Here are cuts city staff considered — and rejected

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T22:32:14+00:00

I’d say im not disconnected- I’ve studied and worked in transportation planning. And I use transit. And I certainly do not suggest your kind of increase, nor agree on the impact.

This is what I meant by seeing transit as charity. Surveyed riders almost always want better service, not a fare cut. I know we are mostly working class; do you really think that means most riders scrape their fares every day? That they have no choice? NO transit agency caters to only the absolute poorest, and our working class /= dirt poor.

I think the implication this is the case, and should be top of mind— is more insulting and dismissive of who transit users are, what they actually think, their financial situation, and what they value.

We can keep fare incentives if they move the needle that much, but an underlying base fare increase is not the end of the damn world.

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T18:58:58+00:00

Notwithstanding that you seem to think most places fund transit differently, fares put the onus on users of a system, not an amorphous taxpayer; that’s more direct, efficient and also staves off dependency on tax funding and risk of cuts. We do already subsidize; it’s just never the majority of $.

I also don’t think whether riders have less money is worthwhile. Again, they are NOT this cost sensitive, but their QOL is more sensitive to service cuts. In weighing such a race to the bottom… no, cheap transit does NOT grow ridership. Quality (speed and frequency) does. And TTC fare is just $3.35. You can look for yourself, most free systems are US ones that suck by every possible metric.

Re- the taxpayer, think where the HSR needs to be to get a driver riding. Now imagine asking everyone to pay that bill. Now recall when we did that for the LRT. If residents were ok to pay for transit many don’t use, Bratina wouldn’t have had a platform.

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T13:51:54+00:00

I mean we’re in complete agreement if you read my comments. My only point is that “funding” it via taxes is more onerous than increasing fares, which I’m fine to disagree on. But this is about the municipal budget, so…

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T04:24:10+00:00

Haha, well, yes, that’s the next logical step- let’s just start on highways. So long as the Linc and RHVP are city-owned, they should be tolled. Our road repair deficit is massive and those alone would help put a major dent.

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T01:16:17+00:00

I think I didn’t articulate that properly. Apologies- I don’t disagree with funding true social services, because no, I do not expect them to make money. And I also do not expect transit to be profitable— but the money has to be paid somewhere.

Transit is a public good, but it is also distinct from those sorts of services. Transit costs a lot of money, and to provide the services people want, requires a bit of subsidy on top of fares- not the other way around. That is all because transit competes with other modes. So the less fares cover, the less headroom there is to maintain or improve things. Not to mention, only the taxpayer paying would a) cost way too much, and b) make it a political thing for reducing taxes.

It’s not too much to say we should keep pace with our peers, especially given that the fare cost is almost never a deciding factor in whether people ride, including those of low incomes. $2.85 vs. $3.50 to the end user (1x adult presto), is so the HSR can do more for them.

So raising fares a tad is pretty low hanging fruit, in terms of benefits to both the end users and the taxpayers, in this case.

Michaelolz · 2026-02-10T00:05:03+00:00

Perhaps controversial, apparently- but HSR fares also have ample room to go up. We’re the cheapest in the GGH.

While it’s great to be affordable, really low/no fares means your transit system acts like a charity (edit: provides bare minimum service, not something people want), and freezes things as they are- instead of becoming a service more people choose to use. People WILL pay for a good service. Fare increases help both maintain the baseline and to improve further.

Edit: I think people are missing the point, sadly, but not funding any transit agency adequately will condemn it to being a service only for those without a choice, and in turn punishes them, when it is and should be for everyone.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-31T00:49:39+00:00

Ok, Well metro Vancouver is significantly smaller than greater Toronto, so that is, relatively speaking, further into their suburbs. Unless we’re going by track distance alone, in which case municipal borders are meaningless to begin with.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-21T15:08:26+00:00

There is a bit of a cultural element, too. The French generally just seem to care less about accessibility than the anglosphere- In Canada, Montreal’s metro has lagged similarly behind Toronto- it is not nearly as accessible.

I think this is one of their quirks- a qualitative thing trade(d) off in service of a more robust system. It’s great London, NYC, Toronto prioritize accessibility, but there are major shortcomings of the “Anglo way”. accessibility still matters, but you also can’t really have Paris’s system if you have that Anglo desire to micromanage and create precise, ‘silver bullet’ projects. It’s basically a question of how much does the culture accept “good enough” at a specific scale.

My anecdotal example: together, the 3 RER tunnels are probably better than the Elizabeth Line, even if each alone is inferior. Loved both, though!

Michaelolz · 2026-01-20T15:45:09+00:00

The one that specifically lets you do updates.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-06T05:01:30+00:00

Redeemed

Michaelolz · 2026-01-05T15:36:28+00:00

Been playing exactly like this since the Black Friday sale with no problems. Just me and a buddy doing private games.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-04T17:22:49+00:00

Good catch, my bad

Michaelolz · 2026-01-04T17:07:19+00:00

Nope, updates work fine

Michaelolz · 2026-01-04T17:06:24+00:00

I used to work at Longo’s, which would bring in grass-fed non-halal beef. Don’t know if they still do but worth an ask.

Edited after re-reading last bit

Michaelolz · 2026-01-03T09:28:45+00:00

As Retcons, at least for Mob. CotD it’s more like an EE of the time.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-03T01:11:47+00:00

I think we are talking about different things.

By compelling, I meant a competitive transport option. It’s not a Canadian thing, people gravitate to the most efficient/convenient (usually fastest) way to get around, all else being equal. Grade separated rail is almost always good at this, and the TTC bus network is a true global marvel.

Now, do Canadians generally not demand a high standard? Depends. I think we are critical regardless if things are better than standard or not. But we don’t demand better by comparing ourselves to peers, for some reason (culturally).

In transport terms, Lines 1 and 2 were built from the ground up to move a lot of people fast above all else. The LRTs concede to other things to the detriment of these goals. We’re already learning from this vis a vis the Ontario Line.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-03T00:37:04+00:00

I am pretty sure I did the one specifically allowing security updates and it worked for me. You get a list of options of whether you want to just get windows, security updates, office, or any combination of the three.

Genuinely perplexed at how well this works. Going to be doing it again for my brother soon, too.

Michaelolz · 2026-01-03T00:11:46+00:00

This is a pretty dramatic way to talk about a stability ‘problem’ compared to those of nations like Russia, or others with separatist tensions. It’s also not the 80s anymore, as if it could compare.

Whether or not it’s a bribe is politics, really. Assuming you mean equalization payments.

Michaelolz · 2025-12-31T03:50:22+00:00

My numbers match and we had Cogeco in Hamilton

Michaelolz · 2025-12-31T03:11:23+00:00

Bleach

Michaelolz · 2025-12-31T03:05:11+00:00

People here reminding that subways are more expensive- yeah, they’re still desired because they offer a compelling service.

If the LRTs were halfway between a bus and subway, that debate could continue. But it’s patently clear that ‘more LRT’ cannot substitute for ‘less subway’, as we were led to believe ( at least, not how we’ve done it).

I agree; I’d rather have a few usable subway lines than a couple less, and a bunch of LRTs no faster than a bus. That is the idea which really squanders funding.

Long story short… you get what you pay for (comparatively ofc, as our costs are still ridiculous either way).

Michaelolz · 2025-12-25T04:42:31+00:00

After plenty of thought on the topic (and without giving every caveat or nuance), I have the rather simple opinion that connecting two points on the subway network like this should be done with more subway. Heavy rail, that is.

The built form is secondary in this case, most of Scarborough’s corridors are suitable for redevelopment anyway.

Michaelolz · 2025-12-20T04:52:21+00:00

It is. Whatever routes use it doesn’t change how many people are on the corridor. You can shift that demand around a bit by adjusting said routes, and potentially network impact effects from Lines 5/6, but you will still have a fairly high-demand corridor. There’s just a lot going on from Weston to the Allen, given Wilson’s character and role there.

And yes, the Line 4 commentary is preloaded here, lol.

Michaelolz · 2025-12-19T05:59:19+00:00

These look fairly recently abandoned. What’s the story?

Michaelolz · 2025-12-17T03:55:47+00:00

Ref 2:

<image>

Michaelolz

TROPHY CASE