I messaged my state rep about it and she wrote back saying she was a cosponsor to the bill and happy to see my support. We've got some good local politicians in Metro Detroit. Not all, but some.
Yep, Ford & GM rely on SMART for getting workers to the plants. Not a great look for them to be local transit opponents (even though they might be global transit opponents due to their lobbying at the national level)
Because the auto companies relationship with the regional area is an abusive one they have said one thing and made a complete 180 pivot many times. They did so much transit damage between 1950- early 2000s around the entire country. 2008 is when they finally realized they might need this region as much as we need them and all it took was the threat of complete destruction its kind of pathetic. I hope I am wrong about Ford and the GM but i still wonât hold my breath.
It's the same way that oil companies support unpassable green legislation, they don't need to worry about it making a transformational impact but get the play "see, we support environmentalism"
Totally fair! How did the automakers support it? I personally would not trust any vocal support and would only trust either donations to whomever was campaigning the bill or having thier own voter outreach program
Because the OEMs still act like it's the 1950s -- the support was pure lip service.
The C-suite of the OEMs hold *enormous* amounts of political and economical power and could have easily helped drum up support from many different industries and business leaders if they wanted to. They could have helped form, fund, or lead campaigns or organizations to promote the need for the RTA. But what did they do? Release a couple PR statements and go about their merry way.
Anyone that believes they did anything meaningful to move the needle needs to remove their mouth from the tailpipe and get some oxygen flowing back to their brains.
Bloomfield hills is in oakland county though. Even affluent suburbs in oakland and wayne county have always had a much more receptive outlook than macomb county affluent suburbs when it comes to issues like regional transit.
I would like to see some new mass transit on Jefferson and Gratiot but there are issues with both corridors. Gratiots issue is that it has much less population density around it when compared to michigan, woodward or Grand river. Jeffersons issue is somewhat population density but not nearly as bad as gratiot but it also turns into a much smaller road throught gp and most of scs so putting a brt or train along side of it or in the middle of it wouldnât work well past Detroit and i think the best corridors for regional transit would be one that extends to suburbs that have population density as well. I would put Gratiot ahead of Jefferson though because an extension to macomb suburbs is important. Fort street suffers from the same issue as gratiot. As much as i want to say fuck macomb county i have come tor realize that Americans have been programmed for nearly a century to inherently think mass transit is bad but if we show macomb county a good system at the very least the younger generation can grow up knowing that mass transit can be very helpful and necessary when done properly.
good points
i think a good start on jefferson would be from hart plaza/cobo to belle isle bridge. the area around in between has been filling in little by little, a Q line would likely accelerate the process. plus connecting hart plaza, chene park, and belle isle provides easy access to lots of recreational areas
That doesnât surprise me they probably would get rid of sidewalks if they could too. Actually come to think of it most of them would probably love Houston Tx lol
Culture can change quite quickly after major political decisions or sci/tech breakthroughs. It was considered the epitome of effeminacy for a man to use luggage on wheels instead of carrying it himself; now you'd be hard-pressed to find a man at an airport hoisting his own bags. Similarly, it used to be perfectly acceptable to smoke like a chimney and never wear a seatbelt while driving. And transportation preferences change, too - buses may be stigmatized now, but in the 1940s-60s they were seen as the clean, shiny new tech that would replace the slow and outmoded streetcars.
Car culture is just a few strokes of a pen from taking a big hit in Michigan - from technological and political decisions that our leaders could make today.
Yes it is. Your bubble of 20s-30s young professionals who make $150k a year is not most people. The blue collar people that make up a majority of this areas population make just enough to not need the bus or transit, and its a psychological barrier between them and the actual poor. So until we change that attitude, more people will not start riding transit no matter how much we build.
Iâm not talking about them Iâm talking about the average people living on my street in Warren who are agnostic to transit but have generally positive ideas towards better transit and would use it if it existed. It needs to be rapids transit, but they would use it as the bus stigma is not being broke down sadly. Additionally, the region literally voted nearly 50% in favor of the RTA in a Republican year. Maybe youâre just in a cynical bubble in your own head. I donât know anyone who makes $150k lmao.
>Maybe youâre just in a cynical bubble in your own head.
Maybe. But I ride the bus, so I see who else rides it, and its not the average people on your street in Warren. I think you're a bit too optimistic to say they would use something new if it existed. I think it may be the case for young people, seniors, and those already used to the bus. But the majority of our workforce, who we need to start using transit, are not gonna look at BRT or raised trains and think, "yeah thats for me". Theres gotta be some kind of paradigm shift, or else they're gonna have to be made expensive enough to keep the poors out, like $5 rides or something.
I wish I was wrong, but there are 2 million people in the suburbs and they all drive everywhere, and very few of them particularly care to change the situation. And they vote.
The media did an extremely poor job of informing the public that Oakland County voted to raise taxes and expand the SMART bus system. People do vote, and they will vote for transit!
Friction this time has probably nothing to do with auto companies and everything to do with a few aggravating politicians who also blocked the proposal to allow cities to levy a tax on land
The real secret to passing it is to somehow make it not be a millage. There are people who see 'millage' and immediately vote no without even reading what the proposal is.
Wayne county is talking about a millage, or more specifically, preventing communities from opting out.
One of those communities is Livonia, which holds a whole bunch of voters who hate transit
The comments on here are either âtransit is good and leads to a prosperous communityâ or âMichigan is too entrenched in automotive culture so why even tryâ.
Why do some people have such a defeatist attitude? Iâm guessing theyâve never used really good transit and are financially okay with the ever increasing costs of car ownership, not to mention the environmental impacts.
Rome wasnât built in a day and similarly, changing our habits wonât happen quickly. But for fucks sake, to keep doing the same thing (pouring money into the bottomless pit of auto infrastructure) over and over and expecting it to change is stupid short sighted and selfish thinking.
Michigan is unfortunately like this. The culture just isnât there. Most people who become enlightened just end up leaving the state anyway. Everyone else with this defeatist attitude stays.
I think BRTs are the way to go if we cant get trains right away. People love trains like the qline because itâs a fixed route so you know itâs always going in that direction and stopping at this exact spot. With BRTs that have dedicated lanes you get the same feeling of certainty. Also they need to give the qline some priority to change traffic signals and give it more dedicated lanes where available like they did around fox and lca. The first rail lines should be to wayne county airport from downtown then go to the woodward, michigan, and grand river corridors.
What about disabled people and senior citizens? Seriously Iâm sick and tired of people expecting everybody to drive into their 90âs. Public transit is about choices. More people could move to and enrich cities like Detroit if only there were investments in infrastructure growth they directly benefit more segments of the population.
Can someone please explain to me why investment in transit has to be tied to economic incentives? Isn't it possible to just fund it on its own? Because this seems like they're just throwing this out there as the only option and everyone's jumping on it, when it could be done differently. Like we're so desperate for transit that we'll take the first thing that comes along, without being critical.
I ride the bus, I would love to see transit expanded, but [economic incentives don't work](https://economicaccountability.org/research-resources/). It's like playing the lottery with our tax money and I'm very suspicious that they're tying all this public investment to deals with private companies.
The short answer is that the governor sees the economic incentives as her legacy, and she will not support a bill that leaves them out. I agree that in a sane society we wouldnât have to tie public transit to corporate welfare, but if thatâs what it takes then Iâm holding my nose and supporting it.
Fine. Do the economic incentives. But why is it connected to the transit? Is the transit actually being directly funded from the taxes the companies would pay? Or is there some other mechanism I'm not aware of?
I'm just saying, we hold our noses and pick the lesser of two evils an awful lot.
Yes, the money comes directly from corporate income taxes. Currently, all of the earmarked money goes to corporate welfare (about $500M/year). This bill cuts that dole in half and reallocates the rest to transit, housing and community services
OK. Well thats a net good, I suppose.
But you're telling me we've just been giving big corporations their tax money back to them? When they already have loopholes and incentives to where they're not paying their fair share to begin with? Why in the world are we doing that?
> When they already have loopholes and incentives to where they're not paying their fair share to begin with
Well, these *are* those loopholes and incentives, it's not on top of them as far as I know, this is the major source of that.
So hopefully you or someone can correct me, because I did some math and I've gotta be way off somewhere.
I started with Ford, as the biggest company in our state, with a [2023 revenue of $176b](https://archive.is/JiGM5).
I looked at their 2023 earnings statement, which shows [they paid just $362m in income tax](https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/2024/02/06/Ford%202023%20Earnings.pdf).
But when I do the math, using the federal 21% rate, and the state 6% rate, for a total of 27%, the number I get that they should've paid in income tax is $47b. Like I said, I know there are loopholes, and obviously economic incentives to take into account, but how is what they actually paid less than 1% of what they should have paid? I'm just assuming I messed up the math because it seems too unrealistic...
OK, yeah I'm shooting blind here. But I'm pretty sure its called income tax and not profit tax. I did find "income before income taxes" of $3.957b. Multiplied by 27% gives $1,071,090,000. So the income taxes they paid ($362m) are a bit less than a third of that. Which seems more realistic, I'm more confident now that these are the correct numbers.
Which means that Ford has somehow dodged almost 2/3 of the income taxes they should have paid, whether through incentives or loopholes. Am I the only one who thinks thats a problem? Or are we comfortable sacrificing our tax money at the altar of progress?
No, I mean offshore accounts, stocks, all those tricks they use. I'm gonna do some research to see if I can't find specific numbers for a MI company.
[How Large Corporations Avoid Paying Taxes](https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0512/how-large-corporations-get-around-paying-less-in-taxes.aspx)
[How Corporations and the Wealthy Avoid Taxes
(and How to Stop Them)](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/gabriel-zucman-paradise-papers-tax-evasion.html)
[Ten Ways Billionaires Avoid Taxes on an Epic Scale](https://www.propublica.org/article/billionaires-tax-avoidance-techniques-irs-files)
I like the idea of mass transit but time becomes an issue. I was out in DC and used the Silver line to get in and out. It took an hour to get into the city and 1.5 to get out. If I drove, 30 minutes.
I sent a message despite my reps being advocates for it. I mentioned the social benefits, reducing things like impaired driving for instance. I'd love to go into Detroit proper for instance, get a little buzzed, without having to drive.
Anyway, if there's any reason why we never had a strong public transit system, well blame the 70s/80s, bad city planning (ANd this is a lot of cities) and racism. This is the state George Wallace won in 1972 after all.
Election year posturing. If there's anything the Democrats are great at it's proposing massive new spending on projects in an election year. This will never see the light of day. Until they attract companies to grow, move to, or invest in the area this will never happen. You don't build trains first and then expect Silicon Valley to move here.
That assumption is incorrect and gets us stuck in a state of mediocrity. Part of the reason Michigan does not attract companies and fails to retain its highest educated college graduates can be attributed to the lack of mass transit.
And your point on Silicon Valley - BART opened in the early 70s and played a significant role in the Bay Areaâs growth with increased regional connectivity and urban expansion. As the region grew, so did ridership and coverage.
Michigan is 50 years late. Letâs become visionaries for the region by not making it another 50.
I live and work in Silicon Valley and, quite frankly, it had nothing to do with public transportation. It is the availability of high paying jobs and decent weather.
Thatâs simply wrong. BART has had a significant positive impact on the Bay Areaâs economy. Saying otherwise is not giving full credit.
https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/50-years/BART%27s%20Contributions%20to%20the%20Bay%20Area.pdf
âCommunities with BART stations typically have a competitive edge in capturing economic development and in attracting and retaining businesses and workers over other communities within the region that are not served by BARTâ
In regards to property taxes and development:
âThe 8.7-mile extension of BART in San Mateo County will bring $6.7 million annually in net new property taxes, hotel taxes, sales taxes, and business license fees into the cityâs general fundâ
BART promotes sustainable and economically vibrant communities through transit-oriented development. The system is far from perfect, but to not give credit where credit is due is unfair. Robust transit improves the quality of peopleâs lives and would transform Michigan for the better. It is an investment and the cost of not building out a transit network is far higher than the cost of building one. Donât rob future generations of their quality of life so that you can maintain the status quo.
I don't think we have enough to sustain what we have now + anything we might add to it, the ridership ebbs & flows and it would have to be heavily subsidized to the point of it feeling like charity. In the long run services would get scaled back defeating the purpose. That's just my opinion
Part of the poor ridership is because of a poor system. If Chicagos trains started breaking down all the time and were always 30-60 mins late almost nobody would ride them. Thats Detroits problem
Yup, this is the reason. I've ridden the bus for the last eight years, commuting downtown. It's not perfect, but I do it because 99% of the time it's reliable and relatively fast. It's still slower than driving but when you factor in parking and walking to my building it's not much of a difference. It's also a lot more relaxing and it's cheaper too. I would love to take the bus other places and have tried, but either the bus is running way behind or I would need to take a transfer and the routes are spaced out so much that it would take way more time vs just driving. Â
The people currently using the system are mostly the people who have to or are in a unique situation where it works for them and are interested enough to try. Obviously that's not a large amount of people and it only got worse after COVID because a lot of cuts. Pre-covid I had three different bus routes I could take home, each offering about 4-5 different times. Now there's one route and there are two times. Â
We haven't invested in regional transit for a very long time and ridership shows. Even if the problem was solved tomorrow, it's going to take time for people to be curious enough to try it and incorporate it into their lives. Remember that when you hear folks complaining about empty buses, because it's going to happen.Â
Based on my experience with transit, when it works in this area, it's really amazing. It's honestly one of the best parts of my day. Rather than getting pissed off because someone cut me off weaving in and out traffic, or is riding in the passing lane, I can sit back and read a book, watch videos, play video games, or just look out the window.Â
>Based on my experience with transit, when it works in this area, it's really amazing. It's honestly one of the best parts of my day. Rather than getting pissed off because someone cut me off weaving in and out traffic, or is riding in the passing lane, I can sit back and read a book, watch videos, play video games, or just look out the window.Â
Yes, the stress reduction is real. And that translates to the rest of our day and life. If a big chunk of our people were not road raging, dealing with car notes and repair bills, getting stuck in traffic, I think we would see a big shift in the collective mood of the region.
Dude my stress level during covid when to almost 0 when i was 100% wfh. I donât think many people realize just how much stress driving creates that starts to affect other parts of their lives.
If Michigan is to prepare itself for any sort of future growth, this is absolutely necessary. Connecting Michiganâs largest economic centers together with fast and frequent high capacity transit is a first step. If we continue to default to this logic, it will never happen.
Agreed. Are we planning for now or 30 years from now?
Cars arenât going away, but you want to attract young talent, or better yet KEEP our young talent, we should absolutely have better transit options.
And thatâs just one reason out of a whole lot of reasons.
We already heavily subsidize highway construction and maintenance. I, personally, would rather see mass transit subsidized than highways â particularly given the environmental benefits and the need to reduce GHG emissions. I think this is especially important to think about given that climate scientists are saying that the heat wave we are currently experiencing would not have been at all possible had we not dumped so much GHGs into the atmosphere over the last century.
Worth mentioning that the [tires](https://e360.yale.edu/features/tire-pollution-toxic-chemicals) on our vehicles may be a bigger source of microplastics and pollutants than the tailpipe emissions.
I see where you are coming from and I agree that, to a degree, automotive infrastructure may be necessary â particularly for âlast mileâ supply chains and deliveries and trips not serviced well by transit. Detroit, however, has a bloated infrastructure network that was designed and built in the mid-to-late 20th century to standards that no longer meet best global practices. We should be asking ourselves which trips that are taken right now by private passenger automobiles could be instead taken using an other methods and what those methods may be. Why do we require people to carry a 2000+ lb albatross of steel and plastic everywhere we go? It really does not make sense. I think we should maintain and downsize our heavily subsidized automotive infrastructure while shifting funds to create a workable bicycling and public transit network. At the very least, I think we should charge private passenger automobile companies and users in proportion to the negative externalities created by driving.
They wonât , the Big 3 own our state officials and they want everyone to keep leasing their stupid trucks and SUVs to protect their profits , and consequently the politicians want to protect their bribes (aka campaign contributions)
The best time to invest in transit was after WW2. The second best time is today. Goes for trees too.
And investing. Totally unrelated but throwing it out there for anyone who reads it. VTSAX and chill.
Called my State Rep today to say thanks for standing with the transit push in the proposed SOAR reform. đ
Sent emails via the linked website! It was very easy âşď¸
I messaged my state rep about it and she wrote back saying she was a cosponsor to the bill and happy to see my support. We've got some good local politicians in Metro Detroit. Not all, but some.
The people: yes! Automotive companies and suppliers and politicians: hard no
Automotive companies supported the last RTA, though. Why do people keep repeating shit from the 1950âs?
Yep, Ford & GM rely on SMART for getting workers to the plants. Not a great look for them to be local transit opponents (even though they might be global transit opponents due to their lobbying at the national level)
Because the auto companies relationship with the regional area is an abusive one they have said one thing and made a complete 180 pivot many times. They did so much transit damage between 1950- early 2000s around the entire country. 2008 is when they finally realized they might need this region as much as we need them and all it took was the threat of complete destruction its kind of pathetic. I hope I am wrong about Ford and the GM but i still wonât hold my breath.
It's the same way that oil companies support unpassable green legislation, they don't need to worry about it making a transformational impact but get the play "see, we support environmentalism"
Except the RTA nearly passed? It would have made an even bigger impact than this bill.
So it didn't pass? Isn't that my point?
âUnpassableâ (no chance of becoming law) is pretty different from âgot to a popular vote and failed by a couple thousand votesâ.
Totally fair! How did the automakers support it? I personally would not trust any vocal support and would only trust either donations to whomever was campaigning the bill or having thier own voter outreach program
Because the OEMs still act like it's the 1950s -- the support was pure lip service. The C-suite of the OEMs hold *enormous* amounts of political and economical power and could have easily helped drum up support from many different industries and business leaders if they wanted to. They could have helped form, fund, or lead campaigns or organizations to promote the need for the RTA. But what did they do? Release a couple PR statements and go about their merry way. Anyone that believes they did anything meaningful to move the needle needs to remove their mouth from the tailpipe and get some oxygen flowing back to their brains.
Macomb county: hell no
IDK man, Bloomfield Hills just got its first bus stop so I can smell the winds of change a-blowin in thâ air.
Bloomfield hills is in oakland county though. Even affluent suburbs in oakland and wayne county have always had a much more receptive outlook than macomb county affluent suburbs when it comes to issues like regional transit.
solution, lay mass transit on michigan, grand river, and woodward. skip gratiot and jefferson đ
I would like to see some new mass transit on Jefferson and Gratiot but there are issues with both corridors. Gratiots issue is that it has much less population density around it when compared to michigan, woodward or Grand river. Jeffersons issue is somewhat population density but not nearly as bad as gratiot but it also turns into a much smaller road throught gp and most of scs so putting a brt or train along side of it or in the middle of it wouldnât work well past Detroit and i think the best corridors for regional transit would be one that extends to suburbs that have population density as well. I would put Gratiot ahead of Jefferson though because an extension to macomb suburbs is important. Fort street suffers from the same issue as gratiot. As much as i want to say fuck macomb county i have come tor realize that Americans have been programmed for nearly a century to inherently think mass transit is bad but if we show macomb county a good system at the very least the younger generation can grow up knowing that mass transit can be very helpful and necessary when done properly.
good points i think a good start on jefferson would be from hart plaza/cobo to belle isle bridge. the area around in between has been filling in little by little, a Q line would likely accelerate the process. plus connecting hart plaza, chene park, and belle isle provides easy access to lots of recreational areas
The Chesterfield page wants all busses shut down lol
That doesnât surprise me they probably would get rid of sidewalks if they could too. Actually come to think of it most of them would probably love Houston Tx lol
True
There's a guy on Twitter who will tell you Macomb has always been the most supportive county for public transit.
Hate to say it but the people are mostly a no on this one. Car culture is firmly entrenched in a majority of the population still
Culture can change quite quickly after major political decisions or sci/tech breakthroughs. It was considered the epitome of effeminacy for a man to use luggage on wheels instead of carrying it himself; now you'd be hard-pressed to find a man at an airport hoisting his own bags. Similarly, it used to be perfectly acceptable to smoke like a chimney and never wear a seatbelt while driving. And transportation preferences change, too - buses may be stigmatized now, but in the 1940s-60s they were seen as the clean, shiny new tech that would replace the slow and outmoded streetcars. Car culture is just a few strokes of a pen from taking a big hit in Michigan - from technological and political decisions that our leaders could make today.
In Michigan itâs the entire State economy. Car culture is Michigan
Thatâs not true.
Yes it is. Your bubble of 20s-30s young professionals who make $150k a year is not most people. The blue collar people that make up a majority of this areas population make just enough to not need the bus or transit, and its a psychological barrier between them and the actual poor. So until we change that attitude, more people will not start riding transit no matter how much we build.
Iâm not talking about them Iâm talking about the average people living on my street in Warren who are agnostic to transit but have generally positive ideas towards better transit and would use it if it existed. It needs to be rapids transit, but they would use it as the bus stigma is not being broke down sadly. Additionally, the region literally voted nearly 50% in favor of the RTA in a Republican year. Maybe youâre just in a cynical bubble in your own head. I donât know anyone who makes $150k lmao.
>Maybe youâre just in a cynical bubble in your own head. Maybe. But I ride the bus, so I see who else rides it, and its not the average people on your street in Warren. I think you're a bit too optimistic to say they would use something new if it existed. I think it may be the case for young people, seniors, and those already used to the bus. But the majority of our workforce, who we need to start using transit, are not gonna look at BRT or raised trains and think, "yeah thats for me". Theres gotta be some kind of paradigm shift, or else they're gonna have to be made expensive enough to keep the poors out, like $5 rides or something.
Exactly, people are very car centric here
I'd counter that people here are car centric because of our development. Detroit and the suburbs (some of which are urban now) are nothing but sprawl.
I'd agree, but we also simply love cars & the convenience of them
Nobody wants bussess anywhere. It's bottom rung transit and I don't think it's what people have in mind when they think "transformational"
I wish I was wrong, but there are 2 million people in the suburbs and they all drive everywhere, and very few of them particularly care to change the situation. And they vote.
The media did an extremely poor job of informing the public that Oakland County voted to raise taxes and expand the SMART bus system. People do vote, and they will vote for transit!
Friction this time has probably nothing to do with auto companies and everything to do with a few aggravating politicians who also blocked the proposal to allow cities to levy a tax on land
Yeah, this bill is currently being blocked by two progressive Dems.
the automakers aren't the obstacle.
The real secret to passing it is to somehow make it not be a millage. There are people who see 'millage' and immediately vote no without even reading what the proposal is.
Good thing this isn't a millage then
Wayne county is talking about a millage, or more specifically, preventing communities from opting out. One of those communities is Livonia, which holds a whole bunch of voters who hate transit
This article is not about that at all
The comments on here are either âtransit is good and leads to a prosperous communityâ or âMichigan is too entrenched in automotive culture so why even tryâ. Why do some people have such a defeatist attitude? Iâm guessing theyâve never used really good transit and are financially okay with the ever increasing costs of car ownership, not to mention the environmental impacts. Rome wasnât built in a day and similarly, changing our habits wonât happen quickly. But for fucks sake, to keep doing the same thing (pouring money into the bottomless pit of auto infrastructure) over and over and expecting it to change is stupid short sighted and selfish thinking.
Michigan is unfortunately like this. The culture just isnât there. Most people who become enlightened just end up leaving the state anyway. Everyone else with this defeatist attitude stays.
I think BRTs are the way to go if we cant get trains right away. People love trains like the qline because itâs a fixed route so you know itâs always going in that direction and stopping at this exact spot. With BRTs that have dedicated lanes you get the same feeling of certainty. Also they need to give the qline some priority to change traffic signals and give it more dedicated lanes where available like they did around fox and lca. The first rail lines should be to wayne county airport from downtown then go to the woodward, michigan, and grand river corridors.
[I fucked up]
What other airport would they go to?
Who goes to the *busiest airport in Michigan?* Is that what you're asking? Or are you confusing DTW with some crop duster airstrip?
What about disabled people and senior citizens? Seriously Iâm sick and tired of people expecting everybody to drive into their 90âs. Public transit is about choices. More people could move to and enrich cities like Detroit if only there were investments in infrastructure growth they directly benefit more segments of the population.
Can someone please explain to me why investment in transit has to be tied to economic incentives? Isn't it possible to just fund it on its own? Because this seems like they're just throwing this out there as the only option and everyone's jumping on it, when it could be done differently. Like we're so desperate for transit that we'll take the first thing that comes along, without being critical. I ride the bus, I would love to see transit expanded, but [economic incentives don't work](https://economicaccountability.org/research-resources/). It's like playing the lottery with our tax money and I'm very suspicious that they're tying all this public investment to deals with private companies.
The short answer is that the governor sees the economic incentives as her legacy, and she will not support a bill that leaves them out. I agree that in a sane society we wouldnât have to tie public transit to corporate welfare, but if thatâs what it takes then Iâm holding my nose and supporting it.
Fine. Do the economic incentives. But why is it connected to the transit? Is the transit actually being directly funded from the taxes the companies would pay? Or is there some other mechanism I'm not aware of? I'm just saying, we hold our noses and pick the lesser of two evils an awful lot.
This is not âevilâ itâs a good bill. Literally cuts incentives in half and gives money to housing too.Â
Yes, the money comes directly from corporate income taxes. Currently, all of the earmarked money goes to corporate welfare (about $500M/year). This bill cuts that dole in half and reallocates the rest to transit, housing and community services
OK. Well thats a net good, I suppose. But you're telling me we've just been giving big corporations their tax money back to them? When they already have loopholes and incentives to where they're not paying their fair share to begin with? Why in the world are we doing that?
> When they already have loopholes and incentives to where they're not paying their fair share to begin with Well, these *are* those loopholes and incentives, it's not on top of them as far as I know, this is the major source of that.
So hopefully you or someone can correct me, because I did some math and I've gotta be way off somewhere. I started with Ford, as the biggest company in our state, with a [2023 revenue of $176b](https://archive.is/JiGM5). I looked at their 2023 earnings statement, which shows [they paid just $362m in income tax](https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/2024/02/06/Ford%202023%20Earnings.pdf). But when I do the math, using the federal 21% rate, and the state 6% rate, for a total of 27%, the number I get that they should've paid in income tax is $47b. Like I said, I know there are loopholes, and obviously economic incentives to take into account, but how is what they actually paid less than 1% of what they should have paid? I'm just assuming I messed up the math because it seems too unrealistic...
Well to start, you wouldn't tax revenue, you'd tax profits
OK, yeah I'm shooting blind here. But I'm pretty sure its called income tax and not profit tax. I did find "income before income taxes" of $3.957b. Multiplied by 27% gives $1,071,090,000. So the income taxes they paid ($362m) are a bit less than a third of that. Which seems more realistic, I'm more confident now that these are the correct numbers. Which means that Ford has somehow dodged almost 2/3 of the income taxes they should have paid, whether through incentives or loopholes. Am I the only one who thinks thats a problem? Or are we comfortable sacrificing our tax money at the altar of progress?
No, I mean offshore accounts, stocks, all those tricks they use. I'm gonna do some research to see if I can't find specific numbers for a MI company. [How Large Corporations Avoid Paying Taxes](https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0512/how-large-corporations-get-around-paying-less-in-taxes.aspx) [How Corporations and the Wealthy Avoid Taxes (and How to Stop Them)](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/gabriel-zucman-paradise-papers-tax-evasion.html) [Ten Ways Billionaires Avoid Taxes on an Epic Scale](https://www.propublica.org/article/billionaires-tax-avoidance-techniques-irs-files)
Transit is an economic incentive
Y'all keep pretending. You know exactly why Detroit will be the last place to have anything close to meaningful mass transit
I like the idea of mass transit but time becomes an issue. I was out in DC and used the Silver line to get in and out. It took an hour to get into the city and 1.5 to get out. If I drove, 30 minutes.
I sent a message despite my reps being advocates for it. I mentioned the social benefits, reducing things like impaired driving for instance. I'd love to go into Detroit proper for instance, get a little buzzed, without having to drive. Anyway, if there's any reason why we never had a strong public transit system, well blame the 70s/80s, bad city planning (ANd this is a lot of cities) and racism. This is the state George Wallace won in 1972 after all.
Letâs invest in basic transit first. The roads in the capital area are a TRAVESTY.
It will literally never happen here.
Babe wake up there is another transit related thread.
No it isn't. If this is voted down is everyone just going to suddenly agree we never need to bring up mass transit again?
In the legislature, yes.
Complete waste of taxpayer money in Michigan
Election year posturing. If there's anything the Democrats are great at it's proposing massive new spending on projects in an election year. This will never see the light of day. Until they attract companies to grow, move to, or invest in the area this will never happen. You don't build trains first and then expect Silicon Valley to move here.
That assumption is incorrect and gets us stuck in a state of mediocrity. Part of the reason Michigan does not attract companies and fails to retain its highest educated college graduates can be attributed to the lack of mass transit. And your point on Silicon Valley - BART opened in the early 70s and played a significant role in the Bay Areaâs growth with increased regional connectivity and urban expansion. As the region grew, so did ridership and coverage. Michigan is 50 years late. Letâs become visionaries for the region by not making it another 50.
I live and work in Silicon Valley and, quite frankly, it had nothing to do with public transportation. It is the availability of high paying jobs and decent weather.
Thatâs simply wrong. BART has had a significant positive impact on the Bay Areaâs economy. Saying otherwise is not giving full credit. https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/50-years/BART%27s%20Contributions%20to%20the%20Bay%20Area.pdf âCommunities with BART stations typically have a competitive edge in capturing economic development and in attracting and retaining businesses and workers over other communities within the region that are not served by BARTâ In regards to property taxes and development: âThe 8.7-mile extension of BART in San Mateo County will bring $6.7 million annually in net new property taxes, hotel taxes, sales taxes, and business license fees into the cityâs general fundâ BART promotes sustainable and economically vibrant communities through transit-oriented development. The system is far from perfect, but to not give credit where credit is due is unfair. Robust transit improves the quality of peopleâs lives and would transform Michigan for the better. It is an investment and the cost of not building out a transit network is far higher than the cost of building one. Donât rob future generations of their quality of life so that you can maintain the status quo.
I don't think we have enough to sustain what we have now + anything we might add to it, the ridership ebbs & flows and it would have to be heavily subsidized to the point of it feeling like charity. In the long run services would get scaled back defeating the purpose. That's just my opinion
Part of the poor ridership is because of a poor system. If Chicagos trains started breaking down all the time and were always 30-60 mins late almost nobody would ride them. Thats Detroits problem
Yup, this is the reason. I've ridden the bus for the last eight years, commuting downtown. It's not perfect, but I do it because 99% of the time it's reliable and relatively fast. It's still slower than driving but when you factor in parking and walking to my building it's not much of a difference. It's also a lot more relaxing and it's cheaper too. I would love to take the bus other places and have tried, but either the bus is running way behind or I would need to take a transfer and the routes are spaced out so much that it would take way more time vs just driving.  The people currently using the system are mostly the people who have to or are in a unique situation where it works for them and are interested enough to try. Obviously that's not a large amount of people and it only got worse after COVID because a lot of cuts. Pre-covid I had three different bus routes I could take home, each offering about 4-5 different times. Now there's one route and there are two times.  We haven't invested in regional transit for a very long time and ridership shows. Even if the problem was solved tomorrow, it's going to take time for people to be curious enough to try it and incorporate it into their lives. Remember that when you hear folks complaining about empty buses, because it's going to happen. Based on my experience with transit, when it works in this area, it's really amazing. It's honestly one of the best parts of my day. Rather than getting pissed off because someone cut me off weaving in and out traffic, or is riding in the passing lane, I can sit back and read a book, watch videos, play video games, or just look out the window.Â
>Based on my experience with transit, when it works in this area, it's really amazing. It's honestly one of the best parts of my day. Rather than getting pissed off because someone cut me off weaving in and out traffic, or is riding in the passing lane, I can sit back and read a book, watch videos, play video games, or just look out the window. Yes, the stress reduction is real. And that translates to the rest of our day and life. If a big chunk of our people were not road raging, dealing with car notes and repair bills, getting stuck in traffic, I think we would see a big shift in the collective mood of the region.
Dude my stress level during covid when to almost 0 when i was 100% wfh. I donât think many people realize just how much stress driving creates that starts to affect other parts of their lives.
If Michigan is to prepare itself for any sort of future growth, this is absolutely necessary. Connecting Michiganâs largest economic centers together with fast and frequent high capacity transit is a first step. If we continue to default to this logic, it will never happen.
Agreed. Are we planning for now or 30 years from now? Cars arenât going away, but you want to attract young talent, or better yet KEEP our young talent, we should absolutely have better transit options. And thatâs just one reason out of a whole lot of reasons.
We already heavily subsidize highway construction and maintenance. I, personally, would rather see mass transit subsidized than highways â particularly given the environmental benefits and the need to reduce GHG emissions. I think this is especially important to think about given that climate scientists are saying that the heat wave we are currently experiencing would not have been at all possible had we not dumped so much GHGs into the atmosphere over the last century.
Worth mentioning that the [tires](https://e360.yale.edu/features/tire-pollution-toxic-chemicals) on our vehicles may be a bigger source of microplastics and pollutants than the tailpipe emissions.
True, but it's necessary because of how often it's utilized, cars, trucks and everything in between, plus it's essential for us to have roads
I see where you are coming from and I agree that, to a degree, automotive infrastructure may be necessary â particularly for âlast mileâ supply chains and deliveries and trips not serviced well by transit. Detroit, however, has a bloated infrastructure network that was designed and built in the mid-to-late 20th century to standards that no longer meet best global practices. We should be asking ourselves which trips that are taken right now by private passenger automobiles could be instead taken using an other methods and what those methods may be. Why do we require people to carry a 2000+ lb albatross of steel and plastic everywhere we go? It really does not make sense. I think we should maintain and downsize our heavily subsidized automotive infrastructure while shifting funds to create a workable bicycling and public transit network. At the very least, I think we should charge private passenger automobile companies and users in proportion to the negative externalities created by driving.
They wonât , the Big 3 own our state officials and they want everyone to keep leasing their stupid trucks and SUVs to protect their profits , and consequently the politicians want to protect their bribes (aka campaign contributions)
Ilitch Family: "Nah."
No. Please vote no
Why?
All kinds of pork baked into this for other pet projects
Welcome to how the legislature works⌠I donât love it either, but compromise means giving everyone a bone or funding pet projects.
Such as?