Why Is Translink Building A Needless new Gondola On Burnaby Mountain?

[Corduroy]

You've already read what Translink claims will be the savings and posted your dismissal of them. What I don't understand is your reasons to dismiss them. All your arguments are ad hoc. In this thread you have consistently demonstrated your ignorance of the project and those involved, as well as your lack of motivation to correct that ignorance. When confronted with new facts that challenge your ignorance-based opinions, you either slap together some barely coherent response with simplistic logic that can be easily reduced to "I don't believe it" or change the subject.

This is the worst way to arrive at an opinion. The best way is to examine the facts first and reach a conclusion. A lot of people reach the conclusion and then examine the facts and twist them to meet the conclusion. You don't even bother with facts. You have your opinion and damn logic, facts or coherent arguments.

You wrote a few sentences on why you don't believe the savings stated by Translink are actual savings. These sentences were jumbled and ambiguous and so I asked for clarification. Your response was not to say why you believed Translink's statement was false but that you wanted to see a statement from Translink.

Can you not see how your first statement and your supposed clarification do not follow? If not, then perhaps this why you've been having so much trouble with facts, logic and coherence in this thread.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

You've already read what Translink claims will be the savings and posted your dismissal of them. What I don't understand is your reasons to dismiss them. All your arguments are ad hoc. In this thread you have consistently demonstrated your ignorance of the project and those involved, as well as your lack of motivation to correct that ignorance. When confronted with new facts that challenge your ignorance-based opinions, you either slap together some barely coherent response with simplistic logic that can be easily reduced to "I don't believe it" or change the subject.

This is the worst way to arrive at an opinion. The best way is to examine the facts first and reach a conclusion. A lot of people reach the conclusion and then examine the facts and twist them to meet the conclusion. You don't even bother with facts. You have your opinion and damn logic, facts or coherent arguments.

You wrote a few sentences on why you don't believe the savings stated by Translink are actual savings. These sentences were jumbled and ambiguous and so I asked for clarification. Your response was not to say why you believed Translink's statement was false but that you wanted to see a statement from Translink.

Can you not see how your first statement and your supposed clarification do not follow? If not, then perhaps this why you've been having so much trouble with facts, logic and coherence in this thread.

Translink has to say how much money they will spend on the new gondola compared to the bus system. It's called a cost benefit analysis that shows how a new piece of equipment or method will save a company money over one or ten years. Translink has not stated how much money Translink will save. Translink is confusing consumers with taxpayers, Translink has a mandate from govt to spend tax dollars as wisely as possible, they have a contract with taxpayers, not consumers. Translink must show very clearly where they are saving taxpayers money. They have not because their own internal systems are so chaotic they cannot pin down where all the cheques go to pay for gas, tires, labour etc. They are pathetic.

Tranlink's arguments are in fact ad hoc, they are not concrete. They are flunkies of the real estate industry and the SFU Community Trust. They are supporting special interest groups and not the general public here. it is the worst case of the corporate agenda at play here because it is a case of private profit at public expense. Build a new Patullo bridge or the Everygreen line, no problem.

 

[bill barilko]

As it happens last Wednesday AM I was on the Millenium Line Skytrain discussing this very development with a young woman who intends to attend SFU in the future.

We both agreed it's a great idea and it was refreshing to hear her take on the situation-so different than the pissy close minded old fools that infest this place.

 

[Corduroy]

Translink has to say how much money they will spend on the new gondola compared to the bus system. It's called a cost benefit analysis that shows how a new piece of equipment or method will save a company money over one or ten years. Translink has not stated how much money Translink will save. Translink is confusing consumers with taxpayers, Translink has a mandate from govt to spend tax dollars as wisely as possible, they have a contract with taxpayers, not consumers. Translink must show very clearly where they are saving taxpayers money. They have not because their own internal systems are so chaotic they cannot pin down where all the cheques go to pay for gas, tires, labour etc. They are pathetic.

As we've already seen, Translink has declared some estimates of what they will save in replacing bus service with the gondola. How do you connect all of what you said above with those declarations? Translink is confusing consumers with taxpayers how? Where in their statements have they done this? Please explain why the savings they said they will make are not real savings.

As it happens last Wednesday AM I was on the Millenium Line Skytrain discussing this very development with a young woman who intends to attend SFU in the future.

We both agreed it's a great idea and it was refreshing to hear her take on the situation-so different than the pissy close minded old fools that infest this place.

I think dumpthemonarchy is one of those folks that needs to feel outraged and persecuted. You will notice that most of this arguments are unsupported and laden with emotional appeals - in this thread and every other thread he posts in. Reality or rationality be damned, he'll take whatever side that makes him feel jilted. It's almost impossible to argue with such people.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

Obviously, some people don't live in Vancouver and have to pay all the gas taxes in the GVRD.

1. Gas in Vancouver costs ten cents more a litre here than in Mission, this puts continued pressure on it, the gas tax only seems to go up
2. There are half a dozen other projects that have a higher priority due to very high usage such as replacing bridges and new Skytrain lines
3. They could put the gondola over an industrial area instead