicoach.com/fyiFromMci/story/0309c.htm)
Sojourn for Christ, Gerald
So what is new Gerald , our new president has strong ties with JLL Partners the owners of MCI and it is only our tax dollars good luck
I cannot see this being a bad thing. Why not give or loan some of the money to a start up bus company that will buy made in USA equipment. It beats seeing the money go to AIG bonuses and the likes. Hell maybe I'll start a bus company in our city. We have no such service and I have my CDL with a passenger endorsement and I know a bunch of bus drivers that would jump at the chance.
What they don't tell you is this minor little detail:
There's money to BUY the bus, but you've got to come up with the funds to OPERATE the vehicle (insurance, fuel, wages, maintenance, etc.) And those funds need to come in thru the farebox.
Typical FTA funding pattern, just changed from 80% to 100% for a very specific program - line-haul service (think Greyhound) to underserved rural areas.
What good does it do to buy a $400K coach "for free" if you cannot generate the revenue thru the farebox to even pay the fuel bill, let alone the other expenses??
Your tax dollars at work, otherwise known as gummint doublespeak.
FWIW & HTH. . .
;)
Is there any transit system anywhere with 100% farebox recovery? The local trnsit agency brags about being at 28.8% farebox recovery which means taxpayers pay over 70% of the operating costs. Federal taxpayers pay for most of the buses themselves.
Ironically, transit use exploded in 2008 due to gas prices, but there is no money to add routes and buses to handle the increased demand. The system locally is running a huge deficit due to being funded in large part by motor vehicle sales tax. they are trying to figure out how to use the federal stimulus dollars to cover the operating deficit even though the dollars are supposed to buy capital equipment.
I do not see the problem with some tax subsidy of necessary services. The whole interstate system does not pay for itself. Hasn't it always been urban areas that pay for rural roads. As RJ points out, owning the bus is not the entire business. The lack of that capital expense merely makes the possibility of success more reasonable. Further, if someone was to take them up on the offer, they would be creating jobs in their bus company and with the manufacturer. I like that better than giving all that money to bankers whose Credit Default Swap pyramid scheme finally collapsed. By the way, the value of those Credit Default Swaps was higher than the entire world economy when the end came.
Most transit buses are made in North America although some fleets are starting to buy Van Hool buses. I wonder if the stimulus funds are required to be spent on USA made buses?
I have no problem with taxes paying for transit. I was merely pointing out that increased bus ridership creates a dilemma as more tax money is required as ridership increases. If more people drive on the road at least the government is collecting more fuel tax (at least in theory) and hopefully more motor vehicle sales tax. Roads are paid for by fuel taxes, but at least here in Minnesota vehicle taxes also pay for transit.
I personally don't ride the bus because the fare right now is more than I pay in fuel total for a month. I don't include the cost of insurance or cost of the car because I would have the car regardless of mass transit. I also think the bus stop within walking distance was removed due to budget cuts so I would have to drive to the park and ride anyhow. Even when gas prices spiked I was still paying less for fuel back and forth to work than bus fare.
Quote from: belfert on March 21, 2009, 10:18:51 AM
I wonder if the stimulus funds are required to be spent on USA made buses?
I do recall seeing that it has to be a USA made bus and meet specific safety testing requirements.
Are the safety requirements under the stimulus any different than what is already required for passenger buses? Is the stimulus a way for the feds to push higher safety requirements kinda like the 30% credit for new furnaces only applies to 95%+ furnaces inorder to encourage energy conservation? I know a lot of people would only install 90% or even 80% furnaces without the government tax credit.
For those of you that are distressed by all that money going to the corrupt bankers that dug this hole with the assist of compliant pols, I heard this the other day: "Better the bankers get the money than some undeserving 4th generation 300 pound welfare Queen". I said "yeah, she would only squander it on food and shelter and medical care for the kids". He replied "EXACTLY!". I didn't disturb him any further.
One year a few years ago the VA budget was "UNDER FUNDED" by ONE BILLION bucks due to a budget estimating/request error. That VA director, the guy that made the "mistake", simply fired staff and reduced service to the vets to cover the drastic budget shortfall. There was never an effort made to pass a emergency funding bill or to otherwise refund the hospitals. Now that is what I call "fiscal responsibility" and belt tightening in earnest. May God bless and forgive the people that do, or are capable of doing, that sort of thing because I certainly won't. I think they were doing "Stop Loss" at that time also but I'm not exactly certain.
Anybody have any idea of the horrific consequences that will follow a implosion of the international banking system? Well, just save one round for yourself.
Just imagine how bad things must be if the Democrats are behind giving the bankers hundreds of billion dollars. Gives one pause, don't it?
John the ever CONSERVATIVE.