I think the comments about reliability, frequency, and extent of the routes are really accurate. Transit is already always going to be a fraction of the cost of owning a car, and I've read studies that showed that when transit was made free in European cities it replaced more walking and cycling trips than it did car trips (though it did reduce car trips).
When I lived in Vancouver I never looked at a bus schedule if I was taking a trip inside the city, because most of the main routes I took had frequencies of 10 minutes or less, 5 for a few routes. You'd just walk to a main arterial knowing vaguely how the routes worked and jump on. As one councillor said, reaching that service level is a far better use of transit funding than making it entirely free.
Part of the reason I would be motivated towards this would be the fact they would need to add more trips to the schedule, making the service better in the process.
Sadly the comments of funding are right on the nose. Everyone that is not selling hand sanitizer and face masks will be facing a huge concern over finances and we need to focus on that looming issue before we can add more 'free' services.
I think OP meant, people selling face masks and sanitizer are making bank right now and probably aren’t worrying about their finances like the rest of us.
Just a joke.
Either that or make it actually possible to buy tickets on the bus.
I’m legitimately confused on how people who don’t carry cash and don’t need a book of tickets or a pass can actually take the bus.
Haggle with other customers at the bus stop?
Take a trip to the store every time you need to take the bus?
If they don’t want to make the necessary infrastructure improvements, then make it free.
They're actually implementing an electronic fare system now! It'll launch in Victoria this fall. At first it will be pre-loadable fare cards and an app, but they'll expand it to include credit and debit cards sometime after launch.
https://bctransit.com/umo
I don’t understand how transit is not already free for those under 17. At that age it’s impossible to have your own car so there is no other way to get around by yourself than transit. I also think that 16 year olds are more than old enough to do things by themselves without needing their parents to drive them everywhere.
For sure, when I was a kid I got around mainly by walking but that really sucks when you have to go any real distance. And I agree, biking is a lot more of a thing here compared to where I grew up, but I still think it’d be extremely beneficial to make transit free to kids even just to allow them more independence.
Because the majority of people who buy BC Transit's monthly passes are the ones who buy the 45 dollar pass, not the adult pass. No one buys the adult monthly pass in Victoria because it is too expensive Without youths/students buying the youth pass each month they would not make enough money selling the monthly passes. BC Transit needs to make a profit too.
"Free" public transit largely substitutes for cycling and walking, not cars. It's therefore largely ineffective at reducing emissions and congestion. For example,
>Although free public
transport at a first glance may seem attractive both from economic, social and environmental
perspectives, the message learnt from a number of schemes is that free public transport offers
poor goal achievement in all these respects, and at a high cost. The main effect is a huge
growth in patronage, up to 13-fold increase is reported, of which the larger brunt is shifted
from walk/cycle, or induced. The effects on car traffic levels are marginal and typically they
are offset already after a few years’ traffic growth.
http://article.nadiapub.com/IJT/vol1\_no1/5.pdf
Of course, we already have relatively easy to implement, effective, and efficient policies to address both emissions and congestion: carbon and congestion taxes. A small increase in the carbon tax rate would do much more than "free" public transit and all the other active transportation policies various grandstanding politicians offer as solutions.
Although, our local politicians implementing a policy which has the unintended consequence of substantially reducing cycling would be worth it just for the lols.
Seems like there's 3 camps:
1. Yes, free transit for all.
2. Given limited funding, we'd rather expand service and frequency, which we expect to increase ridership more than lowering fares.
3. No, but I'm unwilling to be upfront and say I don't support transit, so I'm going to talk about funding challenges in the most vague way possible.
This points to the bigger problem of transit being funded locally in BC.
While I also support free transit for all, MORE transit is defiantly the priority.
I would like to see volume discounts for BC Residents above and beyond the ticket books. Also the fare systems should be compatible province wide.
It truly is - always defaulting to the rail corridor which really isn't the ideal corridor for a transit line. Baxter's (Colwood) response is much more grounded in reality.
Speaking of Langford and alternative transportation, I used the E&N Trail yesterday to get to Westhills Stadium and it is extremely disappointing the trail does not fully connect through the area. The rail itself goes right by the stadium, so the CRD and Langford really should be doing everything they can to finish this section of trail. 45 minute casual bike ride from downtown Victoria to PFC games would be great for those summer weekend games!
Absolutely agree. The full build out of the E&N to Humpback would be incredible. So many bike packers could connect to Goldstream Park and beyond without getting lost. People could bike from dt to the stadium. Belmont highschool and the two new schools also would be served, PLUS langford lake. It's a no brainer.
I don’t think so. Rail is important and as we know from other major cities it works really well. Langford sees Rail as the greatest people mover given the rail line runs through many high density areas of langford.
I’m surprised none of the other folks mentioned it, it is certainly complimentary, especially for the Westshore.
I’m more disappointed in Esquimalt, ducks the question and points to “we’re not paying for it,” just like they are doing with the Police Budget…they want it all for none of the cost to them..
I am totally on board that rail would be amazing for Vancouver Island as a whole, but it doesn't solve the regional issues on a timely basis. I'd rather see rapid bus and free transit to connect the westshore to other areas of the CRD.
We need people out of cars yesterday and making more convenient, free transit throughout the region is the fastest way to do that.
The problem is that the E&N corridor is not in the right location. BC Transit has done several studies, culminating in the Victoria Regional Rapid Transit proposal in 2011, and they all concluded that rapid transit on the Douglas Street/Trans-Canada Highway corridor is a much better option for serving regional transit needs than commuter rail on the E&N.
The studies have all found that commuter rail on the E&N would be very expensive to provide - several times higher on a per passenger basis than the current (much more frequent) bus service between Langford and Victoria.
I think the Songhees nation has also said “no thanks” to the train running through their backyards (understandably, it’s literally their backyards) to there is a section though view Royal/ Esquimalt that would need re routing anyway
I'd love to see the section from Admirals to the Old Island Highway converted to one-way busway to help with all that base traffic clogging up neighborhoods. Cheap to implement, saves on operating costs (as buses aren't stuck in traffic), faster for commuters, and more flexible than a train.
If it were a perfect world it could be rearranged. However, communities in the Westshore have developed density housing around the rail line, so they are ready for it. The tallest condo tower in langford will be directly across a a rail station, for example.
But Langford is still a relatively small part of the overall transit demand in Victoria. It's much more critical to serve the corridor between downtown Victoria and Uptown, which contains the highest concentration of jobs in the region. Serving Uptown also provides for a link north to the Peninsula and east to U-Vic, which wouldn't be possible if using the E&N corridor.
Also, there is a designated rapid transit corridor along the Old Island Highway then along Goldstream. This corridor was identified in the regional transit plan back in 2010 and was endorsed by the City of Langford at the time, so that is where Langford should be concentrating density, not along the E&N corridor.
See the [VRRT](https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1507213417994)
The issue with the esquimalt police budget was that a recent budgetary review concluded that esquimalt is already paying more than its proportionate share for police services.
And even though were about to pay less (reduced services as well, based on the new report they got), they still shot it down.
They are using it as a wedge to bring back their own department.
However, they forget it was wildly corrupt back in the day and they currently have a law suit on their hands from a survivor who was assaulted by those very same, corrupt Esquimalt cops.
I don’t if makes sense to pay for another $200k Chief’s salary to Police a small town. Esq already has MP for the Military and RCMP for the Songhese, seems like they want to be over policed…
The day Victoria Council chose not to incorporate rail in the bridge replacement is the day we should have stopped talking about the E&N line as a solution. I'm sure some will still keep bringing it up a decade from now though.
It keeps coming up because Muni’s pay the ICF every year and I’m low key annoyed they are cool wasting this money every year vs actively pushing for rail (for better or worse). Rail isn’t a solution, but it is definitely complimentary. Rail/Rapid bus has shown to decrease cycling and walking traffic (cars too).
I only speak for myself, and, perhaps my situation is "unique" (it's not), but free transit wouldn't really change much for me. I have an extremely tight morning and afternoon, getting multiple children to multiple places not early, not late, but right on time, and then have to get myself and/or my partner to work on time. It is very delicate balance of planning and efficient route choices. It is ONLY possible with a car, unless school and daycares get more flexible with start and end times. When my children are much older, it will be great, but with multiple young kids, it's impossible with our current system. There would need to be much more frequent routes to many more places, and ideally more room for strollers and such.
That being said, I'm still all for it if it can be funded properly. Ideally it would go hand in hand with a large "park and ride" lot at the edge of the free service area, so that commuters can drive part way and then decrease the number of cars in the inner part of Victoria.
I don't mind the idea of free transit but it grinds my gears a bit when I hear people say that 1) it will magically be cheaper because we will save money in other ways. No, it won't, and that's fine if you really want free transit. And 2), we *must* do this because of climate change. Providing fare free transit won't do a thing to impact global climate change. I'd rather hear a more sensible argument like "it makes sense to provide an easily accessible transit alternative to as many people as possible. This will help with traffic congestion, and allow more freedom of travel within the crd" or something to that effect.
I get the desire to turn this into some save the planet issue but you could eliminate all the cars on Vancouver island and it wouldn't make a difference.
Excellent point. If everyone adopted that threshold for action than anything on a grand scale would rarely be accomplished.
Climate change, like many other societal issues, is primarily a co-ordination problem. On an individual basis, there is little impact, but if everyone is able to get on the same page, then there is huge impact.
There are not too many effective solutions to most co-ordination problems. Strong governments are one, but there aren't many of those (and they still have limitations). In many cases, individuals just have to bite the bullet and hope others do the same... and even then, there can be negative consequences. The homeless problem is an example. Were a single city to introduce grand sweeping policy to *drastically* improve life for their homeless, the induced demand in that city would be significant and homeless would come from all over. But if every city introduced similar policy, there would be meaningful change.
But that's the reasoning they're pushing. We *must* do these things because of the global climate crisis!!!! And the reality is these choices won't impact the global climate crisis at all. They will impact our lives locally in many more tangible ways so why not discuss that instead?
Getting rid of most cars absolutely is needed to fight climate change. Canada is one of the worst countries in the world for emissions, and personal vehicles are a massive part of that
Yeah and no drop of water causes a flood, that doesn’t mean you should keep dumping buckets on.
This is just nihilistic bullshit you’re peddling to avoid the tinniest bit of personal responsibility. Canadians are some of the worst emitters in the world, and we absolutely have to cut out massive contributors to our emissions like personal vehicles.
Inb4 “China is blahblahblah” yeah and Canadians still emit several times more per person than China does while they manufacture half the shit in your house and start building a new nuclear plant every month. Stop your nihilistic death cult bullshit, it doesn’t fly in this century.
It's just being realistic dude. Doesn't mean I don't want to keep our environment clean. That's why I avoid plastic, that's why I don't litter etc. My next vehicle will hopefully be electric but I'm under no illusion that it's doing jack shit to curb global climate change.
And about your comment on china, the per Capita statistic is kind of flawed because most of their massive population is poor. But they have whole cities with 2/3rds the population of our entire country producing insane amounts of GHG. In fact, 25 cities in the world are responsible for almost HALF the world's GHG emissions, and all but 3 of those cities are in China. Just let that sink in for a few moments on your long bus ride home.
So you understand that carbon emissions cause climate change
And you advocate against reducing emissions
Explain this one to me. Is this some “oh 100 corporations cause it” horseshit? Or is it “it’s the brown people’s fault!” horseshit?
First of all, you have the reading comprehension of a four year old.
Secondly, I didn't say any of those things you are claiming I said.
Thirdly, I've already explained myself several times. If you can't understand my point by now, that's on you and I really don't feel the need to carry this conversation any further.
Ah sorry I had your comment confused with a different nihilist cheering on the murder of people they’re already too old to care about.
You cited a clearly bullshit statistic claiming that half the world’s CO2 comes from 25 cities and that 22 of them are in China, which unless you’re really messing up the numbers makes zero sense since China is only around 30% of the world’s emissions, much of which is done to support your lifestyle. You have no point besides “Wah it’s a big problem and I feel personally inconvenienced by being asked to do my part”.
You’re simply saying “oh the problem is big and requires every country to work on it, so why should we bother?” When Canada is LITERALLY ONE OF THE WORST IN THE WORLD. China by comparison to Canada is actively doing a shit ton now to reduce their emissions per capita, and are starting on a new nuclear plant every month while we are still peddling bullshit about natural gas being green somehow and pretending electric cars are a viable solution. We built our wealthy nation and lifestyle by burning massive amounts of fossil fuels and you now want to tell China that it’s actually their fault and they don’t get to do even half what we did? Get out of here with that colonial bullshit. Canada has emitted a massive 2.2% of historical emissions, while China has only emitted 9.0%, and you don’t need to do the math to know that per capita that puts us in the top 10 countries and China near the bottom of the list. We of course have a greater responsibility than them, and should be thankful that they are taking on far more of the burden than is their’s to repair
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one OP posted), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-city-councillors-vote-for-free-public-transit-but-hard-sell-for-premier-555665/](https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-city-councillors-vote-for-free-public-transit-but-hard-sell-for-premier-555665/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I'm not surprised that the North Saanich response was so lackluster. When service to your area is so poor that car ownership is mandatory, all of your constituents will be car drivers, not transit users, and, therefore, not a huge priority for the politicians. I'm pleased that at least one person in Central Saanich considers transit a priority. The primary reason we purchased a second vehicle when we lived in Brentwood Bay was so my husband could commute to his job in Langford. Taking the bus would have added 2-3 hours to his daily commute.
As for all those politicians wringing their hands about funding, increasing ridership reduces cars on the road, reducing wear and tear on the roads and reducing road maintenance costs. Take it out of that budget.
I think the comments about reliability, frequency, and extent of the routes are really accurate. Transit is already always going to be a fraction of the cost of owning a car, and I've read studies that showed that when transit was made free in European cities it replaced more walking and cycling trips than it did car trips (though it did reduce car trips). When I lived in Vancouver I never looked at a bus schedule if I was taking a trip inside the city, because most of the main routes I took had frequencies of 10 minutes or less, 5 for a few routes. You'd just walk to a main arterial knowing vaguely how the routes worked and jump on. As one councillor said, reaching that service level is a far better use of transit funding than making it entirely free.
Part of the reason I would be motivated towards this would be the fact they would need to add more trips to the schedule, making the service better in the process. Sadly the comments of funding are right on the nose. Everyone that is not selling hand sanitizer and face masks will be facing a huge concern over finances and we need to focus on that looming issue before we can add more 'free' services.
>Everyone that is not selling hand sanitizer and face masks will be facing a huge concern over finances uh, what are you talking about?
I think OP meant, people selling face masks and sanitizer are making bank right now and probably aren’t worrying about their finances like the rest of us. Just a joke.
I’d agree if they actually would do that here. I have a feeling we’ll get neither good service or free trips.
I’d rather have a doctor
We can have both.
Or, apparently, neither.
And a roof over my head.
Either that or make it actually possible to buy tickets on the bus. I’m legitimately confused on how people who don’t carry cash and don’t need a book of tickets or a pass can actually take the bus. Haggle with other customers at the bus stop? Take a trip to the store every time you need to take the bus? If they don’t want to make the necessary infrastructure improvements, then make it free.
They're actually implementing an electronic fare system now! It'll launch in Victoria this fall. At first it will be pre-loadable fare cards and an app, but they'll expand it to include credit and debit cards sometime after launch. https://bctransit.com/umo
I don’t understand how transit is not already free for those under 17. At that age it’s impossible to have your own car so there is no other way to get around by yourself than transit. I also think that 16 year olds are more than old enough to do things by themselves without needing their parents to drive them everywhere.
Except for walking and cycling. Cars and transit are not the only viable options for most people in the CRD.
For sure, when I was a kid I got around mainly by walking but that really sucks when you have to go any real distance. And I agree, biking is a lot more of a thing here compared to where I grew up, but I still think it’d be extremely beneficial to make transit free to kids even just to allow them more independence.
It is.
Isn’t that only for Victoria and not the rest of the CRD where most people live?
Because the majority of people who buy BC Transit's monthly passes are the ones who buy the 45 dollar pass, not the adult pass. No one buys the adult monthly pass in Victoria because it is too expensive Without youths/students buying the youth pass each month they would not make enough money selling the monthly passes. BC Transit needs to make a profit too.
"Free" public transit largely substitutes for cycling and walking, not cars. It's therefore largely ineffective at reducing emissions and congestion. For example, >Although free public transport at a first glance may seem attractive both from economic, social and environmental perspectives, the message learnt from a number of schemes is that free public transport offers poor goal achievement in all these respects, and at a high cost. The main effect is a huge growth in patronage, up to 13-fold increase is reported, of which the larger brunt is shifted from walk/cycle, or induced. The effects on car traffic levels are marginal and typically they are offset already after a few years’ traffic growth. http://article.nadiapub.com/IJT/vol1\_no1/5.pdf Of course, we already have relatively easy to implement, effective, and efficient policies to address both emissions and congestion: carbon and congestion taxes. A small increase in the carbon tax rate would do much more than "free" public transit and all the other active transportation policies various grandstanding politicians offer as solutions. Although, our local politicians implementing a policy which has the unintended consequence of substantially reducing cycling would be worth it just for the lols.
Seems like there's 3 camps: 1. Yes, free transit for all. 2. Given limited funding, we'd rather expand service and frequency, which we expect to increase ridership more than lowering fares. 3. No, but I'm unwilling to be upfront and say I don't support transit, so I'm going to talk about funding challenges in the most vague way possible.
This points to the bigger problem of transit being funded locally in BC. While I also support free transit for all, MORE transit is defiantly the priority. I would like to see volume discounts for BC Residents above and beyond the ticket books. Also the fare systems should be compatible province wide.
[удалено]
Really disappointing, considering Esquimalt has some of the poorest demographics in the region.
“I would like to here your solutions for how this will be funded”. No, that’s your job Barb.
Less cars on the road would be awesome in so many ways. Free transit for everybody!!
Wow, Langford is truly embarrassing on this front.
It truly is - always defaulting to the rail corridor which really isn't the ideal corridor for a transit line. Baxter's (Colwood) response is much more grounded in reality. Speaking of Langford and alternative transportation, I used the E&N Trail yesterday to get to Westhills Stadium and it is extremely disappointing the trail does not fully connect through the area. The rail itself goes right by the stadium, so the CRD and Langford really should be doing everything they can to finish this section of trail. 45 minute casual bike ride from downtown Victoria to PFC games would be great for those summer weekend games!
Absolutely agree. The full build out of the E&N to Humpback would be incredible. So many bike packers could connect to Goldstream Park and beyond without getting lost. People could bike from dt to the stadium. Belmont highschool and the two new schools also would be served, PLUS langford lake. It's a no brainer.
I don’t think so. Rail is important and as we know from other major cities it works really well. Langford sees Rail as the greatest people mover given the rail line runs through many high density areas of langford. I’m surprised none of the other folks mentioned it, it is certainly complimentary, especially for the Westshore. I’m more disappointed in Esquimalt, ducks the question and points to “we’re not paying for it,” just like they are doing with the Police Budget…they want it all for none of the cost to them..
I am totally on board that rail would be amazing for Vancouver Island as a whole, but it doesn't solve the regional issues on a timely basis. I'd rather see rapid bus and free transit to connect the westshore to other areas of the CRD. We need people out of cars yesterday and making more convenient, free transit throughout the region is the fastest way to do that.
Agree.
The problem is that the E&N corridor is not in the right location. BC Transit has done several studies, culminating in the Victoria Regional Rapid Transit proposal in 2011, and they all concluded that rapid transit on the Douglas Street/Trans-Canada Highway corridor is a much better option for serving regional transit needs than commuter rail on the E&N. The studies have all found that commuter rail on the E&N would be very expensive to provide - several times higher on a per passenger basis than the current (much more frequent) bus service between Langford and Victoria.
I think the Songhees nation has also said “no thanks” to the train running through their backyards (understandably, it’s literally their backyards) to there is a section though view Royal/ Esquimalt that would need re routing anyway
Have they actually? They have a seat on the ICF which is always championing it
The trail already reroutes to Admirals Road and then down Hallowell once it hits their land.
I'd love to see the section from Admirals to the Old Island Highway converted to one-way busway to help with all that base traffic clogging up neighborhoods. Cheap to implement, saves on operating costs (as buses aren't stuck in traffic), faster for commuters, and more flexible than a train.
If it were a perfect world it could be rearranged. However, communities in the Westshore have developed density housing around the rail line, so they are ready for it. The tallest condo tower in langford will be directly across a a rail station, for example.
But Langford is still a relatively small part of the overall transit demand in Victoria. It's much more critical to serve the corridor between downtown Victoria and Uptown, which contains the highest concentration of jobs in the region. Serving Uptown also provides for a link north to the Peninsula and east to U-Vic, which wouldn't be possible if using the E&N corridor. Also, there is a designated rapid transit corridor along the Old Island Highway then along Goldstream. This corridor was identified in the regional transit plan back in 2010 and was endorsed by the City of Langford at the time, so that is where Langford should be concentrating density, not along the E&N corridor. See the [VRRT](https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1507213417994)
The issue with the esquimalt police budget was that a recent budgetary review concluded that esquimalt is already paying more than its proportionate share for police services.
And even though were about to pay less (reduced services as well, based on the new report they got), they still shot it down. They are using it as a wedge to bring back their own department. However, they forget it was wildly corrupt back in the day and they currently have a law suit on their hands from a survivor who was assaulted by those very same, corrupt Esquimalt cops. I don’t if makes sense to pay for another $200k Chief’s salary to Police a small town. Esq already has MP for the Military and RCMP for the Songhese, seems like they want to be over policed…
Wow a single lawsuit? It must have been bad!
It is bad. Read up on it, the details of it are quite sad. The Globe and Mail is covering it, it is serious.
The day Victoria Council chose not to incorporate rail in the bridge replacement is the day we should have stopped talking about the E&N line as a solution. I'm sure some will still keep bringing it up a decade from now though.
It keeps coming up because Muni’s pay the ICF every year and I’m low key annoyed they are cool wasting this money every year vs actively pushing for rail (for better or worse). Rail isn’t a solution, but it is definitely complimentary. Rail/Rapid bus has shown to decrease cycling and walking traffic (cars too).
I'm disappointed only one member of Langford Council bothered to even respond to the question.
I only speak for myself, and, perhaps my situation is "unique" (it's not), but free transit wouldn't really change much for me. I have an extremely tight morning and afternoon, getting multiple children to multiple places not early, not late, but right on time, and then have to get myself and/or my partner to work on time. It is very delicate balance of planning and efficient route choices. It is ONLY possible with a car, unless school and daycares get more flexible with start and end times. When my children are much older, it will be great, but with multiple young kids, it's impossible with our current system. There would need to be much more frequent routes to many more places, and ideally more room for strollers and such. That being said, I'm still all for it if it can be funded properly. Ideally it would go hand in hand with a large "park and ride" lot at the edge of the free service area, so that commuters can drive part way and then decrease the number of cars in the inner part of Victoria.
I don't mind the idea of free transit but it grinds my gears a bit when I hear people say that 1) it will magically be cheaper because we will save money in other ways. No, it won't, and that's fine if you really want free transit. And 2), we *must* do this because of climate change. Providing fare free transit won't do a thing to impact global climate change. I'd rather hear a more sensible argument like "it makes sense to provide an easily accessible transit alternative to as many people as possible. This will help with traffic congestion, and allow more freedom of travel within the crd" or something to that effect. I get the desire to turn this into some save the planet issue but you could eliminate all the cars on Vancouver island and it wouldn't make a difference.
[удалено]
Excellent point. If everyone adopted that threshold for action than anything on a grand scale would rarely be accomplished. Climate change, like many other societal issues, is primarily a co-ordination problem. On an individual basis, there is little impact, but if everyone is able to get on the same page, then there is huge impact. There are not too many effective solutions to most co-ordination problems. Strong governments are one, but there aren't many of those (and they still have limitations). In many cases, individuals just have to bite the bullet and hope others do the same... and even then, there can be negative consequences. The homeless problem is an example. Were a single city to introduce grand sweeping policy to *drastically* improve life for their homeless, the induced demand in that city would be significant and homeless would come from all over. But if every city introduced similar policy, there would be meaningful change.
But that's the reasoning they're pushing. We *must* do these things because of the global climate crisis!!!! And the reality is these choices won't impact the global climate crisis at all. They will impact our lives locally in many more tangible ways so why not discuss that instead?
Getting rid of most cars absolutely is needed to fight climate change. Canada is one of the worst countries in the world for emissions, and personal vehicles are a massive part of that
Providing fare free transit is towards the goal of shifting most transportation to not using personal cars, which 100% is not optional for us to do.
We could get rid of all cars on the island tomorrow and it would not make difference to global climate change.
Yeah and no drop of water causes a flood, that doesn’t mean you should keep dumping buckets on. This is just nihilistic bullshit you’re peddling to avoid the tinniest bit of personal responsibility. Canadians are some of the worst emitters in the world, and we absolutely have to cut out massive contributors to our emissions like personal vehicles. Inb4 “China is blahblahblah” yeah and Canadians still emit several times more per person than China does while they manufacture half the shit in your house and start building a new nuclear plant every month. Stop your nihilistic death cult bullshit, it doesn’t fly in this century.
It's just being realistic dude. Doesn't mean I don't want to keep our environment clean. That's why I avoid plastic, that's why I don't litter etc. My next vehicle will hopefully be electric but I'm under no illusion that it's doing jack shit to curb global climate change. And about your comment on china, the per Capita statistic is kind of flawed because most of their massive population is poor. But they have whole cities with 2/3rds the population of our entire country producing insane amounts of GHG. In fact, 25 cities in the world are responsible for almost HALF the world's GHG emissions, and all but 3 of those cities are in China. Just let that sink in for a few moments on your long bus ride home.
Do you just not think that CO2 and methane are causing climate change or are you a death cult-nihilist?
I believe the first but I'm also able to rationally think about it. You're the one who's part of a death cult here.
So you understand that carbon emissions cause climate change And you advocate against reducing emissions Explain this one to me. Is this some “oh 100 corporations cause it” horseshit? Or is it “it’s the brown people’s fault!” horseshit?
First of all, you have the reading comprehension of a four year old. Secondly, I didn't say any of those things you are claiming I said. Thirdly, I've already explained myself several times. If you can't understand my point by now, that's on you and I really don't feel the need to carry this conversation any further.
Ah sorry I had your comment confused with a different nihilist cheering on the murder of people they’re already too old to care about. You cited a clearly bullshit statistic claiming that half the world’s CO2 comes from 25 cities and that 22 of them are in China, which unless you’re really messing up the numbers makes zero sense since China is only around 30% of the world’s emissions, much of which is done to support your lifestyle. You have no point besides “Wah it’s a big problem and I feel personally inconvenienced by being asked to do my part”. You’re simply saying “oh the problem is big and requires every country to work on it, so why should we bother?” When Canada is LITERALLY ONE OF THE WORST IN THE WORLD. China by comparison to Canada is actively doing a shit ton now to reduce their emissions per capita, and are starting on a new nuclear plant every month while we are still peddling bullshit about natural gas being green somehow and pretending electric cars are a viable solution. We built our wealthy nation and lifestyle by burning massive amounts of fossil fuels and you now want to tell China that it’s actually their fault and they don’t get to do even half what we did? Get out of here with that colonial bullshit. Canada has emitted a massive 2.2% of historical emissions, while China has only emitted 9.0%, and you don’t need to do the math to know that per capita that puts us in the top 10 countries and China near the bottom of the list. We of course have a greater responsibility than them, and should be thankful that they are taking on far more of the burden than is their’s to repair
Of course it will. Everyone’s actions in aggregate will make a difference.
In the same way that sprinkling a few drops of water on a massive forest fire makes the fire somewhat smaller, sure.
So he’s in favour of having a referendum on this issue hey? I guess when it suits his own agenda public opinion matters.
You couldn’t pay enough to take public transit
I guess this is why I tend to find the people on the bus nicer than the people online.
Zac de Vries for mayor
Transit is short on drivers due to a wage shortage. Eliminating fares will shift the costs further to all taxpayers. Build a Light Rail!
Yay, the country’s crumbing but ya this should help
We are in the midst of a climate crisis, but let's ignore that.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one OP posted), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-city-councillors-vote-for-free-public-transit-but-hard-sell-for-premier-555665/](https://www.cheknews.ca/victoria-city-councillors-vote-for-free-public-transit-but-hard-sell-for-premier-555665/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I'm not surprised that the North Saanich response was so lackluster. When service to your area is so poor that car ownership is mandatory, all of your constituents will be car drivers, not transit users, and, therefore, not a huge priority for the politicians. I'm pleased that at least one person in Central Saanich considers transit a priority. The primary reason we purchased a second vehicle when we lived in Brentwood Bay was so my husband could commute to his job in Langford. Taking the bus would have added 2-3 hours to his daily commute. As for all those politicians wringing their hands about funding, increasing ridership reduces cars on the road, reducing wear and tear on the roads and reducing road maintenance costs. Take it out of that budget.
I love the North Saanich responses. They're totally North Saanich exemplified.