ouest-de-lîle Station YUL-Aéroport-Montréal-Trudeau - Discussion

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a 15 minutes, geraldshaw a dit :

Minority governments managing

Déplace ton message dans le forum  portant sur les Discussions Politiques si tu espères poursuivre sur ce sujet.  Dans les discussions précédentes sur ce fil (Ouest-de-l'Île-Station YUL), l'emphase était sur le financement de cette station: acceptable. Ton dernier message est toutefois trop centré sur la politique fédérale pour justifier sa présence ici.  J'essaie de m'en tenir aux règles.  

[geraldshaw]

44 minutes ago, Né entre les rapides said:

Déplace ton message dans le forum  portant sur les Discussions Politiques si tu espères poursuivre sur ce sujet.  Dans les discussions précédentes sur ce fil (Ouest-de-l'Île-Station YUL), l'emphase était sur le financement de cette station: acceptable. Ton dernier message est toutefois trop centré sur la politique fédérale pour justifier sa présence ici.  J'essaie de m'en tenir aux règles.  

I beg to disagree, The state of financing of this YUL station is entirely a political one. There is no point going to the political strand - only to be told that my comments should go to the financing of this station strand. 

[SameGuy]

Gotta agree. I don’t see anything crossing the line yet — there have been quite a few posts further up that got much closer to that line.

[Enalung]

1 hour ago, geraldshaw said:

I beg to disagree, The state of financing of this YUL station is entirely a political one. There is no point going to the political strand - only to be told that my comments should go to the financing of this station strand. 

Yes, the financing of YUL is political, but the fact is that most of those reading this just don't have the power to do anything about it. Regardless of it it's over the line or not, it's a pointless argument. It does not add anything of value to the thread. Worse, the fact is that theses politically charged discussions are very divisive. I do talk politics quite a bit on other social websites, but as much as possible, I try to avoid those arguments on this forum. It's not the reason why I come here. It's basic common sense and basic social etiquette. Most of us have a guinine interest in those projects and just enjoy sharing knowledge and ideas. I said it last time and I'll say it again: take more time to read some of the threads in this forum. Read enough and you'll notice that there are some lines that most members do not cross regardless of forum rules.

[SameGuy]

Well said. Thanks. I’ll think twice in the future.

[Né entre les rapides]

il y a une heure, geraldshaw a dit :

I beg to disagree, The state of financing of this YUL station is entirely a political one. There is no point going to the political strand - only to be told that my comments should go to the financing of this station strand. 

In a previous message, you wrote that financing for the project will most likely come from the Canada Infrastructure Bank.  I supported that view.  I simply do not want to be dragged into "p" discussions which inevitably relate to a future federal election where too many other (and more important) factors will be at play.  

 

[geraldshaw]

4 hours ago, Enalung said:

Yes, the financing of YUL is political, but the fact is that most of those reading this just don't have the power to do anything about it. Regardless of it it's over the line or not, it's a pointless argument. It does not add anything of value to the thread. Worse, the fact is that theses politically charged discussions are very divisive. I do talk politics quite a bit on other social websites, but as much as possible, I try to avoid those arguments on this forum. It's not the reason why I come here. It's basic common sense and basic social etiquette. Most of us have a guinine interest in those projects and just enjoy sharing knowledge and ideas. I said it last time and I'll say it again: take more time to read some of the threads in this forum. Read enough and you'll notice that there are some lines that most members do not cross regardless of forum rules.

To ignore the critical   dynamics of the timing of financing and the deadline to secure that financing within 60 days -  March 2021, when said  financing is 100% from various arms of the state, and when  concurrently  there is a March 2021  federal budget with  1many  billions of new infrastructure  money for Quebec on the table to  be delivered  by a federal minority govt., is to ignore the elephant in the room.

The 3 options for the timing of that financing is (1) before the budget   i. e.,  in February 2021 - or within the next 30 days (2) as part of a March 2021 budget that is passed in May 2021  (3) or after the election say in the summer or worse the fall,  by a re-elected  Liberal  majority government.  (1) is most like likely because it  gains the most political points in Quebec in the fastest possible way. To ignore financing timing options  makes them  elephants in the room.

This business above you say  "those reading just don't have the power to do anything about it"  is a "pointless argument" and  "does not not add anything of value to the thread" is "politically charged discussions are very divisive"  is like  saying that this site of supposedly important opinion influencers is for you,  just a site where contributors "just enjoy sharing  knowledge and on ideas" . I am happy for you. But please, give others who contribute a little more credit. The site has important influence on key decision makers for each project.   

[andre md]

11 hours ago, geraldshaw said:

I beg to disagree, The state of financing of this YUL station is entirely a political one. There is no point going to the political strand - only to be told that my comments should go to the financing of this station strand. 

exact ca sent la politique a plein nez et Legault joue la dessus depuis un certain temps. 

Au début le provinvial était d'accord pour aider ADM il a virer capot et maintenant il souffle la chaleur sur le federal. 

Si je ne me trompe l'ontario a fait sa contribution pour le lien ferroviaire a Pearson. 

[SameGuy]

But I agree with @Né entre les rapides and @Enalung that it has become unnecessarily divisive in tone over the past few months, veering from the discussions of design and construction to that of politics and ideology — ie opinions about which government should be ponying up to rescue the station. While discussion of financing projects forms a very natural part of discourse regarding a major project, it too often invites ideological barbs to be thrown into the mix that do not actually help further that conversation. If the mods/admins see it differently, then carry on, but I wouldn’t be astonished if this gets forked to a different thread in the off-topic forum.

[geraldshaw]

1 hour ago, SameGuy said:

But I agree with @Né entre les rapides and @Enalung that it has become unnecessarily divisive in tone over the past few months, veering from the discussions of design and construction to that of politics and ideology — ie opinions about which government should be ponying up to rescue the station. While discussion of financing projects forms a very natural part of discourse regarding a major project, it too often invites ideological barbs to be thrown into the mix that do not actually help further that conversation. If the mods/admins see it differently, then carry on, but I wouldn’t be astonished if this gets forked to a different thread in the off-topic forum.

At the same time this site has become a vital opinion influencer with a  growing impact  -- it  is  being seen or heard about or read  by private and public  urban planners, powerful architectural  firms, the media, and yes by   political  advisors  and by infrastructure forces at  all 3 levels of government.  Differing opinions are far more important than unanimous cheerleading. I have seen very little in the way "ideological barbs".

Debate is not divisive but rather it is  a good thing that in the end creates better projects. This site succeeds  in that effort to help create a better Montreal, the city we all love.