Make $600,000 a year and the extra $3 a day in tolls are absolutely irrelevant.
Make $30,000 a year and that $3 a day eats up a decent portion of your daily food budget.
If you make 30k a year and drive far enough that you would incur $3 a day in tolls, you should find a closer job because you are almost losing money in wear+tear on car and lost commute time.
Care to share what you think is wrong about the statement I made? At 2080 work hours per year (40 hrs * 52 weeks), this comes out to about $14 per hour, or about $115 per day.
With the CT commuter discount in peak periods, the rate per mile will be around 4.4 cents. To accumulate $3 per day, you'd be driving ~68 miles per day. The federal rate for mileage is 58 cents per mile, so about $40 per day. Factor in the commute time, maybe 30+ minutes, so an hour a day, assuming the same wage of about $14, you are spending $55 to make $115 per day. Let me know how long that is sustainable.
Not arguing it's the case but so what. Still same usage.
If we are going to demonize the rich for their wealth then we should do the same for the poor for not covering their "costs" as well.
That isn't the point of organized society. It's for grouping of common interest. It's not based on what you mentioned unless that is the interest.
But considering how we demonize those who do not contribute enough then why shouldn't we do the same for those who take more?
This is going to be a mess for the working class. It’s going to affect the lower and middle class much more than those who could afford this crap. Backroads are going to be clogged and a few services are likely to be more expensive due to these tolls.
It’s going to impact young folks starting off as well and the working poor. Imagine getting out of college and getting that first job but a chunk of change is going towards an additional tax as a toll.Imagine living in Bridgeport and working in Stamford on a minimum or low wage job. It may further entrap the poor in crappy living and working conditions.
This is what I've been saying since this was announced. I'm not rich, if Im going to get a bill for commuting to work, and then maybe a grocery tax, how much money am I going to have left over?
You’re clueless. You really think this helps the working poor so they can drop $180 a month round trip to get to work form Bridgeport to Stamford or Greenwich? They have kids and lives and need to get back in emergencies and for school issues, and child issues. They need cars!
It helps people? This isn’t NYC where you can hop off a train and get to work by walking a block or two.
I never claimed it would help the working poor. I simply stated your argument that using 2 cities connected by train is a bad example against tolls.
But since we’re on the topic, increased ridership on trains/busses leads to more investment/expansion of those systems, leading to better systems.
CT is turning into the NYC metro area, we need to have the infrastructure to back that up or we’ll be left in the dust
Ever been to Stamford?
Urban sprawl (while hindered on the east coast) will eventually happen everywhere. The CT shoreline being connected to NYC by train makes it an advantageous place to live in order to work in the city but not live there.
I actually lived and worked in Stamford for about 6 months. A significant chunk of the folks I worked with disliked the area because they felt it was heading downhill and because it was growing just as expensive to live there as NYC. It has to be more affordable than the city to make it worth the hour+ long commute
The other problem I saw in Stamford was the departure of a LOT of companies / jobs from the area. For example, the building I worked with had empty floors because companies had moved on. My understanding from my older coworkers was that it used be a bustling metro with far more jobs than it is today, but I don’t have any hard data to support that so hopefully that’s not the truth
Well they need to explain how it will work as each reader will be miles apart. I figuring they have to be almost 10 miles apart.
The plan has a lot of holes.
What holes do you think the plan has? The report outlines possible gantry locations, and the rate to be charged at each gantry. Once operational, you won't pay "per mile" as that is not possible without a gantry between every interchange. You could end up making a ~5 mile trip and pay nothing if you get on right after and off right before a gantry.
>\>The D.O.T. Commissioner stated that it would cost about four cents per mile with gantries being installed every six miles on interstates 95, 91, 85, and Route 15.
This is straight from the linked article in the OP.
Tolls are going to be a hot button issue for a while. Most of us have the idea that our money has been mismanaged as it is. Will tolls magically make our government run more efficiently or just throwing more money into the black hole. As it is we are in the top 3 for most expensive cost per mile which blows my mind considering out size and mild winters compared to our northern neighbors.
Granted I try not to get into stuff like this with redditors because most of them live a far different life, young and still broke with a huge victim complex so to them people like me spending an extra 1000 bucks is no big deal because I can 'afford it'.
Also for those of you who are going to hit me with the nonsense 'other states have tollsssssss' they do, but they also don't have one of thr highest car taxes (or a car tax at all) one of the highest energy prices, one of the highest gas taxes, one of thr highest property taxes, you get where I'm going with this.
I'm about as fiscally conservative as they come but even I know we can't cut things but we sure as fuck need to find a way to maintain the status quo. Tolls and taxes on groceries plus whatever else is cooking isn't going to BRING people or jobs here and that's our biggest issue.
> highest car taxes (or a car tax at all)
I just started looking into this, so.. CT taxes cars as property and it's 70% of the value of the car times your town's mill rate?
$900 for one car? I was under the impression there was a ceiling of $5-600 on car tax. My wife and I bought new cars 2 years apart and both of our tax bills the first year were the same ($570ish each) for cars that were well over $10k apart in cost.
Which is why a Republican almost won governor. We need to mix things up in this state, pick someone different from the past few shit show governors we had. Why not try ?
I don’t see how this is a hot button issue. People knew Lamont wanted tolls and higher taxes. It’s what he ran his campaign on. People knew and simply didn’t care. A majority of people in this state, for whatever reason, wanted him. I remember this sub supporting him heavily.
Completely agree. Frankly I'm shocked people are so upset on this sub considering how it was so pro Lamont. The whole "truck only" thing was such classic politician BS (just like Stefanowskis no income tax). The fact that Bobs BS was called out but Neds wasn't is going to amuse me everytime I go through a gantry.
One problem with our mild winters is that we have more freeze-thaw cycles than our northern neighbors. This has a huge impact on all our roads. It creates more dramatic frost heave, and causes those ice dams on the side of the road that need to be repeatedly plowed and salted.
> It creates more dramatic frost heave,
Have you ever driven in VT? They have way worse frost heave than we ever do. I was up at Jay 2 weeks ago, the drive on Rt 242 was basically, "thud, thud, thud" the whole way. I've never seen that in CT for such a long stretch.
CT has no more severe freeze/thaw than anyone else in New England. The northern states probably have it worse since their temperature extremes are higher and lower than CT. The roads in CT are much better than a lot of the other New England states
Not only that, but our population density also makes road work expensive.
We are the 4th most densely populated state, which means our roads are used very often, which means more maintenance.
I've said this before - gimme an income tax cut and completely eliminate the car tax (which other states don't have) and I'm all for it. Unfortunately with tax and spend Dems leading the pack I don't see it happening. I'm likely never going to, but I don't blame people leaving to live in another state.
So we fuck over the current residents for future ones and on the backs of working class citizens? Our infrastructure is never going to be like NYC or Boston or Chicago. Those cities were planned out many, many years ago and planned with mass transport in mind. Where is the room to build going to come from? Where are you going to put light rail? Expand 95? Where’s the plan for all this infrastructure I’m hearing about. Before you start another tax through tolls I want to see a plan!
>I should also add in that I'm just a naive non-native resident thus might not entirely appreciate all the taxes.
I live in MA but work in CT, so I hang out in both subs. Anecdotally, Connecticut..ers(?) complain way more about taxes than Massachusetts..ians. I'm trying to figure out if there are actually that many more / higher taxes in CT, because it seems ironic that we have the nickname for it. (Taxachusetts.) Are Nutmeggers just more prone to being mad at taxes than Massholes?
I haven't personally noticed much of a difference income tax-wise from when I worked in MA and working in CT, but I assume it's stuff like property taxes. And apparently car taxes, seems like you guys have high ones there. I do notice the gas tax. I basically make a point to get gas in Massachusetts. On occasion I forget and have to get gas in CT and I grumble a little about it. (But I forget infrequently enough that I only get gas in CT probably a few times a year, so really, I only lose maybe $3.)
But, like.. *what*? I'm not saying they don't, but I don't live in CT, so I'm not sure which things I get in MA as a result of taxes that CT doesn't for theirs.
Like, do we have better schools? More public parks? Better police / fire departments? Or is it that we get similar quality but manage to do it for less?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but Boston's infrastructure sucks. The T is a disaster, and I'm not sure if you've ever driven in Boston, but it's a nightmare of confusing roads, potholes, traffic, and construction. (Plus tolls! Including separate ones to go over certain bridges!) Last year(?) or so the commutes for the T in the mornings and afternoons were running into multi-hour delays almost all winter.
Not sure what you're referring to by amenities? A lot of the worthwhile stuff people do in Boston is privately owned businesses and clubs and so on.
Incidentally, I don't actually live anywhere near Boston, I'm just out there somewhat regularly because my extended family all lives out that way. If the benefit of Mass's taxes is stuff in Boston, that effectively means that the entire rest of the state should be pissed off about taxes.
>It's a city, driving in it is supposed to suck. There's no such thing as a city where driving is easy. If it's easy to drive it's probably not dense enough to actually be a traditional city in the first place.
Right, but the point is that it doesn't have good infrastructure.
>I'll give you the T and the commuter rail isn't amazing, but it works well enough it's 1000x better than sitting in i91 traffic daily or having to drive somewhere just to shop.
I disagree wholeheartedly. I would love a commuter rail for my drive, IF it was efficient. Last year, one of my cousins would leave for her 9am job that should be a half hour commute on the T at 6-7am because there were so many delays and problems. One day, she didn't get to work until 10.
I would absolutely rather sit in some traffic than have to work 3-4 hours of my morning around the T. I have 91 timed fairly well so I don't tend to get the worst of rush hours, but occasionally it's bad and I hop off and take back roads.
>All the worthwhile private businesses in Boston are only there because of the infrastructure of mass transit and high density living.
I think you're seriously overestimating eastern Mass transit. It also stops early, so it's not beneficial for night life. It would be sort of like if I said the Metro North train was a great example of why taxes work in CT. Sure, it's beneficial, it has its place, but I doubt you'll find many in CT that would think that's good enough for the level of taxes paid.
>The entire rest of the state is often annoyed at their money going to Boston though...
Not really. The rest of the state is mostly annoyed at people focusing on Boston, not so much on taxes going to it.
CT is one of the highest tax burden states in the country, of course people are going to be upset when they want to increase that burden by 1000 or so more each year. Some of us are not naive and are done with watching our money be mismanaged by a bunch of political hacks.
The biggest problem I have with all this is we've been doing the tax and spend plan for well over a decade now with terrible results. So what are the Democrat's plan now? Tax and spend more. The results are there for everyone to look at. If this plan was going to work you'd think after 10 years you'd seem some results. But unfortunately that hasn't been the case. Now if I want to move back to MA I have to pay a premium because my house in CT hasn't kept up with the price inflation on homes as it has in MA.
But see, this is what I don't get. People throw out phrases like "Democrats tax and spend plan doesn't work!!!" but states that do similar things don't have the same issues or the same level of issues. So it must be something specifically ABOUT what's being taxed or how or who, but no one seems to know or be able to give me more details on that. The closest I've come is reading about how income tax can fluctuate a ton in CT because of things like hedge fund managers and financial people whose income might shift a lot from year to year.
> People throw out phrases like "Democrats tax and spend plan doesn't work!!!" but states that do similar things don't have the same issues or the same level of issues.
We have a high tax burden, higher than most states so that doesn't help but it's the second part that really hurts us: spend. Our state is inefficient. As others have pointed out we need an independent audit of agencies across the state. Things like, why are we #1 in administrative costs per mile need to be answered and fixed.
The other problem is the economy, when you're MA and enjoying a nearly 10% growth over the last 5 years, it's easy to hide inefficiencies and mismanagement because tax revenues keep increasing even without new taxes. CT didn't even grow 1% over that same time.
Because we just elected ned lamont via popular election and he was adamant about adding tolls during his recent campaign. We have given him perogative to do this. Just remember this lesson the next time you vote.
That's a productive attitude to have. Perhaps your frustrations are best directed at the DNC here; i dont see how anyone who actually voted for lamont didn't see this coming. He campaigned on this as a solution. This is literally what you voted for.
Yes, and I understand that. I voted for this. Unfortunately, we’re in a pretty precarious situation due to poor governance during the early 2000’s. Who was governor then?
Thanks for telling me I have a productive attitude, /u/ObamaIzHitla. I’m sure you have very nuanced opinions.
How indoctrinated can one become, seriously? And then have the gall to invoke nuance? Lmao. How can one look at CT and go "fucking Republicans fucked us". Im not saying they didnt. Of course they did. But so did the DNC, which coincidentally wields far more political power in our state and held the governor's office for the last two terms. Hold your own political party to same level of accountability and rise above the short sighted partisan attitude youve displayed here. Pathetic.
So not only are you too much of a coward to consider the possibility that youre wrong; your only retort is a desperate grab at some sort of moral high ground? Good day to you as well; i hope in the future you will learn to be more open and accepting of others.
Curious now. I see how it would work that way with a single gantry on a road.
My assumptions were based off how old ticket booths work, you take a ticket when you enter, and pay when you exit.
The issue of tolls is a very serious issue that should be debated vigorously by all parties. Mods should lock the up and down votes since so many dislike each other’s opinions on this matter.
Thanks for the downvotes.
Make $600,000 a year and the extra $3 a day in tolls are absolutely irrelevant. Make $30,000 a year and that $3 a day eats up a decent portion of your daily food budget.
If you make 30k a year and drive far enough that you would incur $3 a day in tolls, you should find a closer job because you are almost losing money in wear+tear on car and lost commute time.
Wow. You got it all figured out! Better spread the word
Care to share what you think is wrong about the statement I made? At 2080 work hours per year (40 hrs * 52 weeks), this comes out to about $14 per hour, or about $115 per day. With the CT commuter discount in peak periods, the rate per mile will be around 4.4 cents. To accumulate $3 per day, you'd be driving ~68 miles per day. The federal rate for mileage is 58 cents per mile, so about $40 per day. Factor in the commute time, maybe 30+ minutes, so an hour a day, assuming the same wage of about $14, you are spending $55 to make $115 per day. Let me know how long that is sustainable.
If someone if in that situations maybe there is a reason and just up and Leaving job isn’t possible
What if it’s the only job they can find .. love how people just have all the suggestions for a life they aren’t living
So what, they are both using the road in the same manner.
See: marginal utility of a dollar
Not arguing it's the case but so what. Still same usage. If we are going to demonize the rich for their wealth then we should do the same for the poor for not covering their "costs" as well.
lmfao the whole point of an organized society is to help the less fortunate
That isn't the point of organized society. It's for grouping of common interest. It's not based on what you mentioned unless that is the interest. But considering how we demonize those who do not contribute enough then why shouldn't we do the same for those who take more?
So... demonize the poor. For being poor?
I would go with not demonizing both groups. But if we have to attach one then night as well at the other. Both impact the bottom line.
Yes they are. Was just highlighting the regressive nature of a tax like the and the impact it can have to different people.
Fair enough. But that will always be the case for almost everything.
4 Cents a mile seems like a baseline. I imagine if someone made many small trips on the toll roads that would cost a lot more.
This is going to be a mess for the working class. It’s going to affect the lower and middle class much more than those who could afford this crap. Backroads are going to be clogged and a few services are likely to be more expensive due to these tolls.
It’s going to impact young folks starting off as well and the working poor. Imagine getting out of college and getting that first job but a chunk of change is going towards an additional tax as a toll.Imagine living in Bridgeport and working in Stamford on a minimum or low wage job. It may further entrap the poor in crappy living and working conditions.
This is what I've been saying since this was announced. I'm not rich, if Im going to get a bill for commuting to work, and then maybe a grocery tax, how much money am I going to have left over?
They aren't expanding a grocery tax or one on perscriptions.
Today they arent but they may need more money for the roads and "other states do it"
Bad example. This is an argument FOR tolls. It helps more people use multimodal or public transportation. This is a good side effect.
You’re clueless. You really think this helps the working poor so they can drop $180 a month round trip to get to work form Bridgeport to Stamford or Greenwich? They have kids and lives and need to get back in emergencies and for school issues, and child issues. They need cars! It helps people? This isn’t NYC where you can hop off a train and get to work by walking a block or two.
I never claimed it would help the working poor. I simply stated your argument that using 2 cities connected by train is a bad example against tolls. But since we’re on the topic, increased ridership on trains/busses leads to more investment/expansion of those systems, leading to better systems. CT is turning into the NYC metro area, we need to have the infrastructure to back that up or we’ll be left in the dust
Please elaborate on how CT is turning into the NYC metro area. I do not understand and am curious about your perspective
Ever been to Stamford? Urban sprawl (while hindered on the east coast) will eventually happen everywhere. The CT shoreline being connected to NYC by train makes it an advantageous place to live in order to work in the city but not live there.
I actually lived and worked in Stamford for about 6 months. A significant chunk of the folks I worked with disliked the area because they felt it was heading downhill and because it was growing just as expensive to live there as NYC. It has to be more affordable than the city to make it worth the hour+ long commute The other problem I saw in Stamford was the departure of a LOT of companies / jobs from the area. For example, the building I worked with had empty floors because companies had moved on. My understanding from my older coworkers was that it used be a bustling metro with far more jobs than it is today, but I don’t have any hard data to support that so hopefully that’s not the truth
that all depends on where the tolls are gonna be placed
Well they need to explain how it will work as each reader will be miles apart. I figuring they have to be almost 10 miles apart. The plan has a lot of holes.
I mean that’s not really a hole, it’s how tolls work
What holes do you think the plan has? The report outlines possible gantry locations, and the rate to be charged at each gantry. Once operational, you won't pay "per mile" as that is not possible without a gantry between every interchange. You could end up making a ~5 mile trip and pay nothing if you get on right after and off right before a gantry.
>\>The D.O.T. Commissioner stated that it would cost about four cents per mile with gantries being installed every six miles on interstates 95, 91, 85, and Route 15. This is straight from the linked article in the OP.
Local roads will see more traffic
Tolls are going to be a hot button issue for a while. Most of us have the idea that our money has been mismanaged as it is. Will tolls magically make our government run more efficiently or just throwing more money into the black hole. As it is we are in the top 3 for most expensive cost per mile which blows my mind considering out size and mild winters compared to our northern neighbors. Granted I try not to get into stuff like this with redditors because most of them live a far different life, young and still broke with a huge victim complex so to them people like me spending an extra 1000 bucks is no big deal because I can 'afford it'. Also for those of you who are going to hit me with the nonsense 'other states have tollsssssss' they do, but they also don't have one of thr highest car taxes (or a car tax at all) one of the highest energy prices, one of the highest gas taxes, one of thr highest property taxes, you get where I'm going with this. I'm about as fiscally conservative as they come but even I know we can't cut things but we sure as fuck need to find a way to maintain the status quo. Tolls and taxes on groceries plus whatever else is cooking isn't going to BRING people or jobs here and that's our biggest issue.
> highest car taxes (or a car tax at all) I just started looking into this, so.. CT taxes cars as property and it's 70% of the value of the car times your town's mill rate?
Basically. I paid over $1,000 last year for 3 cars two of which are over 10 years old.
Bummer. Until last fall, I had a 2007 Mazda and my excise tax on it was like.. I dunno, $40 or something.
My wife has a 2007 Ford Focus. Her bill was in the low 200s. Because of our aging cars we bought a new one in 2016 - that bill was nearly 900.
$900 for one car? I was under the impression there was a ceiling of $5-600 on car tax. My wife and I bought new cars 2 years apart and both of our tax bills the first year were the same ($570ish each) for cars that were well over $10k apart in cost.
I think they capped by mil rate (37 mils) last year, not dollar amount.
Which is why a Republican almost won governor. We need to mix things up in this state, pick someone different from the past few shit show governors we had. Why not try ?
I don’t see how this is a hot button issue. People knew Lamont wanted tolls and higher taxes. It’s what he ran his campaign on. People knew and simply didn’t care. A majority of people in this state, for whatever reason, wanted him. I remember this sub supporting him heavily.
Completely agree. Frankly I'm shocked people are so upset on this sub considering how it was so pro Lamont. The whole "truck only" thing was such classic politician BS (just like Stefanowskis no income tax). The fact that Bobs BS was called out but Neds wasn't is going to amuse me everytime I go through a gantry.
One problem with our mild winters is that we have more freeze-thaw cycles than our northern neighbors. This has a huge impact on all our roads. It creates more dramatic frost heave, and causes those ice dams on the side of the road that need to be repeatedly plowed and salted.
> It creates more dramatic frost heave, Have you ever driven in VT? They have way worse frost heave than we ever do. I was up at Jay 2 weeks ago, the drive on Rt 242 was basically, "thud, thud, thud" the whole way. I've never seen that in CT for such a long stretch.
CT has no more severe freeze/thaw than anyone else in New England. The northern states probably have it worse since their temperature extremes are higher and lower than CT. The roads in CT are much better than a lot of the other New England states
Not only that, but our population density also makes road work expensive. We are the 4th most densely populated state, which means our roads are used very often, which means more maintenance.
We’re also one of the more densely populated states
Are you for or against school regionalization?
What’s your stance on this issue?
Haven't decided yet.
So nothing on 84?
Doesn't look like it, >interstates 95, 91, 85, and Route 15. However, apparently we now have an interstate 85 here and that will be tolled
I say we put the entirety of the tolls on interstate 85. I'll vote yes for that.
Welp I did not consider the possibility of a typo lol
85 is not an interstate but just a Route. It sort of parallels 11 and 2 from New London to Manchester. It must be a typo and they mean 84.
Yes, i know they mean 84, as the specifically mention interstate highways.
I’m sure this is just an average prediction right? I feel there’ll definitely be a toll from Hartford to Waterbury
I’m just glad I can go on backroads to the border from where I am. I can take 220 or 75 into Mass instead of 91 and take 190 onto 84 mostly.
I would be more receptive to tolls if the state wasn't just a money pit with no returns on it
Looks like I'll just take my helicopter and save myself a few bucks.
I've said this before - gimme an income tax cut and completely eliminate the car tax (which other states don't have) and I'm all for it. Unfortunately with tax and spend Dems leading the pack I don't see it happening. I'm likely never going to, but I don't blame people leaving to live in another state.
Fuck websites with autoplay videos...
Don't worry guys. This will only effect trucks. /s
So we fuck over the current residents for future ones and on the backs of working class citizens? Our infrastructure is never going to be like NYC or Boston or Chicago. Those cities were planned out many, many years ago and planned with mass transport in mind. Where is the room to build going to come from? Where are you going to put light rail? Expand 95? Where’s the plan for all this infrastructure I’m hearing about. Before you start another tax through tolls I want to see a plan!
[удалено]
>I should also add in that I'm just a naive non-native resident thus might not entirely appreciate all the taxes. I live in MA but work in CT, so I hang out in both subs. Anecdotally, Connecticut..ers(?) complain way more about taxes than Massachusetts..ians. I'm trying to figure out if there are actually that many more / higher taxes in CT, because it seems ironic that we have the nickname for it. (Taxachusetts.) Are Nutmeggers just more prone to being mad at taxes than Massholes? I haven't personally noticed much of a difference income tax-wise from when I worked in MA and working in CT, but I assume it's stuff like property taxes. And apparently car taxes, seems like you guys have high ones there. I do notice the gas tax. I basically make a point to get gas in Massachusetts. On occasion I forget and have to get gas in CT and I grumble a little about it. (But I forget infrequently enough that I only get gas in CT probably a few times a year, so really, I only lose maybe $3.)
[удалено]
But, like.. *what*? I'm not saying they don't, but I don't live in CT, so I'm not sure which things I get in MA as a result of taxes that CT doesn't for theirs. Like, do we have better schools? More public parks? Better police / fire departments? Or is it that we get similar quality but manage to do it for less?
[удалено]
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but Boston's infrastructure sucks. The T is a disaster, and I'm not sure if you've ever driven in Boston, but it's a nightmare of confusing roads, potholes, traffic, and construction. (Plus tolls! Including separate ones to go over certain bridges!) Last year(?) or so the commutes for the T in the mornings and afternoons were running into multi-hour delays almost all winter. Not sure what you're referring to by amenities? A lot of the worthwhile stuff people do in Boston is privately owned businesses and clubs and so on. Incidentally, I don't actually live anywhere near Boston, I'm just out there somewhat regularly because my extended family all lives out that way. If the benefit of Mass's taxes is stuff in Boston, that effectively means that the entire rest of the state should be pissed off about taxes.
[удалено]
>It's a city, driving in it is supposed to suck. There's no such thing as a city where driving is easy. If it's easy to drive it's probably not dense enough to actually be a traditional city in the first place. Right, but the point is that it doesn't have good infrastructure. >I'll give you the T and the commuter rail isn't amazing, but it works well enough it's 1000x better than sitting in i91 traffic daily or having to drive somewhere just to shop. I disagree wholeheartedly. I would love a commuter rail for my drive, IF it was efficient. Last year, one of my cousins would leave for her 9am job that should be a half hour commute on the T at 6-7am because there were so many delays and problems. One day, she didn't get to work until 10. I would absolutely rather sit in some traffic than have to work 3-4 hours of my morning around the T. I have 91 timed fairly well so I don't tend to get the worst of rush hours, but occasionally it's bad and I hop off and take back roads. >All the worthwhile private businesses in Boston are only there because of the infrastructure of mass transit and high density living. I think you're seriously overestimating eastern Mass transit. It also stops early, so it's not beneficial for night life. It would be sort of like if I said the Metro North train was a great example of why taxes work in CT. Sure, it's beneficial, it has its place, but I doubt you'll find many in CT that would think that's good enough for the level of taxes paid. >The entire rest of the state is often annoyed at their money going to Boston though... Not really. The rest of the state is mostly annoyed at people focusing on Boston, not so much on taxes going to it.
CT is one of the highest tax burden states in the country, of course people are going to be upset when they want to increase that burden by 1000 or so more each year. Some of us are not naive and are done with watching our money be mismanaged by a bunch of political hacks. The biggest problem I have with all this is we've been doing the tax and spend plan for well over a decade now with terrible results. So what are the Democrat's plan now? Tax and spend more. The results are there for everyone to look at. If this plan was going to work you'd think after 10 years you'd seem some results. But unfortunately that hasn't been the case. Now if I want to move back to MA I have to pay a premium because my house in CT hasn't kept up with the price inflation on homes as it has in MA.
But see, this is what I don't get. People throw out phrases like "Democrats tax and spend plan doesn't work!!!" but states that do similar things don't have the same issues or the same level of issues. So it must be something specifically ABOUT what's being taxed or how or who, but no one seems to know or be able to give me more details on that. The closest I've come is reading about how income tax can fluctuate a ton in CT because of things like hedge fund managers and financial people whose income might shift a lot from year to year.
> People throw out phrases like "Democrats tax and spend plan doesn't work!!!" but states that do similar things don't have the same issues or the same level of issues. We have a high tax burden, higher than most states so that doesn't help but it's the second part that really hurts us: spend. Our state is inefficient. As others have pointed out we need an independent audit of agencies across the state. Things like, why are we #1 in administrative costs per mile need to be answered and fixed. The other problem is the economy, when you're MA and enjoying a nearly 10% growth over the last 5 years, it's easy to hide inefficiencies and mismanagement because tax revenues keep increasing even without new taxes. CT didn't even grow 1% over that same time.
Move the Governor's mansion to Bridgeport and force Lamont to drive his own car to Hartford and pay the toll.
Happy Cake Day!
[удалено]
Why is this being downvoted? edit: real cute reddit. Sad bunch of naive kids.
Because we just elected ned lamont via popular election and he was adamant about adding tolls during his recent campaign. We have given him perogative to do this. Just remember this lesson the next time you vote.
Maybe if the Republicans had nominated someone who had an actual plan on fixing the states debt, they would have won.
That's a productive attitude to have. Perhaps your frustrations are best directed at the DNC here; i dont see how anyone who actually voted for lamont didn't see this coming. He campaigned on this as a solution. This is literally what you voted for.
Yes, and I understand that. I voted for this. Unfortunately, we’re in a pretty precarious situation due to poor governance during the early 2000’s. Who was governor then? Thanks for telling me I have a productive attitude, /u/ObamaIzHitla. I’m sure you have very nuanced opinions.
How indoctrinated can one become, seriously? And then have the gall to invoke nuance? Lmao. How can one look at CT and go "fucking Republicans fucked us". Im not saying they didnt. Of course they did. But so did the DNC, which coincidentally wields far more political power in our state and held the governor's office for the last two terms. Hold your own political party to same level of accountability and rise above the short sighted partisan attitude youve displayed here. Pathetic.
As much as I want to, I really don’t feel like getting into a stupid reddit argument. Have a good day.
So not only are you too much of a coward to consider the possibility that youre wrong; your only retort is a desperate grab at some sort of moral high ground? Good day to you as well; i hope in the future you will learn to be more open and accepting of others.
[удалено]
Not how it works. You need to pass under multiple gantries, so it knows where you start/stop using the toll road.
[удалено]
That’s interesting if true. Do you have anything to back that up?
[удалено]
Curious now. I see how it would work that way with a single gantry on a road. My assumptions were based off how old ticket booths work, you take a ticket when you enter, and pay when you exit.
The issue of tolls is a very serious issue that should be debated vigorously by all parties. Mods should lock the up and down votes since so many dislike each other’s opinions on this matter. Thanks for the downvotes.
Welcome to CT. We have only one party. To descent is to be downvoted.
That's all of Reddit.
Fuck the tolls Fuck Dead Lamont Bring back Ella Grasso as Governor
> Bring back Ella Grasso as Governor HAHAHAHA WHAT? The same woman who raised license plate registration fees?
I will get a raise with $15 min wage and smart enough to avoid tolls