<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Time For A Change?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2009/03/time-change/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2009/03/time-change</link>
	<description>Puget Sound Transportation and Land Use Issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:55:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: serial catowner</title>
		<link>http://www.orphanroad.com/blog/2009/03/time-change/comment-page-1#comment-1097</link>
		<dc:creator>serial catowner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wp.orphanroad.com/?p=1036#comment-1097</guid>
		<description>Ok, in the past Frank has occasionally scratched his head and wondered &quot;What does this have to do with transit&quot; so let me spell it out- the best fare-box recovery I&#039;ve ever read about was 76%, leaving a cool quarter of the costs to other funding.  And that&#039;s before we start asking just how much of the bill should be presented to the actual riders.

After all, much of the investment will benefit riders 30 years in the future, and the property owners closest to the stations.  Businesses with an expanded labor pool from which to choose the best and brightest will also benefit.

In short, with transit, you make a choice- a massive huge investment in rails, equipment, and signaling, or a massive huge investment in labor and fuel for buses.  The more successful you are, the bigger the investment you need, and we have reasons to believe we want to be very successful indeed.

When the tide was coming in, taxing gasoline, real estate, and consumerism may have made sense.  With the pressing imperative to cut carbon emissions, these are no longer reliable taxing mechanisms.  We need to rethink this so we can do what we want to do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, in the past Frank has occasionally scratched his head and wondered &#8220;What does this have to do with transit&#8221; so let me spell it out- the best fare-box recovery I&#8217;ve ever read about was 76%, leaving a cool quarter of the costs to other funding.  And that&#8217;s before we start asking just how much of the bill should be presented to the actual riders.</p>
<p>After all, much of the investment will benefit riders 30 years in the future, and the property owners closest to the stations.  Businesses with an expanded labor pool from which to choose the best and brightest will also benefit.</p>
<p>In short, with transit, you make a choice- a massive huge investment in rails, equipment, and signaling, or a massive huge investment in labor and fuel for buses.  The more successful you are, the bigger the investment you need, and we have reasons to believe we want to be very successful indeed.</p>
<p>When the tide was coming in, taxing gasoline, real estate, and consumerism may have made sense.  With the pressing imperative to cut carbon emissions, these are no longer reliable taxing mechanisms.  We need to rethink this so we can do what we want to do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

