The new Beltway Express Lanes lost $11.3 million in their first six weeks of operation, new documents shown to investors from operator Transurban show.

The lanes raked in $800,000 in tolls and $200,000 in fees and other revenue but had $3.2 million in operating costs, as well as depreciation of $2.1 million and financing costs of $7 million, according to documents the Australian company showed investors and that were first reported by TollRoadsNews.

An average of 23,308 vehicles took the lanes every day in the first six weeks, less than half of the 66,000 cars a traffic consultant for the project predicted in 2007.

TAR AND FEATHER TIME!!!!


http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-beltway-express-lanes-losing-money/article/2521095

I swear to God, this is the easiest show prep I have ever seen!!

Most hilarious thing is the Washington Examiner and GOP officials are going around the country the past 2 weeks selling a bill of goods about how congestion priced private public partnerships are the way of the future for smart transportation... yet in reality they don't work.

All of this to avoid a discussion about the need to raise the gas tax or leverage it as a percentage.

Can't wait to see I-95 be an equal debacle.

feelitmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new Beltway Express Lanes lost $11.3 million
> in their first six weeks of operation, new
> documents shown to investors from operator
> Transurban show.
>
> The lanes raked in $800,000 in tolls and $200,000
> in fees and other revenue but had $3.2 million in
> operating costs, as well as depreciation of $2.1
> million and financing costs of $7 million,
> according to documents the Australian company
> showed investors and that were first reported by
> TollRoadsNews.
>
> An average of 23,308 vehicles took the lanes every
> day in the first six weeks, less than half of the
> 66,000 cars a traffic consultant for the project
> predicted in 2007.
>
> TAR AND FEATHER TIME!!!!
>
>
> http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-beltway-express-
> lanes-losing-money/article/2521095


Tar and feather who? This was a private effort, and if it fails financially, the people who will pay are those that put private capital at risk.

Not true. The ultimate bill hits taxpayers, if they can make their quota.

feelitmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new Beltway Express Lanes lost $11.3 million
> in their first six weeks of operation, new
> documents shown to investors from operator
> Transurban show.
>
> The lanes raked in $800,000 in tolls and $200,000
> in fees and other revenue but had $3.2 million in
> operating costs, as well as depreciation of $2.1
> million and financing costs of $7 million,
> according to documents the Australian company
> showed investors and that were first reported by
> TollRoadsNews.
>
> An average of 23,308 vehicles took the lanes every
> day in the first six weeks, less than half of the
> 66,000 cars a traffic consultant for the project
> predicted in 2007.
>
> TAR AND FEATHER TIME!!!!
>
>
> http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-beltway-express-
> lanes-losing-money/article/2521095

And in a move that is sure to increase ridership, the minimum toll rates have been INCREASING gradually. One example, Dulles Toll Road to the Springfield interchange was $1.65 when the lanes first opened, and is now $1.85, and I even saw it at $2.00 at a time closer to rush hour, but when neither the regular Beltway lanes nor the Express Lanes were slowed down at all.

The move appears to be directed at persons who will ride the lanes for whatever reason, and may not care what it costs. The tolls were only supposed to go up to dissuade drivers from entering the lanes when traffic on the lanes was sufficienty crowded that traffic was slowing below some particular speed. That extra 0.20 to 0.35 in minimum tolls should go a long way to getting this project into the black...

Virginians are just not paying for the tolls! Unlike the NYC area, southerns are not going to pay. It's just that simple. You have to wonder whether this road is for the public good or just another money drain. It's not really private if it rides on the back of the public.

ICC is in same boat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Virginians are just not paying for the tolls!
> Unlike the NYC area, southerns are not going to
> pay. It's just that simple. You have to wonder
> whether this road is for the public good or just
> another money drain. It's not really private if
> it rides on the back of the public.


Here is the problem. In NY the enire road is tolled, no way around it (practically). Here you have a free option, and free wins every time.

Not true Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not true. The ultimate bill hits taxpayers, if
> they can make their quota.


Yup. Our asshole politicians wrote up the agreements so that the tax payer bails out the Aussies when no one pays to use it. There are also provisions against building "competing" roads.

There really is no risk for the private side of the "partnership", which is just one reason why it stings even more that VA gave this sweetheart deal to a foreign company. At least keep the tax payer sponsored profits here if you are handing out sure things.

These morons love to tout these partnerships as the way forward, but I don't think there is one example where it really worked in the taxpayer's favor. That doesn't matter though. Transurban's profits are more important.

GOP officials...
Ahem. Wrong party. Not that Rethugs have any interest in curbing real spending either.

Typical government waste. People aren't using the road and we have to pay the aussies anyway.

I've been riding around with my transponder in the HOV position for the last 2 months. I've taken the Express Lanes twice per day and never ONCE been pulled over. We Southerners indeed like free. Here's what else we like...fast. I've cut 23 minutes off my commute each way. Awesome!

ICC is in same boat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Virginians are just not paying for the tolls!
> Unlike the NYC area, southerns are not going to
> pay. It's just that simple. You have to wonder
> whether this road is for the public good or just
> another money drain. It's not really private if
> it rides on the back of the public.


If I can find a way to avoid tolls, even shifting the time if day I use roads, I will do what it takes to not support something like the HOT lanes.

I'll "cote" with my wallet, and not pay. Like when I go to Richmond, I find ways around the toll roads and will do the same, here

Ill conceived, poorly executed. It is any wonder nobody will jump on at the American Legion Bridge and take a toll road to Tyson's Corner? Oh, wait, the toll road doesn't run to the bridge, it ends/begins a few miles from it...

Make it toll-free just before the morning and evening rush.

Where the HOT lanes merge back into the Beltway, a big backup develops that crushes traffic flow on the main road.

Demand increases for the HOT lanes and tolls slowly rise.

One caveat. This probably won't work for a few years as the Beltway with the addition of HOT lanes is now probably serious over-capacity.

Hey rickies, the hurting Dulles Greenway went bankrupt very quickly. The silly state will let this new one go and if the donk investors don't buy the assets they get a silly free highway. Sorta.

Borgota.
Mister Seven rides the Money Metal Highway. It's a show.

It was designed to fail, how else can you explain it?

It was designed to get the VA taxpayers to pony up more $$, how else can you explain it?
FIFY.

This traffic fiasco brought to you by the Virginia GOP. Just wait until Cucinelli wins, we will all be riding in horse drawn carriages. "We have to get back to what 'Merica great", domesticated animal transportation.

GOP congressman going around touting how private public toll roads are the way forward in transportation funding instead of the gas tax.

This Hot Lanes is a BUST!!!. I drive the beltway everyday abd the delays are still the same each morning trying to exit onto RT#7 west. That is so bad that folks go down to 123 to try to get into Tysons and that back up also. Traffic is still slow going south in the afternoons too. They added an etra traffic light on 7 at 495 that backs up the westbound traffic in the morning and eastbound in the afternoon. Remember that Tim Kaine was the gov when that was thought up. Bob McDonald was the AG and his office also approved it too.

Yes your tax dollars are paying to take care of it every time it snows.

I agree we definitely need to raise the gas tax. The price of everything else is rising and why shouldn't gas especially given all the negative impact from the pollution.

Also we need a system such as the one in London (and Berlin) where SUVs, minivans, trucks and anything larger is charged a few for using the roads in non rural areas.


Hilarious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most hilarious thing is the Washington Examiner
> and GOP officials are going around the country the
> past 2 weeks selling a bill of goods about how
> congestion priced private public partnerships are
> the way of the future for smart transportation...
> yet in reality they don't work.
>
> All of this to avoid a discussion about the need
> to raise the gas tax or leverage it as a
> percentage.
>
> Can't wait to see I-95 be an equal debacle.

Both of these things need to happen (privatization and increased gas taxes), not to mention a system more like the London system where SUVs, minivans, and trucks and anything bigger are charged fees just for entering the area.

Fox News Sunday Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GOP congressman going around touting how private
> public toll roads are the way forward in
> transportation funding instead of the gas tax.

BushieandCucci Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This traffic fiasco brought to you by the Virginia
> GOP. Just wait until Cucinelli wins, we will all
> be riding in horse drawn carriages. "We have to
> get back to what 'Merica great", domesticated
> animal transportation.


Cucinelli doesn't have a chance, the last election proved that.

And 100% of the rest of the beltway loses money every day. Where do you think the funds for that road come from?

No one is forced to drive in the Lexus Lanes.

No one is forced to drive in ANY lanes; but we all pay taxes -- LOTS of taxes.

Well exactly and no one is forced to drive at all. The roads shouldn't be free. It isn't free to get on a bus or to take the metro rail. Why should the roads be the exception?


jeb9K Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And 100% of the rest of the beltway loses money
> every day. Where do you think the funds for that
> road come from?
>
> No one is forced to drive in the Lexus Lanes.
>
> No one is forced to drive in ANY lanes; but we all
> pay taxes -- LOTS of taxes.

new new plan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make it toll-free just before the morning and
> evening rush.
>
> Where the HOT lanes merge back into the Beltway, a
> big backup develops that crushes traffic flow on
> the main road.
>
> Demand increases for the HOT lanes and tolls
> slowly rise.
>
> One caveat. This probably won't work for a few
> years as the Beltway with the addition of HOT
> lanes is now probably serious over-capacity.

VA had a chance to extend the lanes cheaply to the bridge (or near the bridge) but somehow that did not happen. The current north terminus / merge point is in the worst possible place.

Kaine approved the 495 lanes. McDonnell couldn't wait to approve the 95 lanes, which looks even more foolish now that these are failing. Both parties are useless.

I just want to know if we get to use them for free after VA taxpayers bail out Transurban. Probably not huh?

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well exactly and no one is forced to drive at all.
> The roads shouldn't be free. It isn't free to
> get on a bus or to take the metro rail. Why
> should the roads be the exception?
>
>
> jeb9K Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And 100% of the rest of the beltway loses money
> > every day. Where do you think the funds for
> that
> > road come from?
> >
> > No one is forced to drive in the Lexus Lanes.
> >
> > No one is forced to drive in ANY lanes; but we
> all
> > pay taxes -- LOTS of taxes.

The roads are not the exception --- we pay gas taxes, license plates, vehicle registration and property taxes, inspection and emissions taxes and many I am sure I am missing. And general taxes at the federal, state and local levels to have and use the roads -- perhaps not the fairest way to pay for them, but it's not true that they are free.

Tolls on a publicly funded road are a way forward, but the entire taxing situation has to be revisited before we go this way.

We all pay for the buses and metro whether we use them or not (just ask anyone who is paying more tolls on the dulles toll road today) but a user fee (toll) for those who actually use the services is reasonable.

The key though is that it should be based on use. The person who drives a corolla once a week to the grocery store and otherwise uses metro, shouldn't have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom in the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day does, as the damage to the roads isn't the same. This is the problem with the registration fees.

Similar to the way that it wouldn't be fair for someone like myself who rides the metro daily to pay the same yearly rate for the metro as someone who takes the metro game to a baseball game twice a year.

We need a use based system more like the one in London. The problem is that the London system was cited by the person who did the survey, but was cited completely inaccurately.


NMXJm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well exactly and no one is forced to drive at
> all.
> > The roads shouldn't be free. It isn't free to
> > get on a bus or to take the metro rail. Why
> > should the roads be the exception?
> >
> >
> > jeb9K Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > And 100% of the rest of the beltway loses
> money
> > > every day. Where do you think the funds for
> > that
> > > road come from?
> > >
> > > No one is forced to drive in the Lexus Lanes.
> > >
> > > No one is forced to drive in ANY lanes; but
> we
> > all
> > > pay taxes -- LOTS of taxes.
>
> The roads are not the exception --- we pay gas
> taxes, license plates, vehicle registration and
> property taxes, inspection and emissions taxes and
> many I am sure I am missing. And general taxes at
> the federal, state and local levels to have and
> use the roads -- perhaps not the fairest way to
> pay for them, but it's not true that they are
> free.
>
> Tolls on a publicly funded road are a way forward,
> but the entire taxing situation has to be
> revisited before we go this way.
>
> We all pay for the buses and metro whether we use
> them or not (just ask anyone who is paying more
> tolls on the dulles toll road today) but a user
> fee (toll) for those who actually use the services
> is reasonable.

I don't give a rat's ass how much they cost, it's just a drop in the bucket compared to how much we hand out in the form of hundreds of welfare and other useless social programs. It's about time that people with actual jobs that add to the economy get a little government cheese of their own.

I am happy to say that I use it every morning to get to my job in Tyson's Corner. Now, I no longer have to sit behind some fucking panel van with too many ladders piled on top of it or a fucking POS Hybrid splattered with those god-awful "Hope" and "Change" bumperstickers. You fucking slack-jawed pawns can stick with your proletarian huddle masses and save $3.00 a day in the regular lanes for all I care.

It saves me about 45 minutes each morning and can stay about 45 minutes later at work each night and still get home in time to get laid before I go to sleep each night. At $650.00 an hour, I can bill another $975 each day. 52 weeks a year 5 days a week (even though I also work most Saturday mornings) is 260 days I make an additional $975.00 per day, yep, another $253,500 in productivity (and my pocket) each year.

Because I actually pay taxes, at 25% (apparently less than my "fair share") that's $63,375 in additional taxes that I'm going to pay because of the HOT Lanes. At least I get to spend the rest on booze and whores, thereby "pumping up" another sector of the economy.

Now the rest of you get back to work, the Chinese need you to make money and pay your taxes to pay off all the interest on those bonds they bought from the government that you elected. Fucking dumbasses.

Whenever anyone brags on line about how much they make.... you know they're not making shit.

Richer than you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't give a rat's ass how much they cost, it's
> just a drop in the bucket compared to how much we
> hand out in the form of hundreds of welfare and
> other useless social programs. It's about time
> that people with actual jobs that add to the
> economy get a little government cheese of their
> own.
>
> I am happy to say that I use it every morning to
> get to my job in Tyson's Corner. Now, I no longer
> have to sit behind some fucking panel van with too
> many ladders piled on top of it or a fucking POS
> Hybrid splattered with those god-awful "Hope" and
> "Change" bumperstickers. You fucking slack-jawed
> pawns can stick with your proletarian huddle
> masses and save $3.00 a day in the regular lanes
> for all I care.
>
> It saves me about 45 minutes each morning and can
> stay about 45 minutes later at work each night and
> still get home in time to get laid before I go to
> sleep each night. At $650.00 an hour, I can bill
> another $975 each day. 52 weeks a year 5 days a
> week (even though I also work most Saturday
> mornings) is 260 days I make an additional $975.00
> per day, yep, another $253,500 in productivity
> (and my pocket) each year.
>
> Because I actually pay taxes, at 25% (apparently
> less than my "fair share") that's $63,375 in
> additional taxes that I'm going to pay because of
> the HOT Lanes. At least I get to spend the rest
> on booze and whores, thereby "pumping up" another
> sector of the economy.
>
> Now the rest of you get back to work, the Chinese
> need you to make money and pay your taxes to pay
> off all the interest on those bonds they bought
> from the government that you elected. Fucking
> dumbasses.

I truly am LOL reading your message -- and let's not forget
the lovely "coexist" stickers :) Don't they make you want to puke?
Attachments:

Richer than you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't give a rat's ass how much they cost, it's
> just a drop in the bucket compared to how much we
> hand out in the form of hundreds of welfare and
> other useless social programs. It's about time
> that people with actual jobs that add to the
> economy get a little government cheese of their
> own.
>
> I am happy to say that I use it every morning to
> get to my job in Tyson's Corner. Now, I no longer
> have to sit behind some fucking panel van with too
> many ladders piled on top of it or a fucking POS
> Hybrid splattered with those god-awful "Hope" and
> "Change" bumperstickers. You fucking slack-jawed
> pawns can stick with your proletarian huddle
> masses and save $3.00 a day in the regular lanes
> for all I care.
>
> It saves me about 45 minutes each morning and can
> stay about 45 minutes later at work each night and
> still get home in time to get laid before I go to
> sleep each night. At $650.00 an hour, I can bill
> another $975 each day. 52 weeks a year 5 days a
> week (even though I also work most Saturday
> mornings) is 260 days I make an additional $975.00
> per day, yep, another $253,500 in productivity
> (and my pocket) each year.
>
> Because I actually pay taxes, at 25% (apparently
> less than my "fair share") that's $63,375 in
> additional taxes that I'm going to pay because of
> the HOT Lanes. At least I get to spend the rest
> on booze and whores, thereby "pumping up" another
> sector of the economy.
>
> Now the rest of you get back to work, the Chinese
> need you to make money and pay your taxes to pay
> off all the interest on those bonds they bought
> from the government that you elected. Fucking
> dumbasses.


TL;DR.

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The key though is that it should be based on use.
> The person who drives a corolla once a week to the
> grocery store and otherwise uses metro, shouldn't
> have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom in
> the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day does,
> as the damage to the roads isn't the same. This
> is the problem with the registration fees.
>
> Similar to the way that it wouldn't be fair for
> someone like myself who rides the metro daily to
> pay the same yearly rate for the metro as someone
> who takes the metro game to a baseball game twice
> a year.
>
> We need a use based system more like the one in
> London. The problem is that the London system was
> cited by the person who did the survey, but was
> cited completely inaccurately.
>
>
>

We have a system based on use - the more I drive and the less economical of a vehicle I choose to buy, the more I pay.

So this system is already in place, except for those with hybrids, who pay much less in taxes than me.

Amen to that. Not to mention anyone who brags about getting laid online...that also isn't happening either. They are probably the loser who lives in their mom's basement and posts here in between video games.


BEH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whenever anyone brags on line about how much they
> make.... you know they're not making shit.

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The key though is that it should be based on use.
> The person who drives a corolla once a week to the
> grocery store and otherwise uses metro, shouldn't
> have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom in
> the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day does,
> as the damage to the roads isn't the same. This
> is the problem with the registration fees.

The fairest way to accomplish this is to significantly raise the gasoline tax and base a significant portion of the personal property tax on vehicle weight, in addition to value. Vehicles depreciate over time, but they never get any lighter.

The reason is that bigger, heavier vehicles use more gasoline and do more damage to the road, so by taxing them more you're having them pay more of their fair share.

You want to drive a 5400 pound SUV instead of a 2800 pound Corolla? Go right ahead, but it's gonna cost you an extra grand or two when your tax bill rolls around.

Who cares about tolls? There was a WP article last week about how everone is dodging the tolls on the Dulles Toll Road but they dont go after anyone to get the fines?

I don't doubt that its a flop. However, the lanes haven't even been open for a year. Not many businesses open up and expect to be profitable from day 1.

when they first opened up I was one of those people who said "i'll never use them, while there is 'free' option". Although recently i changed my mind, i'll pay $1+ to ensure a more trouble free trip when traveling to MD or Tysons.

Time to short to spend it in traffic and i can't take that money to after life anyways.

That could work too. There isn't one answer.


Tax Policy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The key though is that it should be based on
> use.
> > The person who drives a corolla once a week to
> the
> > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> shouldn't
> > have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom
> in
> > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> does,
> > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> This
> > is the problem with the registration fees.
>
> The fairest way to accomplish this is to
> significantly raise the gasoline tax and base a
> significant portion of the personal property tax
> on vehicle weight, in addition to value. Vehicles
> depreciate over time, but they never get any
> lighter.
>
> The reason is that bigger, heavier vehicles use
> more gasoline and do more damage to the road, so
> by taxing them more you're having them pay more of
> their fair share.
>
> You want to drive a 5400 pound SUV instead of a
> 2800 pound Corolla? Go right ahead, but it's gonna
> cost you an extra grand or two when your tax bill
> rolls around.

feelitmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The new Beltway Express Lanes lost $11.3 million
> in their first six weeks of operation, new
> documents shown to investors from operator
> Transurban show.
>
> The lanes raked in $800,000 in tolls and $200,000
> in fees and other revenue but had $3.2 million in
> operating costs, as well as depreciation of $2.1
> million and financing costs of $7 million,
> according to documents the Australian company
> showed investors and that were first reported by
> TollRoadsNews.
>
> An average of 23,308 vehicles took the lanes every
> day in the first six weeks, less than half of the
> 66,000 cars a traffic consultant for the project
> predicted in 2007.
>
> TAR AND FEATHER TIME!!!!
>
>
> http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-beltway-express-
> lanes-losing-money/article/2521095


So how many businesses are profitable after only 6 weeks in business?

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The key though is that it should be based on use.
> The person who drives a corolla once a week to the
> grocery store and otherwise uses metro, shouldn't
> have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom in
> the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day does,
> as the damage to the roads isn't the same. This
> is the problem with the registration fees.

Fares pay for 57.6% of your Metro ride - the rest is taken through taxes. Assuming you ride at peak times 200 days per year at $8/day RT, that's close to $1200 a year you are receiving in welfare.

BTW, your POS Corolla is already taxed less, via the car tax. And you use less gas per mile, and less gas overall, thus paying less gasoline tax. And your registration costs less (marginally) than a SUV.

Facts are such stubborn things - but keep hitting that 'fairness' thing, it really seems to work well these days.

...in the 22039 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The key though is that it should be based on
> use.
> > The person who drives a corolla once a week to
> the
> > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> shouldn't
> > have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom
> in
> > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> does,
> > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> This
> > is the problem with the registration fees.
> >
> > Similar to the way that it wouldn't be fair for
> > someone like myself who rides the metro daily
> to
> > pay the same yearly rate for the metro as
> someone
> > who takes the metro game to a baseball game
> twice
> > a year.
> >
> > We need a use based system more like the one in
> > London. The problem is that the London system
> was
> > cited by the person who did the survey, but was
> > cited completely inaccurately.
> >
> >
> >
>
> We have a system based on use - the more I drive
> and the less economical of a vehicle I choose to
> buy, the more I pay.
>
> So this system is already in place, except for
> those with hybrids, who pay much less in taxes
> than me.


Yep, and McDonnell's plan to charge buyers of hybrids $100 to make them pay their fair share was of course shot down

1 yr old Lexus SUV - $1700+ tax bill for 2012. Ouch. At least I have a lane set aside for me now on the Beltway.

Bob Mcdonnell wants to do away with the gas tax and hit the consumer and middle class with higher sales taxes. Sales taxes are regressive. I guess this crappy pay for highway is going to be a failure. Good, I'm glad people are rejecting this concept and we may be able to rid ourselves of Australian overlords on our highways sooner rather than later. Hopefully the tolls are dug up and it is turned into an open and closed peak traffic hours HOV system.

It not really privatization, if Virginia bails them out! We need to let Transwhatever file for Chapter 11. I'll bet that next time whomever will do it right. Or just have it controlled completely by the government. I have a problem with funding private entreprise's mistakes. Makes no sense. Didn't we see what was happening with the ICC. I guess it really doesn't matter, if there is a bail out.

Everyone knows the morons here in Virginia agreed to bailout the Aussies if they fail to turn a profit.

I'm thinking there is no way the Aussies make money for the first few years.

They cook the books so that the road looks like a loser every year, take their check from the Virginia tax payer and when someone starts snooping around, they suddenly go into the black. As long as the GOP has power, they'd never hire another state employee competent enough to actually audit the books. They'd hire an admin instead of an experienced accountant to save $70k a year while we bleed millions to the Australians.

So Kaine was an idiot for doing this in the first place, what does it make McDonnell for surging ahead with another round of it even before the first one had a chance to "perform"? Now we'll have two contracts where Transurban just sucks money out of the general fund citing the fact Virginians don't want to pay $3.00 to go sit in a traffic jam at the end of the "toll road".

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...in the 22039 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > katiesmith Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The key though is that it should be based on
> > use.
> > > The person who drives a corolla once a week
> to
> > the
> > > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> > shouldn't
> > > have to pay the same thing that the soccer
> mom
> > in
> > > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> > does,
> > > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> > This
> > > is the problem with the registration fees.
> > >
> > > Similar to the way that it wouldn't be fair
> for
> > > someone like myself who rides the metro daily
> > to
> > > pay the same yearly rate for the metro as
> > someone
> > > who takes the metro game to a baseball game
> > twice
> > > a year.
> > >
> > > We need a use based system more like the one
> in
> > > London. The problem is that the London
> system
> > was
> > > cited by the person who did the survey, but
> was
> > > cited completely inaccurately.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > We have a system based on use - the more I
> drive
> > and the less economical of a vehicle I choose
> to
> > buy, the more I pay.
> >
> > So this system is already in place, except for
> > those with hybrids, who pay much less in taxes
> > than me.
>
>
> Yep, and McDonnell's plan to charge buyers of
> hybrids $100 to make them pay their fair share was
> of course shot down

That's right you fuckwit. Suck on that. How you like your monkey truck (TM: Kilton) now?

privatization HOT lanes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It not really privatization, if Virginia bails
> them out! We need to let Transwhatever file for
> Chapter 11. I'll bet that next time whomever will
> do it right. Or just have it controlled
> completely by the government. I have a problem
> with funding private entreprise's mistakes. Makes
> no sense. Didn't we see what was happening with
> the ICC. I guess it really doesn't matter, if
> there is a bail out.

That is the problem. These "private/public partnerships" never involve any risk for the private side. They just need to put some money up in the beginning and then the tax payers hold their hand the rest of the way. I wish I could embark on a project where if I fail, I get paid anyway. Who wouldn't sign up for that?

The anti-government pols just love it too. Working to ensure government actually succeeds: recipe for disaster. Corporations making money from tax payer bailouts: Free market at its best!

If everyone boycotts the lanes those Aussies won't last 18 months and we'll score some more bandwidth.

Throw Transurban out!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2013 06:01PM by Atom.

Hay Zeus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't doubt that its a flop. However, the lanes
> haven't even been open for a year. Not many
> businesses open up and expect to be profitable
> from day 1.
>
> when they first opened up I was one of those
> people who said "i'll never use them, while there
> is 'free' option". Although recently i changed my
> mind, i'll pay $1+ to ensure a more trouble free
> trip when traveling to MD or Tysons.
>
> Time to short to spend it in traffic and i can't
> take that money to after life anyways.


When you don't even cover 10% of you nut after the first month...your fucked as a business. And it is not like they are waiting for word of mouth or good reviews to come in.

^^^"I've been riding around with my transponder in the HOV position for the last 2 months. I've taken the Express Lanes twice per day and never ONCE been pulled over."

I've been doing the same thing but not twice a day. Hasn't been congested enough when I'm on 495. But at least once a month I'll jump on the lanes to prevent the $1/mo flex fee. If you ever do get pulled over (which I doubt will ever happen unless you are speeding), switch it to the non-HOV position before the cop walks up to your window and let us know what happens.

I'm it all the time, love the peace and quiet it gives me. Stay out of it.

Can't wait to see the Lanes after 50k Feds and Green badges lose their jobs and don't have to go to work. Maybe we can use them as bike lanes for the smelly granola assholes.

fuck fair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The key though is that it should be based on
> use.
> > The person who drives a corolla once a week to
> the
> > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> shouldn't
> > have to pay the same thing that the soccer mom
> in
> > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> does,
> > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> This
> > is the problem with the registration fees.
>
> Fares pay for 57.6% of your Metro ride - the rest
> is taken through taxes. Assuming you ride at peak
> times 200 days per year at $8/day RT, that's close
> to $1200 a year you are receiving in welfare.
>
> BTW, your POS Corolla is already taxed less, via
> the car tax. And you use less gas per mile, and
> less gas overall, thus paying less gasoline tax.
> And your registration costs less (marginally) than
> a SUV.
>
> Facts are such stubborn things - but keep hitting
> that 'fairness' thing, it really seems to work
> well these days.

You can't do math. 400 million in receipts, 500 million expenses for operation of metro. 80% from fares, 20% from subsidies. BTW those "subsidies" are more than made up by the fact that businesses and commercial properties grow exponentially next to metro lines, bringing in hundreds of millions if not billions.

Jackass

you know............................when the Parkway first opened nobody drove it either.......................

if they extend the hot lanes down to Richmond and up to Baltimore..................well I know I'LL PAY to not have to deal with Prince Willam and Stafford and MoCo traffic

Hay Zeus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't doubt that its a flop. However, the lanes
> haven't even been open for a year. Not many
> businesses open up and expect to be profitable
> from day 1.
>
> when they first opened up I was one of those
> people who said "i'll never use them, while there
> is 'free' option". Although recently i changed my
> mind, i'll pay $1+ to ensure a more trouble free
> trip when traveling to MD or Tysons.
>
> Time to short to spend it in traffic and i can't
> take that money to after life anyways.

How about giving it to me? I will invest it well and ensure that
you have a great legacy. Don't dollar yourself to death...you think a few extra minutes a day will matter? Come one!

Ok bud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fuck fair Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > katiesmith Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The key though is that it should be based on
> > use.
> > > The person who drives a corolla once a week
> to
> > the
> > > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> > shouldn't
> > > have to pay the same thing that the soccer
> mom
> > in
> > > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> > does,
> > > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> > This
> > > is the problem with the registration fees.
> >
> > Fares pay for 57.6% of your Metro ride - the
> rest
> > is taken through taxes. Assuming you ride at
> peak
> > times 200 days per year at $8/day RT, that's
> close
> > to $1200 a year you are receiving in welfare.
> >
> > BTW, your POS Corolla is already taxed less,
> via
> > the car tax. And you use less gas per mile,
> and
> > less gas overall, thus paying less gasoline tax.
>
> > And your registration costs less (marginally)
> than
> > a SUV.
> >
> > Facts are such stubborn things - but keep
> hitting
> > that 'fairness' thing, it really seems to work
> > well these days.
>
> You can't do math. 400 million in receipts, 500
> million expenses for operation of metro. 80% from
> fares, 20% from subsidies. BTW those "subsidies"
> are more than made up by the fact that businesses
> and commercial properties grow exponentially next
> to metro lines, bringing in hundreds of millions
> if not billions.
>
> Jackass

Um, douchebag, take a look at Dunn Loring. How many years (decades) was it before there was anything at that metro stop? Vienna? West Falls Church? East Falls Church? ANY of the PG County stations? And douche, at BEST only 52 percent of metro's operating budtet is funded by fares. That's just the operating budget. Addint in the capital budget, it's less than 20 percent funded by fares so fully 80 percent of the cost of Metro is funded by other than those who ride it.

So you're suggesting that the more money you throw at it, it will eventually-maybe break even?!

Are the rest of you equating, HOT lanes to metro/parkway? HOT lanes is a frill, not a necessity. It allows people that can pay a faster way to work. Oh BTW, if it can't make its quota, taxpayers will cover.

Finally, paying the $1/month for the transponder is outrageous. I suppose we have HOT lane project to thank for this charge to all transponders. Used to have one in each car, but not anymore. I guess my other cars will just have to wait in lines at the toll booths. Sounds like a move backwards. Thanks HOT lane project!

I have taken them morning and afternoon, and they often are no faster than the regular lanes. They might some days be faster in certain spots, but then you get in a rolling roadblock with 2 cars side by side and with only 2 lanes there is no way to get around. The problem is that most Americans do not understand the concept of keep to the right except when overtaking another vehicle.

no faster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have taken them morning and afternoon, and they
> often are no faster than the regular lanes. They
> might some days be faster in certain spots, but
> then you get in a rolling roadblock with 2 cars
> side by side and with only 2 lanes there is no way
> to get around. The problem is that most Americans
> do not understand the concept of keep to the right
> except when overtaking another vehicle.

Let me correct you. DC area drivers do not know that concept. If you go elsewhere in this country, people stay to the right.

In fact, once I was in PA driving on 81 N and a line had formed in the left lane because someone wasn't moving right. I could see ahead that people were flashing lights, a horn was honked, and finally the car moved over. As I pass I notice the car: a Lexus bought at Pohanka in Chantilly. The "park myself in the left lane like I am the only person on the road" style of driving is not accepted outside of this area.

But yeah, less congestion doesn't mean you won't get stuck behind Sally Homemaker yapping on the phone going 60 in the left lane while another guy goes 60 in the right lane. You'll be paying to stare at Sally's "OBX" sticker.

no faster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have taken them morning and afternoon, and they
> often are no faster than the regular lanes. They
> might some days be faster in certain spots, but
> then you get in a rolling roadblock with 2 cars
> side by side and with only 2 lanes there is no way
> to get around. The problem is that most Americans
> do not understand the concept of keep to the right
> except when overtaking another vehicle.


Agree. If they raise the speed limit to 80, then they will see a bump in customers.

Good ole GOP. If a company starts to go under just throw government tax dollars at it. If a company is doing well then give them tax breaks.

Yeah, shame on the GOP, esp. that Republican Kaine for pushing so hard for the "partnership" aspect...

Jess1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, shame on the GOP, esp. that Republican Kaine
> for pushing so hard for the "partnership"
> aspect...


And who are the ones going around saying gas tax should be repealed and private roads should replace public roads?

God forbid a democrat compromise and listen to the GOP one fuckin time, then everything will get blamed on the one democrat right?

Let me ask you something, are you really pretending that its democrats who want more private take overs of traditionally public responsibility? You twat

"democrats who want more tax dollars to spend as the really smart people in government think it should"

FIFY.

BTW, why the constant denial @ the Dem's role in this? C'mon, step up and claim it.

ROFLMAO@all the idiots seeing this as a GOP/Demo thingee

like $$$$ picks sides or something........................

anywho, bottom line is, in reality, Beltway needed widening. It got widened and now ppl are complaing there's no fucking traffic? WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!!?!?!?!

I mean seriously.....................if you actually ever find yourself online, taking time out of your life to COMPLAIN that there is NOT ENOUGH TRAFFIC ON THE BELTWAY.................well I'm sorry but you need a foot up yr ass.

@Gordo +1

Plus, the tards are placing the blame on the wrong party (if there is blame to go around).

Officials of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) signed an agreement with two private companies in April 2005. A contract was finalized on December 20, 2007,

Who was Governor in 2005?
Who was Governor in 2007?

I'll give you a hint. They were both Democrats.

Driving School Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> no faster Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I have taken them morning and afternoon, and
> they
> > often are no faster than the regular lanes.
> They
> > might some days be faster in certain spots, but
> > then you get in a rolling roadblock with 2 cars
> > side by side and with only 2 lanes there is no
> way
> > to get around. The problem is that most
> Americans
> > do not understand the concept of keep to the
> right
> > except when overtaking another vehicle.
>
> Let me correct you. DC area drivers do not know
> that concept. If you go elsewhere in this
> country, people stay to the right.


I get sick of hearing how people drive "elsewhere". There's at least a 90% chance that the idiots driving here ARE from elsewhere. Did they just start being idiots after they moved here, or were they idiots back where they came from as well?

We have it worse here because we have a sampling of non-driving motherfuckers from every part of the country (and the world).

I drove a truck for years in the lower 48 states and there's plenty of places that the drivers are worse than here, if you can believe that.

I'm particulary amused by drivers from the northern states that brag about their snow driving skills. That's the biggest crock there is! It just takes a few more flakes than here, before they start spinning out, turning over, or sliding into ditches.

Those Northern drivers who can handle the snow are a joke. I am pretty sure I watch them spin out and wreck every winter on the weather channel. Great driving there. These idiots come here and proceed to wreck into others with their cavalier attitude.

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ROFLMAO@all the idiots seeing this as a GOP/Demo
> thingee
>
> like $$$$ picks sides or
> something........................
>
> anywho, bottom line is, in reality, Beltway needed
> widening. It got widened and now ppl are
> complaing there's no fucking traffic? WHAT THE
> FUCK!?!?!!?!?!?!
>
> I mean seriously.....................if you
> actually ever find yourself online, taking time
> out of your life to COMPLAIN that there is NOT
> ENOUGH TRAFFIC ON THE BELTWAY.................well
> I'm sorry but you need a foot up yr ass.


What an ignorant comment GB. The beltway needed widening? Says who? The people who need to justify a 6% increase in budget every year at VDOT? Plenty of Fairfax residents might have rather had OTHER options other than a toll road which in other parts of the county (see DTR) are alreayd being fought against. Perhaps a better bus system, or god forbid a rail connection between blue and orange that doesnt have to go all the way through Arlington or something that actually would solve issues like a fucking expansion of orange line to centreville.

Widening does not always reduce traffic. After the road is 8 lanes wide, there is barely any improvement outside of a couple extra thousand that it can process. Mo lanes mo problems, just means the traffic jams will look more fuckin impressive when they ultimately catch up.

And to the Jess1, you still have explained which party says that these private toll roads are the way forward and that Kaine compromised with Republicans in Richmond (the ones in the legislature who actually control this kind of stuff because as governor you are about as impotent as the president when passing budgetary issues) to instead of spending 2 billion in transpo which NOVA is entitled, compromise and build a toll road.

He compromised with the GOP, that was the big mistake. So please don't simplify to the point of oh well he signed it, he must have been the creator of the idea.

yeah, I know I've cultivated a lotta "crazy" on this site................but to hate me so bad that you'd end up so bat-shit crazy that you'd find yourself arguing how the beltway didnt need widening............................wow.

o_0

Pat yrself on the back, "Oh".......you've left Gordon Blvd speechless.

pic unrelated
Attachments:

The stupid thing about the new toll lanes is that they could have just built one set of lanes that changes direction around mid-day. There are 2 outer loop lanes and 2 inner loop lanes, each of which is only useful for about 2-3 hours a day during rush hour. I drive south/east from Tysons towards Alexandria every morning and then north/west in the afternoon, and there is never very much congestion on the Beltway in my direction. There is no demand for a toll road when the free road has the same speed limit and will get you there just as fast. If I were sitting in stop and go traffic I would consider paying to go faster, but that is never the case. They took up a lot of physical space that could have gone towards more actual usable lanes in order to build 2 lane toll roads that only have a purpose for rush hour.

Oh its that simple ay? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Widening does not always reduce traffic. After the
> road is 8 lanes wide, there is barely any
> improvement outside of a couple extra thousand
> that it can process. Mo lanes mo problems, just
> means the traffic jams will look more fuckin
> impressive when they ultimately catch up.

Boy are you an idiot. By that logic, we shouldn't increase Internet bandwidth at home because people will just use up all the new bandwidth, then we'll need to increase it again.

So I assume you're still using dial-up. Hope you're enjoying it, you big dope. :-)

Kilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh its that simple ay? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Widening does not always reduce traffic. After
> the
> > road is 8 lanes wide, there is barely any
> > improvement outside of a couple extra thousand
> > that it can process. Mo lanes mo problems, just
> > means the traffic jams will look more fuckin
> > impressive when they ultimately catch up.
>
> Boy are you an idiot. By that logic, we shouldn't
> increase Internet bandwidth at home because people
> will just use up all the new bandwidth, then we'll
> need to increase it again.
>
> So I assume you're still using dial-up. Hope
> you're enjoying it, you big dope. :-)


Dumb analogy for lots of reasons. Does your computer crashing cause the rest of the network to back up?

He's right. Adding lanes only works to a point. Traffic doesn't flow like data. If you can make it do so, then we'd be in good shape and then you might have a point re simply adding capacity. 'Til then, not.

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Dumb analogy for lots of reasons. Does your
> computer crashing cause the rest of the network to
> back up?
>
> He's right. Adding lanes only works to a point.
> Traffic doesn't flow like data. If you can make
> it do so, then we'd be in good shape and then you
> might have a point re simply adding capacity.
> 'Til then, not.


speaking of dumb analogies...................

@dumb - why is it y'all are arguing this? Beltway needed widening, ok? But ok, wahteves. To answer you directly, yr computer crashing DOES cause the rest of the network to back up IF the ENTIRE network has to flow thru that crashed computer. Happens all the time - we grown up s call it "I.T." LoLz. Usually, the "computer" in question is something we call a "server". But I digress.

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dumb analogy for lots of reasons. Does your
> computer crashing cause the rest of the network to
> back up?

Sure does. Token ring, bitches!

I'M A FIVE-STAR MAN!!

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does your computer crashing cause the rest of the
> network to back up?

Yes. If I'm at work and I use all the Internet bandwidth, my computer causes slowness for other computers on the network. (I'll ignore the comment about "crashing", which clearly indicates you're clueless about this topic. :-)

> He's right.

Actually he didn't say much of anything (which you two seem to have in common), so he can't be right. He first seemed to indicate that the beltway doesn't need widening. Then he referenced a theoretical benefit cutoff of 8 lanes, which has nothing to do with the beltway since it isn't 8 lanes. Then he basically said that there's no benefit to going over 8 lanes, outside the benefit of greater traffic flow. LOL.

Two peas in a pod.

Computer Nerd Alert!
Computer Nerd Alert!
Computer Nerd Alert!
Computer Nerd Alert!

Kilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does your computer crashing cause the rest of
> the
> > network to back up?
>
> Yes. If I'm at work and I use all the Internet
> bandwidth, my computer causes slowness for other
> computers on the network. (I'll ignore the comment
> about "crashing", which clearly indicates you're
> clueless about this topic. :-)


No, it doesn't. That would be the equivalent of being inside or your "car" (network). It does not bring the common-carrier network to its knees as a single wreck on a 2, 4, 6, 8-lane highway does.

Nor does the analogy work because, again as should be obvious to anyone, traffic does not flow in a highly controlled, protocol-driven manner as does data which uses bandwidth in a more uniform manner. As I said, if you can figure out how to make it do so, then you could make do with far fewer lanes.

Last, it doesn't work because a relatively small increase in traffic (versus saturation in your analogy) causes a much larger proportional effect on congestion.


>
> > He's right.
>
> Actually he didn't say much of anything (which you
> two seem to have in common), so he can't be right.
> He first seemed to indicate that the beltway
> doesn't need widening. Then he referenced a
> theoretical benefit cutoff of 8 lanes, which has
> nothing to do with the beltway since it isn't 8
> lanes. Then he basically said that there's no
> benefit to going over 8 lanes, outside the benefit
> of greater traffic flow. LOL.
>
> Two peas in a pod.


He said as much as you did with your dumb analogy which, in fact, does exactly the same things in terms of assumptions as you then criticize here. lol

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> @dumb - why is it y'all are arguing this? Beltway
> needed widening, ok? But ok, wahteves. To answer
> you directly, yr computer crashing DOES cause the
> rest of the network to back up IF the ENTIRE
> network has to flow thru that crashed computer.
> Happens all the time - we grown up s call it
> "I.T." LoLz. Usually, the "computer" in
> question is something we call a "server". But I
> digress.


That wasn't the analogy presented. It's not an analogous model.

(P.S. I was CCNP, CCIE among other certifications. I'm quite aware what a "server" is. But thanks for, yet again, demonstrating your vast knowledge of all things. lmao)

GB you are wrong, flat out. You are using a zero base analysis. Ok so widening will always create some improvement. But the amount of improvement vs how much effort and what else could have been done is more important.

Get it?

After 8 lanes any increase in number of lanes has a deteriorating improvement to the road capacity. This is basic transportation queue modeling, any highway designer will tell you the same. Highway design does not do total lanes = direct correlation to total capacity because there are far greater factors that cause traffic such as lane merger, lane speed, incidence rates, that after you get above 6 to 8 lanes begin plateauing the effect that more lanes has.

We got a system that can increase capacity 10 thousands users. Ok thats great, but the Beltway has over 100,000 users, and this project was "a mega project". There could have been a better solution. When you are having this many people concentrated into a corridor it tells you that the ability for roads to address traffic concerns is now becoming exhausted.

Trains carry 36 times more people per second per track than an equivalent car lane at free flow. The point here is that they built a toll road that barely improves anything longer than a couple of years instead of building a system that would have been able to accept a population that is magnitudes of order larger.

But no you and the general public of non-transportation engineers are right. More pavement is always better. Duh! Its traffic dummy, just do what Los Angeles does, they have great traffic

LA City Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> After 8 lanes any increase in number of lanes has
> a deteriorating improvement to the road capacity.
> This is basic transportation queue modeling, any
> highway designer will tell you the same. Highway
> design does not do total lanes = direct
> correlation to total capacity because there are
> far greater factors that cause traffic such as
> lane merger, lane speed, incidence rates, that
> after you get above 6 to 8 lanes begin plateauing
> the effect that more lanes has.

Is it 8 lanes, or 6-8 lanes? Make up your mind son. You and the other bird brain sound like classic Internet Dumbfuckz.

>
> We got a system that can increase capacity 10
> thousands users. Ok thats great, but the Beltway
> has over 100,000 users, and this project was "a
> mega project". There could have been a better
> solution. When you are having this many people
> concentrated into a corridor it tells you that the
> ability for roads to address traffic concerns is
> now becoming exhausted.
>
> Trains carry 36 times more people per second per
> track than an equivalent car lane at free flow.
> The point here is that they built a toll road that
> barely improves anything longer than a couple of
> years instead of building a system that would have
> been able to accept a population that is
> magnitudes of order larger.
>
> But no you and the general public of
> non-transportation engineers are right. More
> pavement is always better. Duh! Its traffic dummy,
> just do what Los Angeles does, they have great
> traffic

Yeah and you're smarter than all the highway designers who have designed highways in all the other cities with wider highways than DC. Of course! Why oh why didn't they consult "LA City" from Fairfax Underground before they made their decisions?? Imagine what they could have accomplished!

"Trains carry 36 times more people per second per track than an equivalent car lane at free flow. The point here is that they built a toll road that barely improves anything longer than a couple of years instead of building a system that would have been able to accept a population that is magnitudes of order larger."

Yeah, but you gots to wait for the train and the train doesn't drop me off in my nice warm garage, like my car does.

Great news. #1 Google search for Hot Lanes Flop now belongs to FFX.

Summercamp! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great news. #1 Google search for Hot Lanes Flop
> now belongs to FFX.


Woohoo!

We're #1!
We're #1!
We're #1!

lulz

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It does not
> bring the common-carrier network to its knees as a
> single wreck on a 2, 4, 6, 8-lane highway does.

Who's talking about wrecks? They're irrelevant to this conversation. And great work throwing out "common carrier" (a completely meaningless term in this context) to try and sound intelligent. You almost made it seem like you have some type of legitimate IT background. :-)

> Nor does the analogy work because, again as should
> be obvious to anyone, traffic does not flow in a
> highly controlled, protocol-driven manner as does
> data which uses bandwidth in a more uniform
> manner.

Actually, highway traffic, on the whole, does flow in a predictable manner -- that's how traffic engineers simulate it.

> Last, it doesn't work because a relatively small
> increase in traffic (versus saturation in your
> analogy) causes a much larger proportional effect
> on congestion.

Nope, same thing for data congestion.

You've done some outstanding work here. You've taken an analogy which is far from perfect (as analogies tend to be) and was half in jest, and you've managed to not be able to shoot it down at all. Stick with being a "former" CCxx. It suits you well. :-)

Kilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It does not
> > bring the common-carrier network to its knees as
> a
> > single wreck on a 2, 4, 6, 8-lane highway does.
>
>
> Who's talking about wrecks? They're irrelevant to
> this conversation. And great work throwing out
> "common carrier" (a completely meaningless term in
> this context) to try and sound intelligent. You
> almost made it seem like you have some type of
> legitimate IT background. :-)
>

Simple example (of many possible) to show that your analogy sucks.

Not at all a meaningless in this context. A road is the "common carrier" of traffic in the same way that the larger data network serves in the same way for data. Your example of saturation within your own network is irrelevant to the capacity and utilization of the greater network. Simple. Poor analogy, poor example in an attempt to further prove your point.

And any time you want to compare knowledge of the subject just ante up...


> > Nor does the analogy work because, again as
> should
> > be obvious to anyone, traffic does not flow in
> a
> > highly controlled, protocol-driven manner as
> does
> > data which uses bandwidth in a more uniform
> > manner.
>
> Actually, highway traffic, on the whole, does flow
> in a predictable manner -- that's how traffic
> engineers simulate it.
>
> > Last, it doesn't work because a relatively
> small
> > increase in traffic (versus saturation in your
> > analogy) causes a much larger proportional
> effect
> > on congestion.
>
> Nope, same thing for data congestion.


They are not equivalent models other than at a very elementary level. As anyone who's actually studied cueing theory and similar models understands very well given that they are two very commonly used examples specifically to illustrate DISSIMILAR models and the differences involved.


>
> You've done some outstanding work here. You've
> taken an analogy which is far from perfect (as
> analogies tend to be) and was half in jest, and
> you've managed to not be able to shoot it down at
> all. Stick with being a "former" CCxx. It suits
> you well. :-)


Now you at least you concede that your analogy sucked. lol So I guess I've accomplished that much.

Yep, before moving on to bigger and better things. BTW, Linda in Accounting forget her password (again). Take care of that before you go home OK? lol

But you are right about one thing - wasting my time arguing with your dumb ass. I'm done schooling you for today. You can declare victory now.

Kilton is always right, do not try to tell him otherwise.

Not always but he/she is right in this case. Widening roads is common (!) sense. Use your heads.

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
> As anyone who's actually
> studied cueing theory and similar models
> understands ...

Oh brother - it's queueing theory, not 'cueing' theory. Sounds like something you do on a pool table.

Ok bud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fuck fair Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > katiesmith Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The key though is that it should be based on
> > use.
> > > The person who drives a corolla once a week
> to
> > the
> > > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> > shouldn't
> > > have to pay the same thing that the soccer
> mom
> > in
> > > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> > does,
> > > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> > This
> > > is the problem with the registration fees.
> >
> > Fares pay for 57.6% of your Metro ride - the
> rest
> > is taken through taxes. Assuming you ride at
> peak
> > times 200 days per year at $8/day RT, that's
> close
> > to $1200 a year you are receiving in welfare.
> >
> > BTW, your POS Corolla is already taxed less,
> via
> > the car tax. And you use less gas per mile,
> and
> > less gas overall, thus paying less gasoline tax.
>
> > And your registration costs less (marginally)
> than
> > a SUV.
> >
> > Facts are such stubborn things - but keep
> hitting
> > that 'fairness' thing, it really seems to work
> > well these days.
>
> You can't do math. 400 million in receipts, 500
> million expenses for operation of metro. 80% from
> fares, 20% from subsidies. BTW those "subsidies"
> are more than made up by the fact that businesses
> and commercial properties grow exponentially next
> to metro lines, bringing in hundreds of millions
> if not billions.
>
> Jackass

Here's the 2011 budget - http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/ANNUAL_BUDGET_FY2011.pdf - latest I could find.

1.45B operating budget, only 789M came from fares. That's actually a little less - 54% percent of the operating costs are covered by fares. The rest of your ticket is paid by everyone else's taxes - Federal, state, and local.

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your example of saturation within
> your own network is irrelevant to the capacity and
> utilization of the greater network.

Nope, data congestion occurs the same way whether it's on a little network or a big network. Completely meaningless to this discussion.

> As anyone who's actually studied cueing theory

LOL, cueing? Say what? You've clearly studied it a great deal -- they just forgot to teach you how to spell it. Great work Einstein. :-)

> But you are right about one thing - wasting my
> time arguing with your dumb ass.

Translation: "You've beaten me down enough for one day, Kilton. I can't take any more of your irrefutable facts or rock-solid logic. BTW did I mention I used to have a bunch of certz???"

Dumb Analogies R Dumb Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon Blvd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > @dumb - why is it y'all are arguing this?
> Beltway
> > needed widening, ok? But ok, wahteves. To
> answer
> > you directly, yr computer crashing DOES cause
> the
> > rest of the network to back up IF the ENTIRE
> > network has to flow thru that crashed computer.
>
> > Happens all the time - we grown up s call it
> > "I.T." LoLz. Usually, the "computer" in
> > question is something we call a "server". But
> I
> > digress.
>
>
> That wasn't the analogy presented. It's not an
> analogous model.
>
> (P.S. I was CCNP, CCIE among other
> certifications. I'm quite aware what a "server"
> is. But thanks for, yet again, demonstrating your
> vast knowledge of all things. lmao)

Um, you wouldn't know a CCIE if one kicked you in the ass. Stop posing.

Downs-Thomson paradox (named after Anthony Downs and J. M. Thomson), also referred to as the Pigou–Knight–Downs paradox (after Arthur Cecil Pigou and Frank Knight), states that the equilibrium speed of car traffic on the road network is determined by the average door-to-door speed of equivalent journeys by (rail-based or otherwise segregated) public transport.

It follows that increasing road capacity can actually make overall congestion on the road worse. This occurs when the shift from public transport causes a disinvestment in the mode such that the operator either reduces frequency of service or raises fares to cover costs. This shifts additional passengers into cars. Ultimately the system may be eliminated and congestion on the original (expanded) road is worse than before.

The general conclusion, if the paradox applies, is that expanding a road system as a remedy to congestion is not only ineffective, but often counterproductive. This is also known as Lewis–Mogridge Position and was extensively documented by Martin Mogridge with the case-study of London on his book Travel in towns: jam yesterday, jam today and jam tomorrow?

LA City Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GB you are wrong, flat out. You are using a zero
> base analysis. Ok so widening will always create
> some improvement. But the amount of improvement vs
> how much effort and what else could have been done
> is more important.
>
> Get it?

whelp..............seeing as I didnt argue ANY of this bullshit, I'm not seeing as to why you are directing this at me...................but whateves. Let's see whatcha got................

>
> After 8 lanes any increase in number of lanes has
> a deteriorating improvement to the road capacity.
> This is basic transportation queue modeling, any
> highway designer will tell you the same. Highway
> design does not do total lanes = direct
> correlation to total capacity because there are
> far greater factors that cause traffic such as
> lane merger, lane speed, incidence rates, that
> after you get above 6 to 8 lanes begin plateauing
> the effect that more lanes has.

Wow............Cool Story, Bro. So maybe, just maybe, mind you............maybe that's why they made the new Beltway lanes "HIGH CAPACITY TRAVEL LANES!!?!?!!?!?!?!!!"




> We got a system that can increase capacity 10
> thousands users. Ok thats great, but the Beltway
> has over 100,000 users, and this project was "a
> mega project". There could have been a better
> solution. When you are having this many people
> concentrated into a corridor it tells you that the
> ability for roads to address traffic concerns is
> now becoming exhausted.
>

Always easy to QB from yr chair in yr living room. Even easier on Monday morning, hoss. Didnt see you down in Richmond successfully lobbying for any "better solution" these last few years or so................


> Trains carry 36 times more people per second per
> track than an equivalent car lane at free flow.
> The point here is that they built a toll road that
> barely improves anything longer than a couple of
> years instead of building a system that would have
> been able to accept a population that is
> magnitudes of order larger.

Someone else has already pointed out things like "stations" and "waiting times". You act like a train would solve everything and NEVER have a problem - you need to wake up to reality, son. EVERYTHING needs widening someday, ok kiddo? http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17498/metros-stuffed-full-at-rosslyn-what-can-be-done/

>
> But no you and the general public of
> non-transportation engineers are right. More
> pavement is always better. Duh! Its traffic dummy,
> just do what Los Angeles does, they have great
> traffic

Yeah..........how dare the public have a voice in the matter, right Comrade? Anyways, I guess you suggest we stick our head in the sand about vehicle traffic like what Arlington County has done - and they have GREAT traffic too - completely opposite of LA, right?.................... Jackass.

Read the memo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok bud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > fuck fair Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > katiesmith Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > The key though is that it should be based
> on
> > > use.
> > > > The person who drives a corolla once a week
> > to
> > > the
> > > > grocery store and otherwise uses metro,
> > > shouldn't
> > > > have to pay the same thing that the soccer
> > mom
> > > in
> > > > the gas guzzler SUV who makes 5 trips a day
> > > does,
> > > > as the damage to the roads isn't the same.
> > > This
> > > > is the problem with the registration fees.
> > >
> > > Fares pay for 57.6% of your Metro ride - the
> > rest
> > > is taken through taxes. Assuming you ride at
> > peak
> > > times 200 days per year at $8/day RT, that's
> > close
> > > to $1200 a year you are receiving in welfare.
>
> > >
> > > BTW, your POS Corolla is already taxed less,
> > via
> > > the car tax. And you use less gas per mile,
> > and
> > > less gas overall, thus paying less gasoline
> tax.
> >
> > > And your registration costs less (marginally)
> > than
> > > a SUV.
> > >
> > > Facts are such stubborn things - but keep
> > hitting
> > > that 'fairness' thing, it really seems to
> work
> > > well these days.
> >
> > You can't do math. 400 million in receipts, 500
> > million expenses for operation of metro. 80%
> from
> > fares, 20% from subsidies. BTW those
> "subsidies"
> > are more than made up by the fact that
> businesses
> > and commercial properties grow exponentially
> next
> > to metro lines, bringing in hundreds of
> millions
> > if not billions.
> >
> > Jackass
>
> Here's the 2011 budget -
> http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/docs/ANNUAL_BUDGE
> T_FY2011.pdf - latest I could find.
>
> 1.45B operating budget, only 789M came from fares.
> That's actually a little less - 54% percent of the
> operating costs are covered by fares. The rest of
> your ticket is paid by everyone else's taxes -
> Federal, state, and local.

Hahahahaha

You moron. WMATA runs buses to you fucktwat. Look at the part that says RAIL OPERATION, and shut the fuck up and admit you dont know dick, you dick

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LA City Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > GB you are wrong, flat out. You are using a
> zero
> > base analysis. Ok so widening will always
> create
> > some improvement. But the amount of improvement
> vs
> > how much effort and what else could have been
> done
> > is more important.
> >
> > Get it?
>
> whelp..............seeing as I didnt argue ANY of
> this bullshit, I'm not seeing as to why you are
> directing this at me...................but
> whateves. Let's see whatcha got................
>
> >
> > After 8 lanes any increase in number of lanes
> has
> > a deteriorating improvement to the road
> capacity.
> > This is basic transportation queue modeling,
> any
> > highway designer will tell you the same.
> Highway
> > design does not do total lanes = direct
> > correlation to total capacity because there are
> > far greater factors that cause traffic such as
> > lane merger, lane speed, incidence rates, that
> > after you get above 6 to 8 lanes begin
> plateauing
> > the effect that more lanes has.
>
> Wow............Cool Story, Bro. So maybe, just
> maybe, mind you............maybe that's why they
> made the new Beltway lanes "HIGH CAPACITY
> TRAVEL LANES!!?!?!!?!?!?!!!"
>
>
>
>
> > We got a system that can increase capacity 10
> > thousands users. Ok thats great, but the
> Beltway
> > has over 100,000 users, and this project was "a
> > mega project". There could have been a better
> > solution. When you are having this many people
> > concentrated into a corridor it tells you that
> the
> > ability for roads to address traffic concerns
> is
> > now becoming exhausted.
> >
>
> Always easy to QB from yr chair in yr living room.
> Even easier on Monday morning, hoss. Didnt see
> you down in Richmond successfully lobbying for any
> "better solution" these last few years or
> so................
>
>
> > Trains carry 36 times more people per second
> per
> > track than an equivalent car lane at free flow.
> > The point here is that they built a toll road
> that
> > barely improves anything longer than a couple
> of
> > years instead of building a system that would
> have
> > been able to accept a population that is
> > magnitudes of order larger.
>
> Someone else has already pointed out things like
> "stations" and "waiting times". You act like a
> train would solve everything and NEVER have a
> problem - you need to wake up to reality, son.
> EVERYTHING needs widening someday, ok kiddo?
> http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17498/met
> ros-stuffed-full-at-rosslyn-what-can-be-done/
>
> >
> > But no you and the general public of
> > non-transportation engineers are right. More
> > pavement is always better. Duh! Its traffic
> dummy,
> > just do what Los Angeles does, they have great
> > traffic
>
> Yeah..........how dare the public have a voice in
> the matter, right Comrade? Anyways, I guess you
> suggest we stick our head in the sand about
> vehicle traffic like what Arlington County has
> done - and they have GREAT traffic too -
> completely opposite of LA,
> right?.................... Jackass.


HAHAHAHAHAHHAA

THAT IS HOW IGNORANT YOU ARE YOU CUNT

Arlington IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE

Its traffic has been DOWN over the past 20 years even though their square footage development has TRIPLED in the same time and their population has risen.

How did they do it? Better transit, better buses, LESS highways for commuters living outside of arlington, less wasteful spending on road widenings, and most importantly more density in commercial cores you stupid fuckin ignorant cunt who thinks she knows anything.

The only reason you think Arlington has bad traffic is because all you know is driving on 66 THROUGH arlington, something barely any Arlingtonians do.

Way too many egos in this discussion. But cueing theory? HAHAHAHAHA!

Sorry that you poor guys can't afford a few bucks to get into a faster lane. I use the 495 Express Lanes ALL THE TIME. I even use them on weekends just to drive faster and get away from all the fucking morons who can't drive for shit (like the idiots who drive 55 in the left lane). Yeah, I can afford a few bucks when it saves me 10 to 30 minutes. My time is worth WAY more than that per hour. On Sunday I went from South Van Dorn to Tysons in 8 minutes (yes, I timed it).

So, cry all you want. You morons are willing to waste money on cheap beer/lottery tickets/etc but not willing to spend money on saving time - THE ONLY DAMN THING YOU CANNOT BUY IN LIFE!

*Waves at you from the faster lane*