Buttigieg/Secretary of Transportation Thread

[Bama Chick 28596]

Where’s a link to that actual tweet?

Because that’s not on his timeline.

[washparkhorn 9931]

1 hour ago, Kyle said:

Here is a link to the actual tweet - https://twitter.com/SecretaryPete/status/1374776049859432450

 

Let me guess - Kyly the aggy hasy been listening to Tucker talk about equality/equity. 

dum.

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by washparkhorn

[Bama Chick 28596]

Ah, I was looking at his personal account apparently. Thanks.

[GRHorn 105]

On 3/28/2021 at 12:11 AM, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

 

The alternative is to raise the gasoline tax. Then all the rich liberals can cruise around in their Teslas and not have to pay a cent to maintain the roads.

 

 

 

Who says we need to raise taxes to spend excessively? What has this last year told us? You don’t need to raise revenue to spend. 
 

So why are the libs here cheering the most regressive tax imaginable? Poor people have to drive everywhere. They get to stay home to work. Scared to go out to dinner. Here’s the answer. It affects rural people disproportionately so they like it. 

[mchookem 15879]

please quote ONE 'lib' here who is cheering this. quote ANY poster cheering it. 🙄

i used to not think you were a troll. you have changed my mind the last month. 

[GRHorn 105]

On 3/27/2021 at 4:06 AM, 956 Worldwide said:

 

At first glance, a pay by the mile tax does seem to be pretty equitable.... you use, you pay.  This is basically what a fuel tax is—- the more you drive, the more you fund. 

 

On 3/27/2021 at 2:55 PM, Hank Kingsley said:

Pete Buttigieg isn't allowed to discuss ideas for the future or have an open dialogue about infrastructure. Discourse isn't tolerated anymore. 

Carry on. 

 

 

On 3/27/2021 at 12:36 PM, Fudge Nuggets said:

I bought my car the day after Thanksgiving 2019.  This Thursday the odometer rolled over 4,000 miles.  Bring it on, Pete. You’ll get fuck all from me.

@mchookem

[mchookem 15879]

not even close to 'cheering' 🙄

 

Edited March 30, 2021 by mchookem

[Celery Man 20832]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

 

So why are the libs here cheering the most regressive tax imaginable? Poor people have to drive everywhere. They get to stay home to work. Scared to go out to dinner. Here’s the answer. It affects rural people disproportionately so they like it. 

Lol yeah that’s what the libs are doing. Plotting how to fuck over rural people. Reality is closer to Don Draper in the elevator - they don’t think about them at all, which is a problem in its own right. Anyways, easy to understand how modern republicans can assume the worst about everyone else based on a fictional narrative of their own creation.

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

 

Who says we need to raise taxes to spend excessively? What has this last year told us? You don’t need to raise revenue to spend. 
 

So why are the libs here cheering the most regressive tax imaginable? Poor people have to drive everywhere. They get to stay home to work. Scared to go out to dinner. Here’s the answer. It affects rural people disproportionately so they like it. 

A theoretical VMT would replace the gas tax. With more electric cars in the future, it's only a matter of time. 

 

[High Plains Drifter 10961]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

 

Who says we need to raise taxes to spend excessively? What has this last year told us? You don’t need to raise revenue to spend. 
 

So why are the libs here cheering the most regressive tax imaginable? Poor people have to drive everywhere. They get to stay home to work. Scared to go out to dinner. Here’s the answer. It affects rural people disproportionately so they like it. 

 

Concern troll is concerned about poor people.

 

 

I live in a rural area. You city folk subsidize my internet, my insurance, my roads and highways, my schools, my healthcare system. I don't give a shit if it affects rural people more. I do care if it affects poor people more. That is easily fixed with rebates or a more progressive income tax structure. There are probably other ways as well.

 

[956 Worldwide 34241]

All of the concerns about rural and poor people are addressable and would be part of any discussion.  You can provide rebates and credits with income testing and for workers.  You can adjust the VMT rate to control for congestion, type of road, and area (which is fair, because rural roads that don't get as much traffic require less maintenance than superhighways).  In some ways, the VMT will be LESS regressive than a fuel tax because while most actual driving poor people are stuck with older and less fuel efficient cars, wealthy people can afford hybrids, electric cars, etc. if they want them.  The VMT could look at weight per axle.

But well done on dumbifying and distorting the proposal into something exactly ZERO people are discussing, wrapping it in Sean Hannity branded Culture War gift paper, and refusing to provide any productive solution to the cold hard math of declining fuel taxes and rising road budgets! Very on-brand for today's 'conservatives.'  And you can't argue with the results, in the long run you will get more rural votes by convincing the country folk that cityslickers hate them and want to tax each mile they drive in their pickups than you ever will by actually fixing their roads. 

Edited March 30, 2021 by 956 Worldwide

[Fudge Nuggets 19111]

8 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 

 

@mchookem

Well mine was far from cheering this on.  Matter of fact it was a pure "take your stupid ass idea and shove it up your ass, Pete" in disguise.

[TwiceHorn 31085]

On 3/27/2021 at 10:57 AM, RomaVicta said:

Reading these posts gives me a clearer vision of what has changed about fiscal conservatives. I think the GOP (not Trumpist) by sloganeering about the failures of goverment and the waste of government (very real concerns) and then pushing their rhetoric to state the total failure of government (hyperbole used to enflame their dwindling masses) ended up abandoning citizenship almost altogether.

 

Nailed it. And "fiscal" is just an element of conservatism, helpful to distinguish social aspects.

I'm a conservative, but to me that means having the kind of conversation occurring right here, not just airing a bunch of grievances and ignoring any solutions.

Pete is proposing a "liberal" or progressive idea for regulation and taxation.  The people on this thread that are saying "whoa, hold up a minute," are being conservative.  Not GOP conservative, but conservative.

I can appreciate people with "radical" ideas like AOC, Pete, Warren, because they start a dialog about solutions to a problem.  I may want to fine tune the hell out of the solution, or end up opposing it entirely in favor of something else or maybe nothing at all, but you have to start somewhere and as many of the things as I have found distasteful about the GOP for a couple of decades now, it is the increasing unwillingness to address problems.

Edited March 30, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

Interesting that no one mentions semis/18 wheelers in this discussion, considering the amount of miles they drive and damage they cause to roads/freeways. And that these corporations will eventually start using electric trucks. 

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

I'm a conservative, but to me that means having the kind of conversation occurring right here, not just airing a bunch of grievances and ignoring any solutions.

Pete is proposing a "liberal" or progressive idea for regulation and taxation.  The people on this thread that are saying "whoa, hold up a minute," are being conservative.  Not GOP conservative, but conservative.

I can appreciate people with "radical" ideas like AOC, Pete, Warren, because they start a dialog about solutions to a problem.  I may want to fine tune the hell out of the solution, or end up opposing it entirely in favor of something else or maybe nothing at all, but you have to start somewhere and as many of the things as I have found distasteful about the GOP for a couple of decades now, it is the increasing unwillingness to address problems.

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I may want to fine tune the hell out of the solution, or end up opposing it entirely in favor of something else or maybe nothing at all, but you have to start somewhere and as many of the things as I have found distasteful about the GOP for a couple of decades now, it is the increasing unwillingness to address problems.

Unfortunately this has become an issue on the left as well. If they don't like the messenger, they don't like the idea. 

If Bernie publicly supported the VMT, all these leftist Twitter dipshits wouldn't be so mad.  If Warren was proposing the VMT, Hugo would be peppering this thread defending it. 

I know it's almost exclusively a Twitter thing, but Buttigieg Derangement Syndrom is very real. 

 

[956 Worldwide 34241]

11 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Interesting that no one mentions semis/18 wheelers in this discussion, considering the amount of miles they drive and damage they cause to roads/freeways. And that these corporations will eventually start using electric trucks. 

That's where a variable VMT based on weight/axle would factor in. 

[Js1 84995]

29 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Unfortunately this has become an issue on the left as well. If they don't like the messenger, they don't like the idea. 

If Bernie publicly supported the VMT, all these leftist Twitter dipshits wouldn't be so mad.  If Warren was proposing the VMT, Hugo would be peppering this thread defending it. 

I know it's almost exclusively a Twitter thing, but Buttigieg Derangement Syndrom is very real. 

 

Republicans shoot the message.

Dems shoot the messenger. 

[Celery Man 20832]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Republicans shoot the message.

Dems shoot the messenger. 

To be fair the republicans shoot a lot of bystanders as well

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

 

 

[BradInATX 9208]

14 hours ago, GRHorn said:

 

Who says we need to raise taxes to spend excessively? What has this last year told us? You don’t need to raise revenue to spend. 
 

So why are the libs here cheering the most regressive tax imaginable? Poor people have to drive everywhere. They get to stay home to work. Scared to go out to dinner. Here’s the answer. It affects rural people disproportionately so they like it. 

 

I haven't really seen anyone cheering it. I'm ambivalent on it. What I do care about is that Buttigieg seems to be aware of looming issues coming in the future and trying to get ahead of them. As we move toward green energy and more electric cars on the road, that's going to be a net loss of revenue that needs to be replaced by something else.

I'm sure, as Worldwide said above, they'll have rebates to make it more progressive. But even if it's not perfect, at least one party is aware of the future and working proactively to get ahead of problems. This administration appears, so far, to be aware of and working on solutions for looming changes that will transform our world. Driverless/electric cars, income inequality, technology, etc. The other party is denying any of those things exist and pretending it's 1957.

Edited March 30, 2021 by BradInATX

[GW Hayduke 1949]

42 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

 

I'm not much of a fan of congestion pricing.  Instead of increasing the price to decrease/control demand, they should increase capacity to meet demand.  I'm all for increasing revenues for transit, but I would rather see more subway lanes, buses, and train cars to meet peak demand. This model can hamper investment in future capacity since authorities can just simply increase the price to control demand.

The end result of congestion pricing also has equity issues where low and medium income folks can easily be priced out.  Then we are left with a public transit system that only caters to high earners during certain times of the day.

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

27 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I'm not much of a fan of congestion pricing.  Instead of increasing the price to decrease/control demand, they should increase capacity to meet demand.  I'm all for increasing revenues for transit, but I would rather see more subway lanes, buses, and train cars to meet peak demand. This model can hamper investment in future capacity since authorities can just simply increase the price to control demand.

The end result of congestion pricing also has equity issues where low and medium income folks can easily be priced out.  Then we are left with a public transit system that only caters to high earners during certain times of the day.

I'm not well versed with congestion pricing. I know a lot of progressive NYers have been calling for it for years. Why would the public transit system only cater to high earners? 

 

[956 Worldwide 34241]

I am pretty sure that the congestion pricing plan in NYC is for use of roads and does not apply to public transit, but I am not completely sure. 

[GW Hayduke 1949]

21 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I'm not well versed with congestion pricing. I know a lot of progressive NYers have been calling for it for years. Why would the public transit system only cater to high earners? 

 

I was just going off of the video clip and it appeared to me they were planning to apply congestion pricing to subways.  I was mistaken.  It looks like they are going to apply it to automobile users in the CBD.  A lot of toll roads in Texas have congestion pricing involved and I'm sure those in NY do also.  But there is usually a non-tolled route available, and taking lanes that were previously non-tolled and making them tolled can be complicated (it is illegal here in Texas). It could be a good thing for NY if they address the equity issue for automobile users and this is something the public understands and wants.

 

[kevwun 15572]

43 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I am pretty sure that the congestion pricing plan in NYC is for use of roads and does not apply to public transit, but I am not completely sure. 

I believe you are right.  The whole purpose of it is to get cars off the street and people in to public transportation.  It will probably help there, but it's going to be limited to densely populated cities that have good public transportation systems.

Edited March 30, 2021 by kevwun

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

1 minute ago, kevwun said:

I believe you are right.  The whole purpose of it is to get cars off the street and people in to public transportation.  It will probably help there, but it's going to be limited to densely populated cities that have good public transportation systems.

Definitely. This really only makes sense for a handful of big cities at the moment. 

[RomaVicta 29704]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Nailed it. And "fiscal" is just an element of conservatism, helpful to distinguish social aspects.

I'm a conservative, but to me that means having the kind of conversation occurring right here, not just airing a bunch of grievances and ignoring any solutions.

Pete is proposing a "liberal" or progressive idea for regulation and taxation.  The people on this thread that are saying "whoa, hold up a minute," are being conservative.  Not GOP conservative, but conservative.

I can appreciate people with "radical" ideas like AOC, Pete, Warren, because they start a dialog about solutions to a problem.  I may want to fine tune the hell out of the solution, or end up opposing it entirely in favor of something else or maybe nothing at all, but you have to start somewhere and as many of the things as I have found distasteful about the GOP for a couple of decades now, it is the increasing unwillingness to address problems.

You're describing the kind of conservative the country needs. You have no home right now. That's distressing even though I am moderate left. Somebody made this a war where you just shoot not talk.

 

 

[elfenix 34161]

We have a serious poster here describe VMT, which is a user fee, ultimately, as a liberal idea? What the actual fuck?

[henrygandorf 29169]

 

i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that nobody in any department of trump's administration could've done this, with 4x as much time allotted, even with cue-cards and rehearsals.

[mchookem 15879]

man he brings out my geeky fangirl 😄😊

[Biff Tannen 45439]

4 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

 

i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that nobody in any department of trump's administration could've done this, with 4x as much time allotted, even with cue-cards and rehearsals.

Depends.  If you wanted thoughtful, truthful answers, then no fucking way.  They were very good at rambling nonsense and lies though.

[henrygandorf 29169]

4 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Depends.  If you wanted thoughtful, truthful answers, then no fucking way.  They were very good at rambling nonsense and lies though.

i don't care about thoughtful or truthful, just fucking answers.

not filibustering about nonsense and side-stepping into some trumper talking points.  i don't remember the last time a republican gave a straight fucking answer to a question.  i mean, i'm sure video exists, but who has that kind of time.

[Hank Kingsley 20594]

DOT now has a chief science officer for the first time in almost 40 YEARS. 

"I look forward to working across all modes of transportation to address the immediate concerns, and to ensure our future transportation system is sustainable," Hampshire said. "It is important that [the transportation department] incorporate scientific research to advance climate change initiatives that are fair and equitable to all."

[Gil Bang 25843]

He's a cool customer.  

 

 

[F250 28623]

43 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

He's a cool customer.  

 

 

lulz he is good at unmasking clowns in disguise.

 

[Biff Tannen 45439]

47 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

He's a cool customer.  

 

 

fucking clown show

[Amos Moses 795]

That is my congressman. So proud.

[Gil Bang 25843]

Just now, Amos Moses said:

That is my congressman. So proud.

Call his office and tell him you don't appreciate his assclownery. 

[Gap03 3223]

49 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

He's a cool customer.  

Jesus Christ, Texas ... so many fucking embarassments.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5102]

Our taxpayer money at work, blowing up pictures of Biden so that Republicans can cast aspersions in committee hearings.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6531]

I see shit like this and it's off to Realtor.com to look for places other than TX to live.  I wonder how many other Texans are possibly considering moving due to the direction of this state.  Sadly, there are tons of Republicans in other states that see this stuff and say, "I really need to move down to Texas".  

[SydneyCarton 47809]

1 hour ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

I see shit like this and it's off to Realtor.com to look for places other than TX to live.  I wonder how many other Texans are possibly considering moving due to the direction of this state.  Sadly, there are tons of Republicans in other states that see this stuff and say, "I really need to move down to Texas".  

There's literally 2, maybe 3, threads discussing this on this very board. So...a lot. 

[Beantown Express 2.0 6531]

14 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

There's literally 2, maybe 3, threads discussing this on this very board. So...a lot. 

Yeah, I post on those.  I was just wondering if it's just a thing with this board or actually a very wide spread thought process throughout Texas.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Gap03 said:

Jesus Christ, Texas ... so many fucking embarassments.

Was thinking about it this morning... who has us beat? Georgia (MTG) and NC (Cawthorn) have bad ones, but it seems to be "ones." Meanwhile, we have:

Chip Roy
Troy Nehls
Ronny Jackson
Louie Gohmert
Ted Cruz

Drop down just a level and you have the guys who aren't as big a clowns, but do some real damage:

Abbott
Patrick
Paxton

I've left Cornyn off as I can't quite place where he genuinely is at. 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Yeah, I post on those.  I was just wondering if it's just a thing with this board or actually a very wide spread thought process throughout Texas.

Visit r/Texas. It will make you give up hope as anyone who votes for sanity is making plans to leave the state.

[kibbles 70]

what is his ceiling?   sec of state?

[UpperWestside 6081]

2 hours ago, Gap03 said:

Jesus Christ, Texas ... so many fucking embarassments.

I have stopped telling people I grew up in Texas. That right there is a good reason why. 

[UpperWestside 6081]

55 minutes ago, kibbles said:

what is his ceiling?   sec of state?

I won’t put a ceiling on him. So much of his future in the political realm will be determined in the next 5-7 years though. If he were married to a woman he would have a cakewalk to the presidency. If society ever moves past that ridiculous hang-up about who he loves then the top office in the land is within his reach. It’s sad that that still can determine his future and the impact he can make on this country. 

[RDCanecutter 26198]

3 hours ago, Gap03 said:

Jesus Christ, Texas ... so many fucking embarassments.

6 times as many people in the state as an average state, that's probably gonna get you 6 times as many assclowns.

Don't beat yourself up unless you start getting 8+ times as many.