Obama plans high-speed money shredder, made in China.

[PeshakJang]

You guys enjoy driving for hours on end and pissing in bottles along the highways. We will be kicking back with a beer in the lounge. Thats pwnage.

Back on track, please respond to the numbers I posted.

 

[chucky2]

Fares and transit taxes on tickets and monthly passes are 85% of BARTs budget. The rest come from CA taxpayer. Thing is we put back more then that 15% with advertising and shops. Enough that we have a surplus for the system itself if that clears things up a bit.

Ignoring Persha's posts, you're talking about a 4.5M surplus - that's great! But they got 26M from the taxpayers to get that 4.5M surplus, which means, they're really 21.5M in the red...using the numbers you've provided. So either they still have to cut, and/or, raise rates.

When they're completely off the taxpayer teat, both Fed state and local, and operating at their revenue level, or even better above it, then I'll call that awesome.

So far it looks like they're getting lots of money and still running in the red...

Chuck

 

[Steeplerot]

At least now we have Republicans in congress who will undoubtedly block this ridiculous spending black hole.

A demographically old and dying regional minority party with a bunch of ineffectual retards too hung up on ideology pulled from a crackerjacks box to get anything done? Bring it. They are even more obsolete and ineffectual then the democratic party at getting things done. lol we got a dreamer here.

 

[Steeplerot]

Back on track, please respond to the numbers I posted.

You provided no links, or anything backing your assertion but incomplete data for years back I already agreed were outdated for the issue at hand.

 

[PeshakJang]

You provided no links, or anything backing your assertion but incomplete data for years back I already agreed were outdated for the issue at hand.

http://www.bart.gov/docs/FY2010_financials.pdf

That's the link I posted, with the numbers I got from it, from the last fiscal year. There is no more current report.

If you think historical figures from the most recent 3 years are obsolete, or not a good indicator of what this year will look like, please provide me with the facts you base than on.

 

[Steeplerot]

http://www.bart.gov/docs/FY2010_financials.pdf

Thats late 2009 early 2010, how many times am I repeating myself for the dense? Its getting boring. Look at the first lines before copy and pasting what you want to see. That is almost a 3 year old budget come april this year.

 

[PeshakJang]

Thats late 2009 early 2010,

Yes, it is the most recently reported financial assessment. The report is dated November 24 2010. If you can find a more recent report of the financial status of BART, please post it.

how many times am I repeating myself for the dense? Its getting boring.
Look at the first lines before copy and pasting what you want to see. That is almost a 3 year old budget come april this year.

I don't consider last year 3 years ago.. but hey... if deficit = surplus then maybe 1 = 3.

Please show me the budget for 2012 if you have it. If not, please show me the budget for 2011. Show me SOMETHING to support your claims.

Let's give a run down of what you are claiming:

FY2008 - Loss of $315 Million
FY2009 - Loss of $318 Million
FY2010 - Loss of $279 Million
FY2011 (which is this year, BTW) - Surplus of $4 million

So please outline how you came to this conclusion. How did they turn 3 years of 1/3 Billion deficits into a surplus in one year?

 

[xj0hnx]

Thats late 2009 early 2010, how many times am I repeating myself for the dense? Its getting boring. Look at the first lines before copy and pasting what you want to see. That is almost a 3 year old budget come april this year.

Um no.

For the years ended June 30, 2010 and 2009

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the District as of June 30, 2010 and 2009

Certified Public Accountants
Walnut Creek, California
November 24, 2010

November 24, 2010 isn't even four months ago, and June 30th 2010 wasn't even a year ago.

 

[Steeplerot]

Yes, it is the most recently reported financial assessment. The report is dated November 24 2010. If you can find a more recent report of the financial status of BART, please post it.

I already posted last years 2010-2011 report. And quoted a whole wall of text with highlights. And link.

2011-2012 will be out in May, and it will be even more interesting as BART had record setting passengers of all time this year when the Giants kicked TX ass in the World Series on top of a smallish fare hike.

 

[PeshakJang]

I already posted last years 2010-2011 report. And quoted a whole wall of text with highlights. And link.

2011-2012 will be out in May, and it will be even more interesting as BART had record setting passengers of all time this year when the Giants kicked TX ass in the World Series on top of a smallish fare hike.

You edited your post, so I didn't see it.

PS, that story is from June 2010, so by your standard, it's 3 years old. It's also not a report, it's a press release.

And you basically proved my point with your post. BART operates at a net loss if not for state and federal subsidies. The only reason there is a small surplus is because the state is giving them $26 million. They still lose $300 million per year on actual operations.

They spent $700 million on operations, they made $370 million on operations. If somebody gives them $400 million to stay open, that somehow means that they made money? Please explain further.

 

[Fear No Evil]

You guys enjoy driving for hours on end and pissing in bottles along the highways. We will be kicking back with a beer in the lounge. Thats pwnage.

I work for a very large company and my commute is exactly 0 miles. Its amazing how businesses come up with solutions other than billion dollar trains to solve problems like this.

 

[PeshakJang]

BART got your tongue?

 

[Steeplerot]

I am not reposting a wall o' text from the same thread because you do not like the answers you get. Deal with it.

 

[PeshakJang]

I am not reposting a wall o' text from the same thread because you do not like the answers you get. Deal with it.

I read your wall of text. I explained the numbers behind your generalizations, and the false conclusion that you reached. You refuse to accept the facts, and keep insisting that a loss = a surplus.

Be a man and admit that you were flat out wrong.

 

[Steeplerot]

I explained the numbers behind your generalizations, and the false conclusion that you reached.

Except that you did nothing of the sort except repeat outdated information to make conclusions that fit your narrow world-view missing the point. Now you are spamming/spining to dazzle with bullshit. As I said, deal with it.



Surplus offers chance to clean up BART train cars

BART puts surplus into fare rollbacks

Board votes to spend surplus on riders, defers vote on fare rollback

BART announces another $4M surplus

 

[werepossum]

I read your wall of text. I explained the numbers behind your generalizations, and the false conclusion that you reached. You refuse to accept the facts, and keep insisting that a loss = a surplus.

Be a man and admit that you were flat out wrong.

But - but all the voices in his head agree with him!

BART not only can't make it on it's customers, it can't even make it on its potential customer base. Federal money is required to make it work. Fortunately for Red, this fits right in with his Magic Cupboard Theory of Economics. There's always money in the Magic Cupboard!

 

[alphatarget1]

Let me chime in on this...

I used to live in the Bay Area and back in the good ol' days when gas was $1 a gallon, hardly anybody rode BART on non-peak times. A large majority of the money to build the system has already been spent. In a urban transportation planner's perspective, how many miles of new lanes of roads and new bridges would you have to build if you stopped running BART? I don't even think there is room to accommodate new roads. Furthermore, if you understand California geography, all that smog gets blown into the central valley and just sticks around in Bakersfield- in other words, the state of CA has a vested interest in subsidizing BART. I'm not sure if I agree that there is a need for more extensions on BART. I think the benefits are minimal compared to the cost of building new stations and rails.

HSR for intercity connections simply will not work in most of the United States. Does Canada have HSR? How about Australia? Hell, Russia doesn't really have a lot of high speed rail either. It makes a whole lot of sense to build HSR in densely populated areas, but not so much when your cities are greater than 300-400 miles apart with not much in between. You'd also need supporting infrastructures for existing cities, otherwise what are you going to do when you get to your destination? Rent a car after you get off the train?

With that said, gas has nowhere to go but up, so it's nice to have alternatives. Would you still drive or fly to visit Grandma who lives 1000 miles away when plane tickets are 600 bucks each, and gas is 8 bucks a gallon? I am sure someone has done studies on how it would affect people's choice when it comes to choosing a mode of transportation. Whether that justifies the cost of building a HSR network is the matter of public debate.

These are complex issues that doesn't have a black or white answer... When it comes to Obama, though, I tend to think he has no problem pissing my hard earned money away to attempt to achieve his socialist goals.

 

[Steeplerot]

I used to live in the Bay Area and back in the good ol' days when gas was $1 a gallon, hardly anybody rode BART on non-peak times..

In other words you too have nothing but a very old opinion to chime in on as it once again fits your narrow worldview.
The system is also probably twice as big as back then. Apples to oranges.


BART customers continue to set ridership records

On Saturday, October 31: Fifth-highest Saturday
For the 3 a.m. (Saturday, October 31) to 3 a.m. (Sunday, November 1) revenue day, BART had 227,100 riders. This is the fifth-highest Saturday since BART began service. There were 133,700 transbay trips.

On Friday, October 30: Second-highest ridership day
For the 3 a.m. (Friday, October 30) to 3 a.m. (Saturday, October 31) revenue day, BART had 437,700 riders. This was the second-highest ridership day since BART began service. There were 258,200 transbay trips.

On Thursday, October 29: 442,000 riders following emergency Bay Bridge closure
For the second time in as many days, BART customers have set a new, single-day ridership record. On Thursday, trains carried 442,000 riders beating the previous day's record high of 437,200 riders. Thursday there were 86,000 or 24% more customers than on a typical Thursday.

Also Thursday, 260,600 riders used BART to get between the East Bay and San Francisco. Transbay ridership was 95,000 or 57% higher than on an average Thursday.

THIS MORNING'S TRANSBAY RIDERSHIP UP 60%
BART's transbay ridership this morning is up 60% as compared with a normal Friday morning. Typically between the start of service and 10 a.m. BART would carry about 50,000 passengers between the East Bay and San Francisco. This morning, transbay ridership increased by 29,000 riders for a total of approximately 79,000 transbay riders.

Additionally, this morning's overall ridership was up 27%. That translates into 28,000 more passengers using BART. Typically, during a Friday morning commute, BART would carry about 101,000 passengers systemwide. Today there was a total of 129,000 riders systemwide.

Thats just this past YEAR

http://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2009/news20091030.aspx

 

[alphatarget1]

But - but all the voices in his head agree with him!

BART not only can't make it on it's customers, it can't even make it on its potential customer base. Federal money is required to make it work. Fortunately for Red, this fits right in with his Magic Cupboard Theory of Economics. There's always money in the Magic Cupboard!

BART is NOT cheap. $5 bucks each from Union City to Pleasant Hill. 3x people that's $15 roundtrip.

 

[alphatarget1]

In other words you too have nothing but a very old opinion to chime in on as it once again fits your narrow worldview.

Wow, you are dense. Did you read the entire post? I did not criticize BART in any shape or form. I think it's a great system for the most part. I lived in Asia and Europe and I'm well aware of what could work and what wouldn't work in the US based on my experiences living on 2 other continents other than North America.

Good luck, you live in California. Your state is bankrupt. The middle class continues to flee your socialist utopia. Don't expect us to bail you out when investors stop financing California debt.

 

[Steeplerot]

Wow, you are dense. Did you read the entire post? I did not criticize BART in any shape or form. I think it's a great system for the most part. I lived in Asia and Europe and I'm well aware of what could work and what wouldn't work in the US based on my experiences living on 2 other continents other than North America.

Good luck, you live in California. Your state is bankrupt. The middle class continues to flee your socialist utopia. Don't expect us to bail you out when investors stop financing California debt.

We will be fine, this is pretty lol coming from folks who think Europe is about to topple to a caliphate with brown people crawling all over. meh. We will still be the economic superpower of not only the USA but the whole west coast of North and South American continents. I would worry about your houses being in order thanks.

 

[Steeplerot]

BART is NOT cheap. $5 bucks each from Union City to Pleasant Hill. 3x people that's $15 roundtrip.

15$ is not bad for 3 people, considering it's a 81 mile journey. If you deviated a bit and crossed the Bay bridge in a car at peak times its 6$ toll now, Golden Gate Bridge is even more.

 

[PeshakJang]

Except that you did nothing of the sort except repeat outdated information to make conclusions that fit your narrow world-view missing the point. Now you are spamming/spining to dazzle with bullshit. As I said, deal with it.

I posted the financial figures from BART for the last reported fiscal year. These are FACTS. If you don't understand how to read a financial statement, it's not my fault.

I'm not spinning anything. I posted the facts. You post nothing but news stories and press releases explaining "Surplus!" without explaining how that "surplus came into being. YOU are making the leap from a total budget surplus to BART making money. That is the very definition of spinning.

And hey... look at this:

Surplus offers chance to clean up BART train cars

The agency is in the envied position of dealing with a budget surplus due to a $26 million funding contribution it unexpectedly received from the state this year. Originally, BART entered this fiscal year with a multimillion-dollar deficit, but the state funding turned that shortfall into a $9 million surplus.

​

​

BART puts surplus into fare rollbacks

BART has recently debated how to spend the extra money, which came about due to a surprise injection of $24 million from the state.

​

​

Board votes to spend surplus on riders, defers vote on fare rollback

BART projected a $4.5 million funding surplus for Fiscal Year 2011 - the current budget year - after a court order required the state to return State Transit Assistance money to transit agencies like BART.

BART announces another $4M surplus

"No we did not win the lottery," says BART Director Carole Ward Allen. "This money came from the state ..."

Although the extra funds are considered miniscule compared to the agencies $700 million a year operating budget, BART says it comes from belt tightening.

Honestly... you post 4 stories, 2 of which are the same, and you don't even read one of them?

 

[alphatarget1]

15$ is not bad for 3 people, considering it's a 81 mile journey. If you deviated a bit and crossed the Bay bridge in a car at peak times its 6$ toll now, Golden Gate Bridge is even more.

You must be on some good crack. Why would ANYBODY deviate and go across the bay to get to another East Bay location? 81miles round trip on BART is $5.05*3*2=$30.3. From Union City to Pleasant Hill on I880 and CA24 is 40.1 miles one way. If I drove a Honda Civic that gets 40mpg that's 1 gallon of gas for 3 people @ $4 a gallon that's still only $4 for 3 people vs. $15. BART is therefore a little less than (including depreciation) 375% more expensive than driving.

If one was planning on going out to the City to get wasted, sure, BART is great, cuts down on drunk driving. BART is also great for commuters who don't want to be stuck in traffic. In all other times, if there are viable/cheaper alternatives, I'd probably avoid BART and public transit, especially when the transportation of more than 1 person is required.

 

[Genx87]

How many public transit systems post a surplus without tax subsidies? In MN our public transit system covers something ridiculous like 35% of the cost of operations through fares. The rest is picked up by siphoning off taxes. The mass transit crowd is in a real pickle on that argument. If they changed the fares to represent the true cost of riding on their toy trains ridership would drop like a rock. I would have no problem with mass\public transit if the fares covered the true cost of service.