Comment 25978

By adrian (registered) | Posted July 17, 2008 at 13:33:47

haaa, re. "The benefit to the disenfranchised in this community would greatly outweigh the costs", I agree with you that free transit would benefit economically marginalized citizens.

However, I think the key question on this issue is not whether free transit benefits Hamilton's citizens, so much as whether free transit benefits Hamilton's transit system.

A transit system that is hobbled by poor public funding, subject to greatly increased criticism from narrow-minded councilors and citizens from sparsely populated areas, is a transit system that is in trouble. A transit system that is in trouble is bad for everybody, including Hamilton's poorer citizens.

jason, re. "Their infrastructure costs trillions", I think you're missing just how much you rely on that road network, even if you don't drive on it. Every product you buy, save those that are manufactured on the spot (e.g. baked goods) is transported to you by road.

My point about the Roman roads is that long before the automobile, the need for high quality roads was apparent (and they were high quality - the success of Christianity is in large part due to the ease with which its evangelists traveled throughout the Roman empire on those roads, and of course, the relative peacefulness inside that empire).

I do think tolls are appropriate on highways.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds