montréal STM: Prolongement de la ligne 05 Bleue vers l'Est

[Corbeau]

il y a 3 minutes, SameGuy a dit :

Again, the only way I could see a public metro system being completely privatized is if we let our habitual exceptionalism dictate such an illogical course of action.

Some of the best, most efficient metros on the planet are owned by the public but are privately operated under concession; the public transit authority mandates the needs of the system, and the private concession holder finds the most efficient ("profitable") means to meet the mandate. This is the only way I could see our metro being improved and made more efficient.

But it's the Caisse public? The REM is considered a public system. It accepts our OPUS cards.

[Corbeau]

il y a 1 minute, montrealgoalie a dit :

No..

What?

What are these shower thought questions you're asking lately?

The Caisse wants maximum profit. Wouldn't that require barely-used stations like George-Vanier?

[montrealgoalie]

1 minute ago, Corbeau said:

But it's the Caisse public? The REM is considered a public system. It accepts our OPUS cards.

Yea I think he meant to put "privatized" in quotes

The caisse is "public" but operates like a "private" entity, mostly

[Corbeau]

il y a 8 minutes, montrealgoalie a dit :

Yea I think he meant to put "privatized" in quotes

The caisse is "public" but operates like a "private" entity, mostly

Probably first thing to do would be to scrap the ARMT and change the other public institutions. Then partner with la Caisse for the metro, allowing both it and the government to make money like with the REM.

[SameGuy]

9 minutes ago, Corbeau said:

But it's the Caisse public? The REM is considered a public system. It accepts our OPUS cards.

Para-public. It doesn't report to the government, but rather to its stakeholders; the public is its investor group, but it is a for-profit entity that must find return on investment by any means. Public transit is a social service. We don't expect our roadways or crosswalks or sewage systems or schools to turn a profit, but just to be safe and reliable.

[Corbeau]

il y a 2 minutes, SameGuy a dit :

Para-public. It doesn't report to the government, but rather to its stakeholders; the public is its investor group, but it is a for-profit entity that must find return on investment by any means. Public transit is a social service. We don't expect our roadways or crosswalks or sewage systems or schools to turn a profit, but just to be safe and reliable.

Because public transit isn't seen as an absolute necessity.

[SameGuy]

"Isn't seen as" by whom, though?

[Corbeau]

il y a 1 minute, SameGuy a dit :

"Isn't seen as" by whom, though?

The government it seems. It might be changing, but it took 40 years to extend the blue line.

[SameGuy]

I don't think the dysfunction inherent in our version of transit planning and administration can be properly characterized as not seeing public transit "as an absolute necessity." 

[mtlurb]

Il y a 2 heures, SameGuy a dit :

We don't expect our roadways or crosswalks or sewage systems or schools to turn a profit, but just to be safe and reliable.

But they do, having them, mean thousands of jobs are created which supports our public services, this is the profit. Not having a toll on every corner, doesn't mean revenus and profits aren't created somewhere in the market. Same thing for the sewage or schools, the profit are indirect by enhancing hygiene and education, which in turn cost less to society in the end.

Eduction + Hygiene - cost of infra - cost of not doing anything = profit.