Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
34 user(s) are online (30 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 34

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 3 »


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#80
Not too shy to talk
Not too shy to talk


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/6/21 22:04
Last Login :
2020/4/14 1:47
From Downtown JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 34
Offline
Will the new tunnels of the gateway project be used solely for Amtrak?

Would love to see a comparison between that and East Side Access tunnels.

Posted on: 2015/12/27 0:48
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#79
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline

Posted on: 2015/11/12 21:37
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#78
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
I must have hit a nerve for Monroe to use ALL THREE of his accounts to discredit what I said.


You're as correct about that as you are about the tunnel. But I thank you for stepping up with your tax dollars in the new deal!

Posted on: 2015/11/12 19:29
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#77
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
6/15 16:59
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2633
Offline
I must have hit a nerve for Monroe to use ALL THREE of his accounts to discredit what I said.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 19:20
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#76
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
You're also forgetting that the Port Authority was a stakeholder in the original deal, and you can count half of that money as a NJ contribution. That's gone now, and we have the Feds and NY picking up 75% of the original and subsequent costs. NY, outside of their Port Authority share, wasn't putting in a penny. Now they'll share the pain with us! Want to know how good a deal this is? The Star Ledger had it up on their news feed front page for about a minute!

Posted on: 2015/11/12 19:10
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#75
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/8/19 16:35
Last Login :
2019/1/12 22:36
From the village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 218
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Double down, you still lose. NJ didn't sign off to a thing, and it was exactly because of what I said it was. And now we've got the Feds taking over half the cost, and I'm sure half the overrun, which will be billions. Of course that's all imaginary to you, since the paperwork hasn't been signed yet. It is clear that NJ will pay less. Good job by Senator Booker pushing Governor Christies agenda-true bi-partisanship benefitting NJ!


But it isn't clear.

With a $3b base on ARC and a $5b base on Gateway, ARC would have had to reach a 66% overrun covered completely by NJ to reach the $5b MINIMUM we'll be spending on Gateway. A 100% overrun on ARC would have left NJ paying ($6b) and is equivalent to a 25% overrun on Gateway with NJ footing 25% ($1b) of that $4b overrun.

Let's take an extreme example, the nightmare project that was the Big Dig went 270% over budget. In that scenario, ARC would have cost NJ $8.1b. To reach that number with Gateway, the project will only need to go 62% over budget.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 19:03
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#74
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Double down, you still lose. NJ didn't sign off to a thing, and it was exactly because of what I said it was. And now we've got the Feds taking over half the cost, and I'm sure half the overrun, which will be billions. Of course that's all imaginary to you, since the paperwork hasn't been signed yet. It is clear that NJ will pay less. Good job by Senator Booker pushing Governor Christies agenda-true bi-partisanship benefitting NJ!

Posted on: 2015/11/12 18:37
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#73
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 22:56
Last Login :
2019/11/14 1:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1010
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal.

I have to disagree with Politifact on this one. As the GAO put it, in its report:

"Because the project was terminated before FTA and NJT entered into a full funding grant agreement, there was no final agreement by all the parties on the issue of responsibility for project cost growth. While the Secretary of Transportation and the governor of New Jersey held discussions on additional funding options, planning documents did not address the source of funding of potential cost growth for the project."

http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/589192.pdf

Some of us also could not help but notice that Christie did not turn right around and demand a better deal. No, he spent a bunch of those funds on completely unrelated projects, then did nothing until years later when the Amtrak tunnel blew a fuse, and the US DOT and Cuomo started calling him out for it.

We're also noticing that NJ is even more on the hook than before. Our initial cost is $2 billion higher than with the ARC tunnel. Heck, if we take the Politifact claims seriously, then not only is NJ on the hook for 25% of the initial cost, we could be on the hook for 50% of the cost overruns!

According to the Politico article, by federal law the sponsoring agency has to pay for overruns. That's PA. That means NJ now pays half. And if it was possible to negotiate something different now, then it was equally possible to negotiate something different then.


Quote:
I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure.

Dude? Seriously. You're the only person in NJ who is defending this guy. If he slapped a baby, you'd say the infant deserved it.

For my part, I don't come into this saying "Christie sucks, therefore his plans suck." I look at his actions, and determine their merit or lack thereof. In this case:

Thus, the facts remain:
? There was no agreement that put NJ totally on the hook for ARC overruns
? Christie canceled the project in the midst of negotiating how to deal with the cost overruns (and did not speak to Patterson about it either)
? It is clear that the new tunnel project will cost NJ more.
? It is also obvious that Christie's cancellation delayed the project by at least 10 years, during which time the current infrastructure has become even more precarious

That does not look like a win for NJ.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 18:30
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#72
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/8/19 16:35
Last Login :
2019/1/12 22:36
From the village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 218
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/



25% of $20b is $5b.

$5 billion is > $3b.

So I'm not totally sure how this is a "better" deal.


Also, ARC would have been owned by NJTransit exclusively. No rental fees to Amtrak, no rental fees to Port Authority. No scheduling conflicts with MTA or Amtrak. Just NJTransit.

Oh, and ARC would have been completed in 2017. If Gateway breaks ground before 2020 I would be surprised. So there is all the lost wages and lost land values.

So "better" I guess is a relative term.


I guess since there never was a contract signed stipulating that NJ was on the hook it didn't happen. Except for the fact that none of the partners agreed to put in one red cent towards the overrun . . .

But you have to solve for X-X being the inevitable cost overruns that no one offered to help pay. Saying that NJ would only have paid 3 billion is nonsense. Fiction. Imaginary. Silly.


Correct, and the Gateway project becomes cheaper for NJ at just under a ~$3b overage.

However, this would have been a 100% cost overrun on the ARC and a mere 15% on Gateway. It is a much safer bet to assume that overrun as % of project total is more likely to be in sync than absolute $$$'s.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 18:15
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#71
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2895
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/



25% of $20b is $5b.

$5 billion is > $3b.

So I'm not totally sure how this is a "better" deal.


Also, ARC would have been owned by NJTransit exclusively. No rental fees to Amtrak, no rental fees to Port Authority. No scheduling conflicts with MTA or Amtrak. Just NJTransit.

Oh, and ARC would have been completed in 2017. If Gateway breaks ground before 2020 I would be surprised. So there is all the lost wages and lost land values.

So "better" I guess is a relative term.


I guess since there never was a contract signed stipulating that NJ was on the hook it didn't happen. Except for the fact that none of the partners agreed to put in one red cent towards the overrun . . .

But you have to solve for X-X being the inevitable cost overruns that no one offered to help pay. Saying that NJ would only have paid 3 billion is nonsense. Fiction. Imaginary. Silly.


You're talking to a Brooklyn hipster who obsesses over a JC message board and is simply bitter that NY has finally been forced to pay their fair share.

Christie scored a HUGE win for NJ taxpayers with this new deal. I would have preferred the tunnel be constructed earlier, but not with those terrible terms. I've thought that Christie has been MIA too often for my taste over the past year plus, but he may have cemented his legacy with this victory.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 18:02
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#70
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/



25% of $20b is $5b.

$5 billion is > $3b.

So I'm not totally sure how this is a "better" deal.


Also, ARC would have been owned by NJTransit exclusively. No rental fees to Amtrak, no rental fees to Port Authority. No scheduling conflicts with MTA or Amtrak. Just NJTransit.

Oh, and ARC would have been completed in 2017. If Gateway breaks ground before 2020 I would be surprised. So there is all the lost wages and lost land values.

So "better" I guess is a relative term.


I guess since there never was a contract signed stipulating that NJ was on the hook it didn't happen. Except for the fact that none of the partners agreed to put in one red cent towards the overrun . . .

But you have to solve for X-X being the inevitable cost overruns that no one offered to help pay. Saying that NJ would only have paid 3 billion is nonsense. Fiction. Imaginary. Silly.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 17:44
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#69
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
6/15 16:59
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2633
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/



25% of $20b is $5b.

$5 billion is > $3b.

So I'm not totally sure how this is a "better" deal.


Also, ARC would have been owned by NJTransit exclusively. No rental fees to Amtrak, no rental fees to Port Authority. No scheduling conflicts with MTA or Amtrak. Just NJTransit.

Oh, and ARC would have been completed in 2017. If Gateway breaks ground before 2020 I would be surprised. So there is all the lost wages and lost land values.

So "better" I guess is a relative term.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 17:31
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#68
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2019/12/17 22:00
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1893
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/

Just because a state senator makes a claim does not mean what she is claiming is true. As we heard during the GOP debate, a lot of people say dumb and inacurate things...

NJ.com: Looking back: Chris Christie's reasons for scrapping ARC tunnel:
Quote:
In 2012, however, the federal Government Accountability Office came to a different conclusion Christie?s cost-overrun claims. The nonpartisan office also refuted his claim that New Jersey would have been responsible for all of those overruns ? one of the governor?s primary arguments for pulling out of the project.


In short, there is ZERO evidence that Christie's claims are based in reality.

Ultimately, Christie's decision was made for political reasons. He didn't want to justify on the presidential campaign trail that New Jersey went deeper into debt while he was in the statehouse.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 17:21
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#67
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
That was the reason he cancelled it, and now we have a much better deal. I guess some hate Christie so much they can't stand getting a great deal for NJ taxpayers. Go figure. Even Senator Booker is giving him props! As for the overrun, all the Feds offered was low cost financing-now they're going to pay half, and NY will pay their quarter. Win/win NJ!

http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey/ ... s-would-have-been-new-je/

Posted on: 2015/11/12 17:05
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#66
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 22:56
Last Login :
2019/11/14 1:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1010
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
There is nothing in the news that suggests NJ is fully, 100%, on the hook for any and all cost overruns....

There was absolutely nothing that suggested NJ was 100% on the hook for cost overruns with the ARC tunnel. You are dead wrong on that claim.

The new deal clearly costs NJ billions more than the ARC tunnel. Even when we include 1/2 of PA's share.

If NJ is paying 25% of the new tunnel, it seems likely we'll be on the hook for 25% of any cost overruns.


Quote:
Anyone who ignores the fact that NJ was 100% responsible for any and all cost overruns to make their argument is stupid.

OK then.

Prove it. Show us the contracts that specifically state that NJ would have been on the hook for 100% of all cost overruns on the ARC project.

By the way, GAO couldn't find anything to that effect; Patterson said he didn't recall ever speaking to Christie about overruns.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 16:46
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#65
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Anyone who ignores the fact that NJ was 100% responsible for any and all cost overruns to make their argument is stupid. Just how much is the east river tunnel MTA project over budget so far? And with the new financing, New York state is paying their fair share of the cost!

Posted on: 2015/11/12 16:32
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#64
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
6/15 16:59
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2633
Offline
New Jersey's annual budget is about $40 billion dollars. That's about $6,000 in spending per person.

The original state contribution to ARC was $3 billion over 7 years, which is about $500 million a year, or .0125% of the annual budget.

That comes out to about $75 per person per year in spending.

However, since the project would have created construction jobs during that time and most of that money would come back to the state as income tax -- and some of that money was also Federal tax dollars -- the cost per person isn't as high.

The main reason the ARC was cancelled was not with regards to the tunnel, but because Christie wanted the Port Authority's contribution to ARC ($2.7 billion) to go to Pulaski repairs ($1.8 billion). He also was under the impression that the federal transportation dollars would still be awarded to NJ even though it wasn't being used for the original project, either because of ignorance or delusion. That was not the case, and the Federal government sued for $271 million dollars. NJ ultimately paid out $95m.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 16:05
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#63
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/10/7 15:46
Last Login :
9/19 0:12
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3182
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Let's all give a big thank you to Governor Christie! Because he flushed the Tunnel to Macy's Basement we now have the Feds paying for half the new tunnel costs, with NY an equal partner on the rest. Saved us billions of dollars from the original, flawed deal!


Yes. This is why Gov. Christie did us a favor in cancelling the ARC. Remember the SCC ? It was a pot of gold for politician?s, their friends and relatives. I could just imagine how high the ARC overruns would have been.

** **
Philly.com N.J. School Construction This lesson plan is failing May 01, 2005

New Jersey's inspector general was hired in February to ferret out waste, abuse and mismanagement in government. It didn't take her long to find some. In the first investigation of her newly created office, undertaken with borrowed staff, IG Mary Jane Cooper found millions of dollars in questionable spending at the Schools Construction Corp., the agency that oversees $8.6 billion in school construction and renovation. That money was supposed to go toward classrooms and kids.

But "lax or nonexistent oversight," according to the IG, has resulted in sloppy accounting and duplication of services for project managers, unexpectedly high land acquisition costs, exorbitant wages for contract workers, millions spent on office renovations and furnishings, and thousands awarded in staff bonuses."

Posted on: 2015/11/12 15:56
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#62
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2014/8/19 16:35
Last Login :
2019/1/12 22:36
From the village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 218
Offline
Total laymen here, but struggling to understand what the direct impact on the average taxpayer would be estimated at for the original project (feel free to tack on a reasonable overrun based on other projects of this scale) vs the new tunnel.

I simply don't understand the outrage over tax contribution driving the abandonment of a critical infrastructure project for what is the major economic hub of our country, likely driving the direct or indirect employment of the majority of state residents. But maybe I'm just clueless.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 15:45
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#61
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Er, no. Now the Feds have 50% ownership, which wasn't the case when Governor Christie flushed the tunnel to Macy's basement.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 15:15
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#60
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/11/17 1:11
Last Login :
1/28 19:30
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1182
Offline
As much as I dislike Christie, the original estimates might have been $8.6 billion, but as we know about any public projects in that area, cost overruns are usually 2x as high.

The WTC PATH Hub was budgeted for $2 billion and ended up as $4 billion.

Still, we probably would have spent less in the long run if we had just gone with the damn thing in the first place.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 15:09
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#59
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
6/15 16:59
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2633
Offline
New York still has not actually put any money in. The only thing Cuomo has actually is said is that abstractly, at some point in the future, when he is no longer governor, New York will contribute some amount of money not yet determined. Meanwhile, there are 8 million NYC voters who are looking at the underfunded Second Avenue subway asking for money for that project. There are other NYS voters looking for better train access along the east side of the Hudson River. Long Islanders looking for more funding for LIRR. I wouldn't count your NYS dollars until the check clears.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 15:04
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#58
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
There is nothing in the news that suggests NJ is fully, 100%, on the hook for any and all cost overruns, unlike the flawed deal that Governor Christie flushed. A giant win for NJ taxpayers. Do note that the original cost for NJ you quoted doesn't count our half share of the Port Authority money.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 14:49
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#57
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/8/6 22:56
Last Login :
2019/11/14 1:56
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1010
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Let's all give a big thank you to Governor Christie! Because he flushed the Tunnel to Macy's Basement we now have the Feds paying for half the new tunnel costs, with NY an equal partner on the rest. Saved us billions of dollars from the original, flawed deal!

You're joking, right?

The original deal was estimated at $8.6 billion; NJ's own estimate was closer to $11 billion by the time of cancelation. NJ's initial share was $1.25 billion.

The new tunnel is estimated for $20 billion; at 25%, NJ is on the hook for $5 billion. Presumably, NJ also has to pay 25% of any cost overruns. Yay.

There was no agreement in place as to who was supposed to pay for any cost overruns; and the GAO found that NJ was likely going to be on the hook for less than 15%.

The cancelation has wound up costing us more.

I'd also love to see the economic cost of 10 years of delays, thanks to his canceling the project -- especially if the Amtrak tunnel is unable to function prior to the completion of the new tunnel.

No one is buying your spin.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 14:39
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#56
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/9/14 18:57
Last Login :
2020/1/27 22:17
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1008
Offline
Officials say an agreement has been reached to create a corporation to oversee plans to build a rail tunnel under the Hudson River.

The agreement was announced Wednesday and federal and state officials say the entity will be created within the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Gateway Development Corporation will coordinate the project and be controlled by a four-member board with representatives from both states, Amtrak and the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Federal officials and Amtrak say they will be responsible for financing half of the project, which could cost up to $20 billion.

The announcement represents significant progress in the project.

The century-old rail tunnel used now by Amtrak and New Jersey Transit is deteriorating and was damaged by Hurricane Sandy.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/officials-c ... bc3a0cb&mc_eid=bf9c1813e6

Posted on: 2015/11/12 13:37
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#55
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That's the gratitude he gets for saving us billions? You're cold, man! :)

There is a question of a dollar's value yesterday versus a dollar value tomorrow.

In reality, Christie pushed the tunnel down the road for the next governor and generation to pay for it.


That has no basis in reality, Pebs. In the new formula, NJ is responsible for 25% of the cost. That will probably end up being less than what NJ would have paid just for the cost overrun on the previous deal.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 12:39
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#54
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2019/12/17 22:00
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1893
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
That's the gratitude he gets for saving us billions? You're cold, man! :)

There is a question of a dollar's value yesterday versus a dollar value tomorrow.

In reality, Christie pushed the tunnel down the road for the next governor and generation to pay for it.

Posted on: 2015/11/12 12:32
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#53
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
That's the gratitude he gets for saving us billions? You're cold, man! :)

Posted on: 2015/11/12 12:29
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#52
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/14 2:38
Last Login :
8/28 20:53
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3645
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Let's all give a big thank you to Governor Christie! Because he flushed the Tunnel to Macy's Basement we now have the Feds paying for half the new tunnel costs, with NY an equal partner on the rest. Saved us billions of dollars from the original, flawed deal!
the only thing christie will get from me is a kick in the ass! nj is still one of the eakest performing states economically...no wonder only 1% of republicans support him

Posted on: 2015/11/12 12:09
 Top 


Re: Light at the end of the tunnel?
#51
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
2020/10/5 21:44
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4440
Offline
Let's all give a big thank you to Governor Christie! Because he flushed the Tunnel to Macy's Basement we now have the Feds paying for half the new tunnel costs, with NY an equal partner on the rest. Saved us billions of dollars from the original, flawed deal!

Posted on: 2015/11/12 12:02
 Top 




(1) 2 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017