Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RailRoad_Candy t1_j6nb7gw wrote

Offering me a half-price ticket to ride a train that may or may not come (flip a coin) when I depend on that transportation for my livelihood...the price of the ticket really isn't the main issue at heart is it?

Not saying it's half-price but you get the point. I don't remember her running on the promise of half-baked band-aid solutions? Was that a commercial of hers that I missed?

2

Victor_Korchnoi t1_j6nyvyi wrote

The commuter rail train is very reliable. It is by far the most reliable transit in Boston. The issue is it doesn’t come frequently and it’s prohibitively expensive unless your employer subsidized it.

26

sihtydaernacuoytihsy t1_j6nhur5 wrote

I'm sorry, but that's the entire game.

Housing: we'll mostly defer to nimbys, but will give away land to a handful of developers and annoy everyone with ineffective rent control.

Education: we'll keep doing BuildBPS, but we'll call it a Green New Deal and staff it with recent graduates who have no business running a two billion dollar redevelopment project. (Edit: they added today (1/31/23) a new Chief of Capital Planning. I can't tell if she has any construction project management experience; she's former BPS transportation head.)

More education: black lives matter, but we'll skip the part where we adequately resource majority-black schools. Hell, we won't even guarantee the buses will run on time or translators will show up.

Climate: 400 ppm is an existential threat to the city, but you're gonna have to drive to work if you want to be on time.

Police reform: We'll fully fund the police and will not start a significant alternative social services response team. Hell, we won't won't even change the overtime rules that allow hundreds of police to make more each year than the mayor.

(I hope she proves me wrong, since her promises are largely good ones.)

11

sas92398 t1_j6nk2l6 wrote

She’s all about “innovative” gimmicks that don’t actually improve anyone’s life

6

sihtydaernacuoytihsy t1_j6nn1ih wrote

I mean the problem to me is that real solutions involve tradeoff and piss off the losers.

We need massively more units of housing, hundreds of thousands, which will require annoying the nimby's and neighborhood defenders, building over thousands of single family homes and two story businesses, etc. (I also think they should not have many affordable units; the affordability benefits should come by bending the supply:demand ratio, not from creating stupid lotteries.)

Likewise, real police reform isn't possible without pissing off the police.

Likewise, a real Green New Deal school building program will require hiring mid and late-career professionals, pissing off the campaign staffers who wanted patronage.

Don't get me started on busing, school and neighborhood integration, or bike lanes.

She's too ambitious, and maybe too much of a lightning rod, to accept those tradeoffs. The former is on her; the latter rooted in class, race, gender, and just weird GOP conservative insanity, and I feel bad for Wu on that stuff. She should be able to make hard decisions without jagoffs threatening her and her family, expressly or implicitly. I loathe the bullhorn brigade because they unduly constrain Wu's policy choices (also they're just assholes). But I roll my eyes at Wu's please-them-all attitude, too.

11

septagon t1_j6o06jc wrote

See: every major American city with full progressive/democrat leadership. They NEVER fix the things they claim to care about.

−5

sihtydaernacuoytihsy t1_j6oeij5 wrote

That seems like a littttttle bit of a stretch. Many fail to live up to their own intentions, and adopt half-measures and can-kicking. Weirdly, however, crime is down, guns are down, teen pregnancy is down, unemployment is down, trash is down, education is up, incomes are up, amenities are up, in most of those cities over the course of the last couple decades.

Indeed, the reason we have the housing price crunch and the gentrification and displacement is that American cities (all major US cities are varyingly blue) have become much more desirable locations over the last couple generations. Maybe that's a result of progressive leadership, maybe it's not, but a lot of things that we cared about a generation ago are a lot better now. Change is slow and imperfect.

Edit: PS the adjective is "Democratic", when you're not watching Tucker.

7

AboyNamedBort t1_j6o183v wrote

A coin flip? A tiny percentage of commuter rail trips are cancelled and you are spreading lies by saying its 50%.

9

RailRoad_Candy t1_j6o3eqr wrote

If I need it there when it says it's going to be there, and 20/30/40/50/60 minutes goes by until it shows up...you want to convince me that THAT is reliable transportation?

If a Train is 25 minutes late for an 8PM platform time, that Train didn't show up AT 8, it's late as hell. It DID NOT SHOW WHEN IT WAS SUPPOSED TO. At that point I'm looking at alternate modes of transportation because I'm trying not to lose my job.

You can shove that "...spreading lies" s@#t right up your a##. People have LOST THEIR JOBS because they depended on the T to be remotely functional and remotely punctual and those people were WRONG to assume so.

−2

Hi_Jynx t1_j6ntzbr wrote

Eh, the commuter rail is pretty expensive if you have a longish commute for a monthly pass so it probably is at least partly the issue. But the unreliability and infrequent trains is also part of the problem I imagine.

5

Victor_Korchnoi t1_j6o15wl wrote

The frequency is absolutely an issue, the reliability is actually really good. In the ~100 times I’ve taken the Needham Line I’ve never had a train more than a couple minutes late.

But the price and frequency make the bus to the subway a more attractive option most of the time.

9

Hi_Jynx t1_j6p8r33 wrote

Eh. I remember having to wait at the Andover station over an hour during a snow storm - one of the last times you want the train to be so delayed. I get on some level weather happens and it can/will cause delays but I really wouldn't call that reliable. Bonus because the Andover station last I was on it does not have any type of enclosed waiting area so it was not a pleasant experience not knowing when the train would come and not really being able to get out of the cold/weather at risk of missing when the upcoming train would come.

2

CJYP t1_j6pc7qk wrote

If the snowstorm is bad enough, every travel method will be disrupted. Driving would certainly be just as delayed, or more, along with a high risk of getting into a crash. Biking would barely work at all. Walking could work if you have the right gear, but you need to be prepared and take it slow. Flights would be delayed or cancelled. Busses might be ok, if there are bus lanes for enough of the route and the plows got to them, but even that's iffy. There just isn't a good way to travel when the snow is that bad, and holding the commuter rail to an unrealistic standard doesn't really help.

4

Hi_Jynx t1_j6phchs wrote

I don't know if I would call it that bad, cars were certainly still running and people were considering pooling together for a rideshare, there's just not many options further from the city.

2

Wtf_is_this1234 t1_j6pav9c wrote

> In the ~100 times I’ve taken the Needham Line I’ve never had a train more than a couple minutes late.

So basically, you rode it once and it came on time?

CR pre-covid had daily delays on just about every line exceeding 15 minutes.

1