The Transportation and Mass Transit Megathread

[Pdt2f]

Ugh. Would her resigning help the transit push?

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2018/02/02/metro-council-members-divided-over-criticaltransit.html

[Neigeville2]

^ I'm supposed to be punished for the Mayor's affair by living with  a crappy transit system?  What does one have to do with the other?  Nobody's saying the president dallied with a porn star, so no tax cut for billionaires.  This is nonsense and has nothing to do with the merits of the plan.

[titanhog]

16 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

 

Just out of curiosity because I see his name thrown around so much, I looked up how much George Soros spends on political contributions relative to the Koch brothers.   

Turns out Soros donated about 3% as much during the last election cycle as the Kock Brothers did.  Less than 3% actually.  Looks like Soros's peak contribution was about 27 million spent during the Bush/Kerry election of 2004, while the Koch brothers have been spending over 900 million over per election the last few presidential cycles at least.  

Can you believe that?  All this time I thought he was the like the Democratic equivalent to the Republican mega donors, but it turns out it's not even close! Of course, this also doesn't take into account that Soros is advocating for candidates and many causes that will hurt his financial bottom line, while the Kochs on the other hand can see a return on their political investments through tax breaks and regulatory windfalls. 

I guess they're really not even comparable after all. 

 

 

 

It's not just about money.  It's about influence.  I'd say Soros has every bit as much influence as the Koch Bros...if not more.  Both "contributors" have done good and bad...especially depending upon which side of the aisle you sit.   And...dare I say that one group is a little more overt...while the other is covert.

And btw...if you don't think those who support this mass transit plan don't have some HUGE $$ people from the outside backing what's going on....you may want to think again.

Edited February 3, 2018 by titanhog

[jmtunafish]

9 hours ago, Neigeville2 said:

^ I'm supposed to be punished for the Mayor's affair by living with  a crappy transit system?  What does one have to do with the other?  Nobody's saying the president dallied with a porn star, so no tax cut for billionaires.  This is nonsense and has nothing to do with the merits of the plan.

I got a tax cut of about $1200/year, so I guess that makes me a billionaire?  And yes, there were/are plenty of people who oppose Trump at every angle because they simply do not like the man.  For some it's because they think he had dalliances with porn stars (which even the porn stars deny), others because he has orange skin, or because he used to be Democrat and is now Republican, or because he's been married more than once, or because his wife speaks with an accent, or who knows why else.  There are plenty of things Trump has proposed that many would normally support, liberals and conservatives alike, but they don't because it's from Trump.  It's not a stretch to think that many people in Nashville are now opposed to anything Megan Barry proposes simply because they are disgusted by her behavior and her apparent abuse of power.

[MLBrumby]

Black pastors join city's transit opposition, from NBJ

https://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/news/2018/02/06/black-pastors-join-citys-transit-opposition.html

[PaulChinetti]

Aren't churches exempt from taxes? I'm pretty sure they are.

So these pastors shouldn't be telling their parishioners anything about how to vote. 

Same with elections of any kind. Didn't a few get in trouble the last election?

Sounds like they missed out on a chance to help their communities also. People are frustrating. 

[MLBrumby]

Not trying to get political here, just perhaps explaining based on perspective.

Campaigning from the pulpit is a point Republicans in many cities used to complain about every election, until they just gave up.  In Nashville, it appears they (the black clergy anyway) are firmly in the Democrats' camp. Didn't I just read where your mayor sought refuge at some of their churches after admitting to her affair with a police officer? It is what it is.

Regarding their opposition, I've heard some business associates who are involved in their inner-city churches that the issue is not that they oppose mass transit per se; it stems from what better use the city (government) could do with the money. I agree that opposition on these grounds is based on a shallow understanding about the revenue source. Many of them see "shiny new trains" and services to the wealthy suburbs as less favorable than feeding the hungry in the inner city. Personally I think it's short-sighted.

Now the cynic in me would also say it's a stance they're taking as a bargaining chip. Perhaps they see a new spigot of funding, and they want a piece. Later they may agree to support it if they get a piece of the pie. Politics make for strange bedfellows.

 

[smeagolsfree]

Trust me, there is campaigning on both sides of aisle from churches. I have seen it first hand. It has been going on since the founding of the country and will continue. It is matter of which right gets trampled,  freedom of religion or freedom of speech. 

[PaulChinetti]

I understand it happens, and they should themselves be allowed to takes stands for sure, for either side of an issue. 

I was under the impression they (pastors) couldn't do it from the pulpit. 

It was more of a general question of what the limits are.

[Pyramid Scheme]

On 9/12/2017 at 8:09 PM, LA_TN said:

"Second city"? Who wants to volunteer to tell Memphis their new nickname?!?!

Because of the Johnson amendment from the 50's, pastors can't endorse candidates if their church is a non-profit. Everything else, as far as I know, is allowed simply because of the 1st Amendment, like, you know, transit.

[Pdt2f]

28 minutes ago, PaulChinetti said:

I understand it happens, and they should themselves be allowed to takes stands for sure, for either side of an issue. 

I was under the impression they (pastors) couldn't do it from the pulpit. 

It was more of a general question of what the limits are.

Endorsing political parties or candidates, no. Endorsing sides of an issue, yes. 

[Dale]

As a churchgoer I'd love to see churches rescind their tax-exempt status, give the state the middle finger (in a manner of speaking) and let fly.

[Neigeville2]

As an atheist I'd love to see churches lose  their tax exempt status and start endorsing candidates, at this point most of them are more interested in politics than religion anyway, why not just drop the pretense.  What irks me about this situation is the negative spoiler role in evidence.   Sticking with a backward transit system is not going to create affordable housing.  The plan has within it a mechanism for capturing the property value increase along the light rail lines and using it to subsidize affordable housing along the same corridors, which is a great idea IMO.  I'm very curious how much these pastors even know about the issue.  In any case, this is just the beginning, I think the next 3 months are going to be nasty times.

[Dale]

21 minutes ago, Neigeville2 said:

As an atheist I'd love to see churches lose  their tax exempt status and start endorsing candidates, at this point most of them are more interested in politics than religion anyway, why not just drop the pretense.  What irks me about this situation is the negative spoiler role in evidence.   Sticking with a backward transit system is not going to create affordable housing.  The plan has within it a mechanism for capturing the property value increase along the light rail lines and using it to subsidize affordable housing along the same corridors, which is a great idea IMO.  I'm very curious how much these pastors even know about the issue.  In any case, this is just the beginning, I think the next 3 months are going to be nasty times.

Yeah, atheists and churchgoers alike are increasingly practitioners of the same "faith."

Edited February 7, 2018 by Dale

[PaulChinetti]

47 minutes ago, Neigeville2 said:

Sticking with a backward transit system is not going to create affordable housing.  The plan has within it a mechanism for capturing the property value increase along the light rail lines and using it to subsidize affordable housing along the same corridors, which is a great idea IMO.  I'm very curious how much these pastors even know about the issue.  In any case, this is just the beginning, I think the next 3 months are going to be nasty times.

More houses equals more affordable houses. 

If they were offering something besides nothing, I would be more interested in listening to what they (the detractors) have to say.
 

[titanhog]

This is more about "you give us our hospital back, we'll support your transit plan" than anything else.

[NashvilleObserver]

4 minutes ago, titanhog said:

This is more about "you give us our hospital back, we'll support your transit plan" than anything else.

Exactly. Wonder if Lee Beaman made a special donation to any of these pastors?

[Guest]

A couple of things -

1- George Soros spends 18 billion to his Open Society foundation...which of course funds most radical left policies.
 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html

2- Churches are allowed to take position on political issues. The IRS rule bans all nonprofits from supporting politicians not issues.

[tokiorose]

It passed!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[samsonh]

36 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

A couple of things -

1- George Soros spends 18 billion to his Open Society foundation...which of course funds most radical left policies.
 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html

2- Churches are allowed to take position on political issues. The IRS rule bans all nonprofits from supporting politicians not issues.

Oh that sweet sweet monthly George Soros check. Can’t wait til it gets here this month!

[BnaBreaker]

55 minutes ago, nashville_bound said:

A couple of things -

1- George Soros spends 18 billion to his Open Society foundation...which of course funds most radical left policies.
 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/business/george-soros-open-society-foundations.html
 

The guy is a holocaust survivor who donated the vast majority of his wealth (18 out of 26 billion at last check) towards the promotion of human rights, public health, and education programs in the developing world.  If that's what the "radical left" is all about, then sign me up!  In any case, more to the point, whether one individually supports the causes Soros dedicates his money towards or not, the point still stands that he's donating money motivated by making the world a better place, as he sees it, and not motivated by a desire to fatten his pockets.  He's not making any money off of supporting gay rights in Uganda, for example.  

In any case, I don't mean to step on any toes.  I'm happy to agree to disagree here.  

Edited February 7, 2018 by BnaBreaker

[titanhog]

I'm done.  Not visiting this thread anymore.  Always turns political.  Facebook's got nothing on this thread.

[BnaBreaker]

2 hours ago, titanhog said:

I'm done.  Not visiting this thread anymore.  Always turns political.  Facebook's got nothing on this thread.

Goodness... I appreciate and respect the hell out of ya titanhog, but I think you're overreacting here.  Who's being negative?  I even ended my post with "don't mean to step on any toes, I'm happy to agree to disagree" and Nashville_bound and others are being even more polite than that lol... I think yours is the first 'tense' post of the thread... I guess I forget sometimes how sensitive some folks are to this kind of thing.  Also, not to point fingers, but wasn't it you who brought up Soros's name first?   I mean, you did it in jest, which is fine, but still... I was like the tenth person to evoke his unholy name, so don't blame me.  

Edited February 7, 2018 by BnaBreaker

[markhollin]

The Metro Council voted overwhelmingly 34-2 to give final approval to add Mayor Megan Barry’s transit referendum to the local primary election ballot on May 1.

But bucking the administration, the council tweaked the referendum language to list both the transit proposal's present-day cost of $5.4 billion as well as the estimated amount of long-term revenue needed for the project, $8.95 billion. The mayor's office had lobbied for only the lower amount to go on the ballot. 

In the end, the biggest question for council members wasn't approval of the ordinance, but rather how many dollar amounts to reference on the ballot.  After a lengthy debate, the council voted 21-16 to adopt an amendment pushed by the council’s five at-large members that will list two dollar figures.

More here:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/02/06/nashville-council-votes-add-mayors-transit-referendum-may-ballot/308864002/

[FromParkAveToTN]

I guess I'll vote in favor of the transit plan since property taxes are not increasing. All the other taxes won't really hit me other than buying groceries and I'm vegetarian so my grocery bill is pretty low anyway.  I'll buy big ticket items from another State when/If I need them. I also work from home so I'm good.

Edited February 7, 2018 by FromParkAveToTN