TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Thing is, if they both take the same amount of time to get to Union, what becomes the point of the GO train?
First, it's extra capacity.
Second, it's still a premium service. Even if takes the same time (not yet certain), it's got comfier seats, windows, fewer stops etc. You could really just as easily say, "what's the point of cars?" since they can also go to Union Station. What's the point of taxis if you have cars? But the different modes have different pros and cons. I mean, there are plenty of commuter rail lines that overlap with subway lines in New York and elsewhere too, I'm sure.
Unless Old Cummer suddenly becomes a hipster hangout or something, GO will remain a commuter rail service to Union and the subway is a more local service. If someone wants to take the subway from Langstaff to Union or say, Downsview, they can but that doesn't mean it's the best way to get there.
GO doesn't help some suburbanite get to say, U of T as easily as the subway, but Mr. Bay Street Lawyer is more likely to opt for GO, I'd think, especially once s/he has more than 3 choices in the morning and night. Different audiences, different needs.
Really, if the biggest problem we have to deal with is too many public transit options in the inner suburbs I think we're doing OK.