News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

The TTC is an essential service. It's not a money-making organization. Because it has a mandate to serve all parts of the city, its emphasis will be on coverage rather than profitability. As a result, some neighbourhoods *will* either have loss-making routes or have no transit altogether. This is not fair to them.

This is partly due as well to the determination that everyone must pay the same price.

An unprofitable route might become profitable if the operator were allowed to charge more per passenger. But the current choice is the standard TTC fare or no route at all. If the TTC decides that you don't deserve a route, no one else is allowed to serve you either and you are simply out of luck.
 
The TTC may not be a money-making organization (I'm sure it wants to be, but that's not supposed to be it's purpose :rolleyes:) but I think it's justified to axe a few services. If you run a bus through a route that gets an atrociously low ridership, I think it's quite right to axe that service completely. It reaches a point that it becomes unsustainable. Not a lot of people use the service, and so service has to be cut back. Still not a lot use it because it's inconvenient, so maybe it just won't work in that corridor.
It may be doing a public service and not be for profit, but then why aren't we running busses out for all the farmers in Durham region? :rolleyes:
 
It may be doing a public service and not be for profit, but then why aren't we running busses out for all the farmers in Durham region?

I am pretty sure that any services that the TTC provides outside of the City of Toronto are done under contract with the particular region and are not a drain on the Toronto taxpayer.

If you run a bus through a route that gets an atrociously low ridership, I think it's quite right to axe that service completely.

Would you agree that if the TTC axes a service that someone else should be allowed to offer service if they think that they can succeed at it? As long as they have a monopoly, then it is perfectly reasonable for people to demand that the TTC offer service, even if there are very few riders.
 
I think it's quite right to axe that service completely

Like it was mentioned before we are here to provide a service to our tax payers, the citizens of Toronto. We should have all equal services be it a profitable route or a money losing one. Why should one get a service he pays for and another who pays for it also does not.

Should we also cancel utility services, water and sewer services just because some areas are losing money?
 
Um, when I hear people say that mass transit should be private, I want to tell them UM HELLO IDIOTS, it became public in the first place because the private sector went bankrupt!!!

All over the US the mass transit systems were private. Pretty much every one went bankrupt... lasting into the 1960s at the latest.


Mass transit is not something that should be profit-oriented, and that is exactly what the purpose of the private sector is, profits. Mass transit is a public necessity, which should run no matter what.



What the TTC needs is more Subway lines. It is very rare and hard to find such underground heavy rail lines that were built and still owned by private companies. They simply do not invest in such big projects because the short term profits - which is why they exist - are not there.

The price of petrol is only bound to increase... so in due time driving will be less and less affordable... so the future of mass transit is good in my opinion.
 
*** PRIVATIZATION WORKS IN EUROPE AND ASIA ***
Click on EACH link below and you will see how many European and Asian systems are operated AND are owned by these private firms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veolia_Transport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arriva
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FirstGroup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagecoach_Group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transdev
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ComfortDelGro
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansaldo_STS (automated systems)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_Corporation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keolis

Like I've said before - stop being scared of the private sector - nothing will get done if we wait on the government. It's better to have something than nothing at all.

Government bad for abosolutely everything? Wow, that sounds like something coming from the idiots who supported Reagan and Thatcher.


Lets just think for a moment about the stuff on this list...


...which of these companies have built underground metro systems and run them? Jee, looks like they are limited to bus lines, because it is not worth while to built such metro lines. Their agenda of short term profits does not allow that.
A few on there are involved to some extent with some subway stuff... but you can not compare asia to us here. Are you aware of how many billions the asian states have been investing into mass transit? Are you aware of how many tens of billions of dollars china is investing in metro systems in many cities?? In only such cases of lavish spending do these private companies participate in joint projects in underground rail.


As for bus transit, sure we see some stuff that you have on your precious list... small buttfuck cities from where I am - the former yugoslavia. Yeah, a private bus company can make a profit there... like one place from the list, small town of pozarevac... about 40,000 people.... and how does this work - well, people do not drive much there, and petrol is uber expensive, combined with a poor government that can not afford to buy buses... so yeah, in such cases these private guys do operate, make a small profit, and work. This most definitely is not comparable to Toronto.

As for the list, it's actually shit. It includes belgrade - well, virtually all the mass transit in belgrade is by the public GSP, not these private guys. We can conclude that the list is problematic - if such an obvious error is on there, then what other wrong stuff is on there? Huh?
 
His references are from wikipedia. What more is there to say?

His references are from wikipedia. What more is there to say?

I'll tell you what more there is to say. The final nail to shut this rotten coffin, before we throw it out to sea...




Cities in Europe and Asia invest heavily in their mass transit, especially subway lines. A city of Toronto's size, if in Europe, would almost surely have a much bigger subway system.

The thing is that the federal governments there finance these projects to a much greater extent. The city is not abandoned to do stuff itself. Sure, the federal governments helps toronto, but if this was say china, we would see the federal government financing 3 new lines all at the same time.

We need to seriously compare Toronto to these european and asian cities.
Especially asian. Heck, when comparing european metro systems we can clearly see that we lag behind. Comparing to asian ones shows that we are really really behind.
South Korea's Daegau subway for example was opened in 1997 and is almost as big as toronto's. India's delhi metro, opened in 2002 is already larger than toronto's.
All this big construction, from Russia, to China, to India, to South Korea, to Germany, to Italy, to France, to Spain, and beyond, has been mainly financed by the federal government.

It's all a matter of money. We are not good financially, so the solution is stupid short term solutions... which will end up costing more in the long run, as has happened in serbia's messed up capital.



To slap the reagan and thatcher fans - the private sector and free market is the one that always fails. This is because of the greed to make more and more profits.

But back to reality - the private sector is necessary. However, this idea that the private sector knows best and should always control everything is fucked up paranoia.
It is a conspiracy really. The mayor of Cleveland I believe opposed the privatization of the electric company. As a result financial sector retaliated to punish him. The result, the city was in financial shit, but electricity was more available than in cities which privatized things. This is especially evident in the third world where water gets privatized... costs go up and people end up rioting. No thanks. Fuck the private sector for these kind of "vital" things.
 
To slap the reagan and thatcher fans - the private sector and free market is the one that always fails. This is because of the greed to make more and more profits.

The point of the private sector is that projects and businesses CAN fail if they turn out to be bad ideas. Conversely, good ideas can turn out to be quite successful.

Government projects that are bad ideas tend to be propped up indefinitely (often at the expense of private sector ventures), since it is paid for with other people's money.
 
The point of the private sector is that projects and businesses CAN fail if they turn out to be bad ideas. Conversely, good ideas can turn out to be quite successful.

Government projects that are bad ideas tend to be propped up indefinitely (often at the expense of private sector ventures), since it is paid for with other people's money.

Everything can be good or bad. I go the impression that he point of creating this topic was to say that that the private sector is always good and the the public sector is always a failure. This is the common rhetoric from the neoliberal camp. It's messed up paranoia. Sadly this was the dominant view for quite some time - and perhaps it still is.

In the US for example they are trying to retain this system. They are trying to get out of the crisis by changing the least amount of things possible. When the underlying reasons, neoliberalism, is not addressed... then all these things being done to get out of the crisis are all in vain.
 

Back
Top