Browsing this Thread:
5 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
Plot that against salary or job type. Yes, absolutely there has been job growth in minimum wage retail jobs in the suburbs. Walmart employs lots of people. Now what about finance, legal services, technology, and research?
Posted on: 2014/5/19 19:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I'll post the link a second time. Perhaps have a read? Outside of Hudson and Bergen counties, NYC employs NJ residents in single digit percentages. Over the 50-year period measured employment in NYC has fallen, and employment in the burbs including NJ has steadily risen. http://www.newgeography.com/content/0 ... onocentrism-edgeless-city
Posted on: 2014/5/19 19:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
 |
Quote:
Do you have a single link to back up any assertions you are making? You've got three office buildings (not necessarily new jobs) relocating to Jersey City. Where are there stats on jobs arriving in NJ? From a right wing news agency: Quote: New Jersey?s underperformance is partly attributable to other states? increasing taxes, while others were helped by boosting energy production, Rosen said. Still, New Jersey?s growth in jobs, personal income and gross state product has lagged behind the nation?s, he said. Essentially, there is zero evidence that jobs are shifting to NJ in anywhere close to the rate that NY is gaining new business.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:50
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Bingo
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Yes - people usually quit their jobs or retire before leaving the state. I'd bet most of the NJ exodus in YOUR link isn't going to NY state for jobs - more likely it's retirees fleeing to states with zero income tax.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Where is the Google New Jersey office? Oh, New York. Where is the Facebook New Jersey office? Oh, New York. Yahoo!? Etsy? Kickstarter? Buzzfeed? FourSquare?
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
Three places listed as coming to NJ while you have NJ listed as the place where people are fleeing from... People don't leave when they have jobs.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:08
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Posted on: 2014/5/19 18:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
JP Morgan and RBC to name 2 recent examples moving to JC. Ask Steve Fulop. Also see this for the general decentralization pattern. http://www.newgeography.com/content/0 ... onocentrism-edgeless-city Quote:
Stop attributing your dumbass statements to me.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 17:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
Really? Which businesses are moving to NJ from NY? Which theory are you working off of when you state that people would stay in NJ if there were no jobs? Would it be the same theory that has NJ listed as the state with the most people moving out?
Posted on: 2014/5/19 17:30
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
hmm, i'm not so sure the NJ commuters are low-to-middle income. i'd have to see stats on that. i'd think that one major reason why NJ residents deal with long commutes to NY is the higher salaries and better career opportunities. many of these types of positions will not be available in NJ.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 17:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Shrinking the size of a labor pool generally drives business costs up. A lot of NJ commuters simply wouldn't move to NY. The majority of commuters are low-to-middle income earners, that even if they were added to the NY property tax rolls would likely be net beneficiaries of NY state and municipal benefits. Businesses are already moving more of their ops to NJ. By not backing the ARC tunnel, NY is simply cutting it's own throat imo.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 17:00
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Are you arguing that the average NJ commuter to NY would be a net cost if they lived in NY? it seems as though that having these workers in NY would result in a gain for NY.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 16:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
You're a fool if you think NY would benefit more by people not purchasing homes in NY. Service costs are vastly lower than just grabbing some commuter tax. Besides, it would behoove a mayor and governor to get more New Yorkers employed and reduce their own unemployment numbers. The ARC tunnel supplies labor, which can be obtained in NY. Why would NY care about a bunch of people living in NJ looking for jobs? New York doesn't need a wider labor pool. They have enough talent in the city and, should there be less access, the talent that isn't there yet will be. It's not "protectionist," it's a fact. If New York could gain so much by having the ARC tunnel built, why didn't they offer money for it beyond PA money...?
Posted on: 2014/5/19 16:26
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Pebble - NJ commuters benefit NY by reducing labor and service costs, and contribute directly to NY state income tax, while not benefiting directly from all the resident services NY state provides. The economics of having a wider labor pool seem to escape you and your "protectionist" view. The real truth is the ARC tunnel benefits both NJ and NY and your counter-arguments seem like petty politics to me.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 16:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
First, this is about the dumbest and most transparent thread ever posted on here. The Alaskan Way tunnel project in Seattle is being used as a straw man to blow Christie and beat the ARC tunnel horse yet again, four years after its demise.
Funny enough though, glad Monroe brings up the tunnel - half-informed though he may be about the project. There is so much to love about the Seattle tunnel - first and foremost because it offers such a stark contrast to how things get done (or don't) around here. The one (and likely only thing) Monroe and I can agree on is the absolute horror that is the Port Authority (half run by his bromantic interest....) Yes, there have been overruns - and guess what? The contractors are bearing a lot of those costs! In Seattle, local government tends to side with the people and isn't an arm of the construction/development business the way it is here. Look at this website: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/ A project budget! A sources and uses table! A project timeline! Frequent and useful press releases! Explanations of problems and outlines of solutions! And independent oversight!: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/News/2014/01/13_StepsMeetDBEGoal.htm Contrast that with this: http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/index.html The soon to be 13 year and counting WTC rebuilding project. A website of glowing self-praise and a bunch of "biggest" "tallest" "world class" bullshit. Beautiful portrayals of things that will be built to a lesser standard than depicted. Not one ounce of substance.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 14:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Midtown office vacancy rates are under 10%.
Central and north Jersey office vacancy rates are 18% to 25%. Good luck job hunting.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 14:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
None of what you wrote correlates with what I wrote. the bridges and tunnels that exist presently due serve NY in some capacity. You can also quantify what NY would lose by the elimination of bridges and tunnels into NJ. The ARC tunnel is a NJTransit commuter line from residential areas. Tell me how NY loses by its lack of existence. Ultimately, your post adds nothing to the actual topic other than a meek attempt at an insult. If a topic is simply over your head, sometimes it is best to just take a step back.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 14:24
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Pebble - by your twisted logic and absurd inferences, Manhattan would be better off with no bridges and tunnels. Idiotic.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 13:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
You make several incorrect assumptions: 1. ?Most, if not all of the income tax ends up with NY??Considering that I work in NY, I?m well aware of what I pay in NY tax compared to NJ. A lot is given to NY, however, NJ still gets my property taxes, much of my entertainment tax, home goods tax, clothing purchases tax? The list goes on and on. 2. ?People would still live in NJ without the access to NY.? This is patently false. You didn?t outright state it but you assumed it with the statement that NJ loses out. The vast majority of jobs are in NY. The better paying jobs are in NY. These jobs will hire people regardless of location. If New Jersey residents, like myself, did not have the access that I have, I would NOT have purchased a home in this state. 3. ?Benefiting from a project means you?re losing when it isn?t getting built.? Again, not directly stated, but definitely implied. If I am asked to purchase something, let?s say food, then the cost analysis is along the lines of how much does food benefit me, followed by how much would I lose out by not purchasing food. Since food is required for me to stay alive, the purchase is a necessity. For NY, this tunnel is like a pair of designer jeans. NY loses absolutely nothing by having this tunnel die. In fact, NY gains by the tunnel not getting built. Less access to those in NJ means that people must move into NY to gain the access needed for the job that they want and/or have. I?m not going to argue about the use of PA money for the Skyway. It is a shady move but I don?t care that it was done. What I care about is the future of this state and this state?s growth. The tunnel is necessary, just as necessary as the PATH extending the amount of trains it can have on one track. By not building the tunnel now, all that happened is that the project has been put off so that more money on the same project can be spent in the future. Without access to the jobs in NY, New Jersey residents are left to search for jobs locally. It cannot be argued that this successful given the fact that NJ has one of the slowest post-recession growths. That isn?t being political, that?s just stating a fact. Either we gain access to jobs being generated in other states or you risk losing quality residents.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 13:47
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42 Last Login : 2022/2/28 7:31 From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
4192
|
It would be interesting to know the ratios of train users from NJ travelling to NY and NY'ers travelling to NJ ?
It would help Christie sell his decision that we have a high number of NY daily commuters coming into our State - noting we are a user pays society and culture! Personally, this train tunnel would basically only benefit NJ commuters most of the time - Just look at the PATH.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 13:33
|
|||
|
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Most, if not all of the income tax ends up with NY, and given as a credit to NJ tax liability. NY gets its slice of the pie, without having to provide local services such as schools. For businesses it also helps keep labor, goods & services costs lower. From FAB's article, it looked like NY, Boston and Washington DC all benefited from the ARC project, but wanted NJ to pick up the tab. Setting aside politics for a sec, it's hard to argue that the NJ and PA money earmarked for ARC wasn't better spent on projects like the Skyway. And I don't buy the legal argument that the PA shouldn't help pay for the Skyway - it's a major artery between the PA-run Newark airport and NYC.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 13:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
There is nothing sillier than someone trying to claim that public transit subsidies is anything more than a necessity to a reduction in congestion. All public transit is subsidized, as it should be. PS: I?m not sure why Christie would take a vegetable to a tunnel. I believe the word you?re looking for is quash. Quote:
I think Christie is who would have signed the contract. But he didn't. And if it is true that the contract called for NJ to pay 100% of the inevitable massive cost overruns, I think Christie made the right choice. We needed a better negotiator to get NJ a better tunnel contract. I don't know who was responsible for that.[/quote] A better negotiator?? For what? Name one thing NY gains by adding this tunnel. Everyone knows the exact reason it was quashed: The fat man couldn?t raise taxes and the Pulaski was ready to fall down. Everything else is the excuse that was used. NJ NEEDS more access into Manhattan. Denying this is like denying the necessity of oxygen. All Christie did was push off the costs onto the next governor, likely forcing NJ residents to pay even more due to the delays.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 13:14
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43 Last Login : 2023/9/5 18:27 From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1980
|
Quote:
This argument is laughable. Of course NY wouldn?t want to spend money on it! Why would they? If there is no tunnel that means that there are less workers coming from NJ. As such, this drives individuals to live in the state they work. End result: NY gets property tax, income tax and the claim of growth. Working in NY still means that those living in NJ pay NJ income tax. As such, it would behoove the state in which people choose to live to use that tax money to better the lives of those that live here. It is just a shame that we have a governor more interested in lining his pockets and those that are his donors (not exactly a rarity amongst politicians) than the actual residents.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 12:58
|
|||
|
Dos A Cero
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Blame the other stakeholders who refused to pay their fair share, Christie said all along we'd pay ours-keep in mind that NY refused to put a single penny into the project, and the Feds had all the taxpayer 'stimulus' money and didn't up their ante a cent either. And as far as the GAO story, see my link to the Seattle fiasco, the continuing increase in the costs of the East River MTA tunnel, the huge over spending on the Port Authority Freedom Tower, the Big Dig-I have no doubt the Tunnel to Macy's basement would top them all. The overall fact is that NJ, as it was structured when Christie pulled the plug, had 100% responsibility for every single penny in cost overruns. Which was a deal breaker, rightfully.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 11:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42 Last Login : 2022/2/28 7:31 From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
4192
|
Report Disputes Christie?s Basis for Halting Tunnel
By KATE ZERNIKE Published: April 10, 2012 Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey exaggerated when he declared that unforeseen costs to the state were forcing him to cancel the new train tunnel planned to relieve congested routes across the Hudson River, according to a long-awaited report by independent Congressional investigators. The report by the Government Accountability Office, to be released this week, found that while Mr. Christie said that state transportation officials had revised cost estimates for the tunnel to at least $11 billion and potentially more than $14 billion, the range of estimates had in fact remained unchanged in the two years before he announced in 2010 that he was shutting down the project. And state transportation officials, the report says, had said the cost would be no more than $10 billion. Mr. Christie also misstated New Jersey?s share of the costs: he said the state would pay 70 percent of the project; the report found that New Jersey was paying 14.4 percent. And while the governor said that an agreement with the federal government would require the state to pay all cost overruns, the report found that there was no final agreement, and that the federal government had made several offers to share those costs. Canceling the tunnel, then the largest public works project in the nation, helped shape Mr. Christie?s profile as a rising Republican star, an enforcer of fiscal discipline in a country drunk on debt. But the report is likely to revive criticism that his decision, which he said was about ?hard choices? in tough economic times, was more about avoiding the need to raise the state?s gasoline tax, which would have violated a campaign promise. The governor subsequently steered $4 billion earmarked for the tunnel to the state?s near-bankrupt transportation trust fund, traditionally financed by the gasoline tax. On Tuesday, in a speech at a conference on taxes and the economy in Manhattan, Mr. Christie did not mention the report, but defended his decision to cancel the project, saying, ?I refuse to compromise my principles.? He also derided the tunnel plan, although he had said even as he canceled it that he believed in its merits. While the tunnel would have expanded the number of subway lines available to commuters at Pennsylvania Station in New York, Mr. Christie characterized it Tuesday as a dead-end to a department store. ?When they want to build a tunnel to the basement of Macy?s, and stick the New Jersey taxpayers with a bill of 3 to 5 billion over, no matter how much the administration yells and screams you have to say no,? he said at the conference hosted by the George W. Bush Institute, before an audience that included Mr. Bush, Karl Rove, and prominent Republicans and business executives. ?You have to look them right in the eye, no matter how much they try to vilify you for it, and you have to say no. You have to be willing to say no to those things that compromise your principles.? Mr. Christie?s estimates of several billion dollars in cost overruns refers to an $8.7 billion estimate that was used for a grant agreement between the federal government and the state to get the project started in early 2009, and was often referred to in news accounts as the price tag on the project. But the federal report noted that federal and state officials, including those in Mr. Christie?s administration, had long been preparing for the possibility that costs might range from $9.5 billion to $12.4 billion. Mr. Christie?s administration, however, argued that the upper estimates were excessively cautious. A spokesman for the governor, Michael Drewniak, said Mr. Christie?s statement of costs had included $775 million to build a new portal bridge, which was required as part of the project. The 70 percent state share, he said, included the costs that would have been paid for by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which is run by both states, as well as federal highway and stimulus funds earmarked for New Jersey. Counting those costs, which the report does not do, would put the state?s share at 65.5 percent. As for the state?s share of the overruns, Mr. Drewniak said the federal government ?offered no significant increase in outright funding that would significantly mitigate the costs to New Jersey.? ?The bottom line is that the G.A.O. report simply bears out what we said in the fall of 2010 and say to this day: the ARC project was a very, very bad deal for New Jersey,? he added, using the acronym for the project, known as Access to the Region?s Core. Martin E. Robins, the founding director of the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center at Rutgers University and an early director of the ARC project, criticized the governor. ?In hindsight, it?s apparent that he had a highly important political objective: to cannibalize the project so he could find an alternate way of keeping the transportation trust fund program moving, and he went ahead and did it,? he said. Shutting down the tunnel project extinguished the best hope to relieve the increasing congestion not only between New Jersey and Manhattan, but also along the popular high-speed route between Boston and Washington. Now, Amtrak and New Jersey trains share two 100-year-old single-track tunnels under the Hudson. As the report notes, those tracks now operate at capacity, and demand for mass transit between New Jersey and Manhattan is expected to grow 38 percent by 2030. One 15-minute disruption, the report said, ripples out to affect 15 other Amtrak and New Jersey trains. Last month, problems on the two tracks on two consecutive days sent delays rippling out along the Northeast. The governor said when he canceled the project that he hoped New York City or federal officials would find another solution But last week, the chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority said one of those, a proposed extension of the No. 7 subway line to New Jersey, was not going to happen ?in anybody?s lifetime.? Congress gave Amtrak $15 million to study a tunnel that would expand capacity by about half as much as the ARC project, but the money to build the tunnel is uncertain. The Government Accountability Office, the nonpartisan investigative arm of Congress, did the report at the request of Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey, a Democrat who is the chairman of the Senate subcommittee on surface transportation, an ardent supporter of public transportation and a critic of Mr. Christie. Investigators spent a year examining official planning studies and estimates for the project and interviewing people associated with it. Mr. Christie supported the tunnel in his campaign in 2009 and in letters to the federal Transportation Department as late as April 2010, four months after he took office. When he canceled it, he said that he supported the merits of the project, but that the state could not afford it, and that he would not put New Jersey taxpayers on ?a never-ending hook? to pay for it. In announcing his decision, Mr. Christie said he was relying on the advice of his ARC steering committee, led by New Jersey Transit officials, which he said had revised estimates and found that the tunnel would ?cost no less than $11 billion and could exceed $14 billion.? The report, however, found that the estimates had not changed since August 2008, 17 months before Mr. Christie took office. New Jersey Transit and federal officials had agreed on a baseline cost of $8.7 billion, which was the figure cited in news reports, but they had also agreed, first in 2008 and then a month before Mr. Christie canceled the project, that costs would range from $9.5 billion to $12.4 billion. When federal officials argued, six weeks before Mr. Christie canceled the project, that it might cost $13.7 billion, the report said, state officials replied that they ?did not see costs rising to this level? and said the project would cost, at most, $10 billion. Federal officials, in response, backed off that higher estimate. But Mr. Drewniak, the spokesman for Mr. Christie, said Monday that the fluctuating estimates suggested that no one really knew how much the project would cost. ?The governor was prudent to cancel the project, given the vast disagreement between professionals,? he said. Mr. Christie further explained his decision by saying that the financing agreement with the federal government required him to declare that New Jersey would pay any costs above the $8.7 billion. That is the standard procedure for full-financing agreements, but the report found that there was no agreement when Mr. Christie canceled the project, and that the federal government, which was already paying 51 percent of the costs, had offered to help with any cost overruns, pledging additional money, low-interest railroad loans and public-private financing. Before Mr. Christie declared the tunnel dead, his transportation advisers told state legislators that they had discussed taking money from the project to fill the transportation trust fund, which was almost empty. Since then, the governor has steered $4 billion in tunnel money to the trust fund, avoiding an increase in the state?s gasoline tax, the second lowest in the nation. Mr. Drewniak criticized Mr. Lautenberg for the report, saying that he should have arranged more federal money for the project. ?He needs to stop blaming others for his failure in leadership,? he said.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 11:06
|
|||
|
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/6/13 17:16 Last Login : 2017/2/3 3:59 From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
540
|
I am amazed how many of you take Christie's explanation for the ARC cancellation at face value, apparently unaware that his stated reasons have been debunked.
Quote: Report Disputes Christie?s Basis for Halting Tunnel http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/10/nyr ... 2Farc+tunnel+cancellation
Posted on: 2014/5/19 4:50
|
|||
|
I live by the river.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
What does that have to do with anything? It's not like you can justify funneling hundreds of millions of dollars to an out-of-mission project because they got involved in out-of-mission projects in the past -- especially when you blast them for those earlier out-of-mission projects. Oh wait, I know. It's another of your red herrings. Why discuss the crap Christie pulls, when we can talk about decisions the PA made 50 years ago? Quote: Why did the PA allow Christie to use the money for the Pulaski Skyway? Because NY wanted more PA money for the Freedom Tower. No, it's because he installed a bunch of flunkies and yes-men on his side of PA. He would have undoubtedly exacted revenge on anyone who blocked him. That's how he operates. I mean, really. The PA "allowed" Christie to yank a billion dollars to a non-PA project? What do YOU think would happen if they refused? Was David Samson going to tell Christie to take a hike? Whatever corruption exists on the NJ side, it's Christie's responsibility to yank it out, or at least take a stab at it. Do you want to try and tell me he's done a good job of reforming the PA...? Quote: At least the Skyway is a transportation project.... It has jack to do with the PA's mission. I do agree it had to be done; the Skyway is falling apart, and a replacement would be even more expensive. But the PA doesn't own it, and it has nothing to do with the PA's mission. Nothing, nada, squat, zippo. If anything, those funds should have gone to the PA's capital plans, or better yet, to a replacement for the ARC tunnel. Instead, it got yanked into a bunch of car projects that have nothing to do with any ports, bridges, tunnels or airports. And no, you can't defend this unjustified redirection of funds by pointing out past out-of-mission decisions which you simultaneously criticize. Either it's OK for the PA to spend on out-of-mission things (in which case, you can't criticize buying and developing the WTC), or the PA shouldn't do things that are out-of-mission (in which case, they shouldn't be spending money on the Skyway). Make up your mind. Quote: And Christie didn't squash the tunnel because of upfront NJ costs. He got out because he knew the project would have cost overruns, that he didn't want to pay for. If it wasn't needed, that would be a reasonable position. But the need for the tunnel still exists, and grows every day -- as do the costs that we'll have to pay when someone finally does bite the bullet and agree to build it. We could have had a new tunnel finished around 2020 (allowing for 2 years of delays). But, no. Because of Christie's short-sightedness, a new tunnel is going to cost taxpayers and PA ratepayers far more than it could have; and I cannot imagine that anyone in the federal government is going to be stupid enough to throw billions at Christie again, only to watch him spend it on highways near Red Hook. So, yeah. I'm not going to thank Christie for basically screwing over NJ so Christie can make it look like he spent less money while in office.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 2:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42 Last Login : 2022/2/28 7:31 From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
4192
|
Quote:
Then what's the big deal ? We pull out, walk away, say thank-you very much and this proposition is not for us. Then conclude by saying we are still interested, but would seek a better deal or options. I've been in many contracts for my services and I always look at the fine print where it might mention; overruns, time of completion, failure to complete project, insolvency, insurances, public liability, invoicing and progress payment scheduling, penalties for slow progress, quality control of workmanship and materials used, a pull out of the contract clause and any penalties associated etc etc. ... If there is no mention of the above I ask the why's and what-if's to protect my labor and services ... I don't want to be the bunny holding the bag and not get paid.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 2:11
|
|||
|
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Seattle tunnel will end up with frightening cost overruns . . .
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I think Christie is who would have signed the contract. But he didn't. And if it is true that the contract called for NJ to pay 100% of the inevitable massive cost overruns, I think Christie made the right choice. We needed a better negotiator to get NJ a better tunnel contract. I don't know who was responsible for that.
Posted on: 2014/5/19 2:09
|
|||
|
||||