[archanfel]

Direct democracy is no great shakes either. Some of the greatest victories in social justice would have been voted down by majority rule at the time.

Democracy does not equal to majority rule. If we only had a direct election system, I wouldn't call that democracy, not in the modern sense anyway. Democracy is about checks and balances. There are plenty of dictators that came to power via popular support, but that's not democracy because their powers are not checked and balanced. Democracy gives the leader some leeway on implementing initiatives that may be unpopular in the short term. However, their powers are always checked in the long term.

 

[OttoSchloss]

wouldn't it just be easier to move closer to where you work?

 

[archanfel]

wouldn't it just be easier to move closer to where you work?

No, it's not easier. Not every couple work in the same building. Not every work place have good schools nearby. Not everybody can afford to live close to work. There are a lot of reasons why people might choose to not live close to work.

 

[OttoSchloss]

No, it's not easier. Not every couple work in the same building. Not every work place have good schools nearby. Not everybody can afford to live close to work. There are a lot of reasons why people might choose to not live close to work.

If people want to commute 2 hours a day or more, they aren't really making quality of life a top priority.

 

[drone]

Yeah, it's political suicide now. But later on it will be transportation suicide if nothing changes.

Politicians need to grow some balls and do what's right not what gets them votes.

I totally agree,but, if one doesn't get votes,then one can't stay in power. I am suspicious of anyone in politics, I don't think their motivation is about doing what's right for the majority,it's doing what's right for themselves. It's a career.

 

[archanfel]

If people want to commute 2 hours a day or more, they aren't really making quality of life a top priority.

If either you have to commute or your wife has to commute, what's your choice?

 

[nfitz]

There are several problems with Oriole station IMHO:

1. The 404 is jammed south of Steeles. Once you reach the 401, the worst is almost over, what's the point of getting off the highway now? I would think the Richmond Hill station is a better choice.

Yes, if your in Richmond Hill ... I was thinking of drivers who'd get on the 404 in Toronto ... this thread is about Tornto drivers after all.

2. Go trains are very expensive and are not very reliable.

I haven't had much problems on GO trains ... and I must note, that the Danforth subway I take most mornings, wasn't very effective this morning.

3. Probably more importantly, you still need to use the TTC to get around in the city unless you work at union station.

For those that aren't right downtown, it doesn't work as well; though given that GO parking is still free, as far as I know, it's not like it's any more expensive.

 

[nfitz]

If either you have to commute or your wife has to commute, what's your choice?

Someone needs to change jobs.

People living in small cities such as Kingston all seem to manage to find jobs in the same city as each other ... and it's a fraction of the size of North York.

I'm sure there will be a few unusual circumstances where people can't do it, but in many cases, it's as if people very quickly decide to go for these overly long commutes, rather than hold out for something more reasonable.

 

[archanfel]

I totally agree,but, if one doesn't get votes,then one can't stay in power. I am suspicious of anyone in politics, I don't think their motivation is about doing what's right for the majority,it's doing what's right for themselves. It's a career.

If they really wanted to do what's right for themselves, they wouldn't be politicians. There are far better careers and most politicians can probably make good money in the private sector. Nah, the draw of a public office is the sense of power and there's nothing more satisfying knowing you used the power to do the right thing, perhaps to leave a legacy.

Of course, I fail to see why this is related to the topic of commutes.

 

[archanfel]

Someone needs to change jobs.

People living in small cities such as Kingston all seem to manage to find jobs in the same city as each other ... and it's a fraction of the size of North York.

I'm sure there will be a few unusual circumstances where people can't do it, but in many cases, it's as if people very quickly decide to go for these overly long commutes, rather than hold out for something more reasonable.

Easily said than done. People living in Kingston don't have competitions from 30 kilometers away for the same job. That's the reality of living in a big city, you face a single job market that covers a vast area. Also, people get used to a particular work environment and workmates. You can't just say this company offers the same money for the same work, why don't you just move here?

Even if people do it willingly, there's no excuse for not taking their position into consideration. So what if somebody likes suburban living and downtown working or vice versa? Should the city just say "Screw you"? Well, they did and they got their asses kicked.

 

[nfitz]

Sounds to me like someone is looking for excuses.

 

[drone]

If they really wanted to do what's right for themselves, they wouldn't be politicians. There are far better careers and most politicians can probably make good money in the private sector. Nah, the draw of a public office is the sense of power and there's nothing more satisfying knowing you used the power to do the right thing, perhaps to leave a legacy.

Of course, I fail to see why this is related to the topic of commutes.

it's related simply because some people have mentioned that improving public transit would alleviate traffic issues by enticing people to use ttc. If a politicians aim is to satisfy their career goals, or even just to stay in power so that they MAY be able to do "the right thing" as you say, then it's likely that they won't work as hard on areas that won't get them re-elected, i.e. they will cater to those industries that wield power through money,and that is not the ttc. Motorists generate money,ttc does not. So,the "pipe dream" that improving the ttc by some will never happen,and when a politician states that they will improve the ttc,it can't and won't happen, even if that's truly their intention. In other words, improving the ttc is not a viable option for improving traffic flow
..and for the record ,most,if not all politicians whom have spent time in office end up in the private sector after their reign, usually with a higher paying job than they had previously in the private sector. Holding office is a stepping stone,and thinking that someone wants to leave a legacy of "doing the right thing" as you say is naive at best. I may sound bitter,but, I'm of the opinion that doing what's right is secondary at best to politicians. Holding office for as long as one can to be able to satisfy both personal and financial motives would likely be at the top of their list.

 

[archanfel]

it's related simply because some people have mentioned that improving public transit would alleviate traffic issues by enticing people to use ttc. If a politicians aim is to satisfy their career goals, or even just to stay in power so that they MAY be able to do "the right thing" as you say, then it's likely that they won't work as hard on areas that won't get them re-elected, i.e. they will cater to those industries that wield power through money,and that is not the ttc. Motorists generate money,ttc does not. So,the "pipe dream" that improving the ttc by some will never happen,and when a politician states that they will improve the ttc,it can't and won't happen, even if that's truly their intention. In other words, improving the ttc is not a viable option for improving traffic flow
..and for the record ,most,if not all politicians whom have spent time in office end up in the private sector after their reign, usually with a higher paying job than they had previously in the private sector. Holding office is a stepping stone,and thinking that someone wants to leave a legacy of "doing the right thing" as you say is naive at best. I may sound bitter,but, I'm of the opinion that doing what's right is secondary at best to politicians. Holding office for as long as one can to be able to satisfy both personal and financial motives would likely be at the top of their list.

Why would politicians wants to get elected if they can't do what they think is the right thing? Reelection is the mean to an end.

Yes, there will always be some bad apples and politicians do soft their stance for re-election, but it does not mean politicians don't want to do the right thing. For example, what's the benefit of introducing the HST in BC to Gorden Campbell? Probably very little. Yes, it would endear some businesses, but I doubt he needs it to be hired. He risked his political life to do something he thought would be right. It backfired obviously.

Also, the most popular thing is not necessarily the right thing to do. Our system strikes a balance between majority rule and dictatorship. It may not always be the right balance, but I have yet to see a better system.

Even if what you said was true, far more people support improving the TTC, even drivers. Auto companies are far more worried about emission standards and public funding than public transit competing with them. The main problem with TTC is the cost, that's why politicians sometimes get the cold feet.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Someone needs to change jobs.

People living in small cities such as Kingston all seem to manage to find jobs in the same city as each other ... and it's a fraction of the size of North York.

I'm sure there will be a few unusual circumstances where people can't do it, but in many cases, it's as if people very quickly decide to go for these overly long commutes, rather than hold out for something more reasonable.

So you would trade a job with upward mobility, personal fulfillment and great benefits for some shorter commuting time? I mean, yeah, the closest job to my house is a Shopper's Drug Mart and they're always hiring new staff but somehow I don't feel compelled to apply there.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I think trying to browbeat people toward quitting their jobs and working closer to home is approaching things from the wrong side. Governments instead need to encourage businesses to locate near population centres (walkable neighbourhoods) or transit stops, and not by highway offramps on service roads.