The news that got the Board’s attention was a cost increase from the 2023 estimate of $4 billion to somewhere between $5.1 and $5.6 billion. The bad news didn’t end there.
What is it with posting haters of the West Seattle rail project?
I would encourage readers, as I would for anyone reading anything, to do a quick background check on the author. He will show you who he is very quickly.
I worked in government and I think voices from across the spectrum is only a good thing when we sit down to figure out how to proceed. However, I don’t have to take that shit seriously once they retire and roll over to their think tank and shit all over process because they checked responsibility for outcomes at the door. I worked at public works and I rarely comment on the actual deliberations happening today cause it’s really hard to do when you’re there but really easy to shit on from the outside, like the author is.
But hey, conservative think tanks always paid the best for trashing the process. I wish I could have just sat my integrity aside to cash their checks. Libs don’t pay shit for it.
As for the author, my question is what in your piece went unexamined that would support a rail link and why did you choose to leave that part out? What is the strongest argument for the rail? What’s the second strongest? There have been many big rail projects that were called out for expense but ended up defining regions and positively transforming them. Would you have argued against those too?
These are the comments I look for when I link articles, especially if I don’t fully understand the topic at hand. Thank you for your insight!
Total be clear I’m in favor of more public transit than less. Our city was never meant to have this many people or cars on the road. If we can shift away from individuals in cars, that’s a huge win for Seattle.
For sure. I know you’re not the author. I’m stating that again in case there’s confusion for anyone else.
Man it used to piss me off when people would throw stones from outside. Like be involved, sure. That’s great.
But we’re in here with budgets and stakeholders tryna find a path forward that works that isn’t kicking the can and instead makes real decisions about the future of the city and when the fuckin answer is the same old tired ass conservative shit, man it’ll drive you crazy. You start dismissing them out of hand but that sucks because they’re your citizens too.
At least the libs had interesting positions. It was questions of fairness and justice and stuff like that.
It was always either No from conservatives because of money or kicking the can cause they want to say no but can’t for some reason.
My brothers and sisters in Christ when we get fuckin consent decreed and the feds break their whole foot off in our ass I promise the cost will be worse
What is it with posting haters of the West Seattle rail project?
I would encourage readers, as I would for anyone reading anything, to do a quick background check on the author. He will show you who he is very quickly.
I worked in government and I think voices from across the spectrum is only a good thing when we sit down to figure out how to proceed. However, I don’t have to take that shit seriously once they retire and roll over to their think tank and shit all over process because they checked responsibility for outcomes at the door. I worked at public works and I rarely comment on the actual deliberations happening today cause it’s really hard to do when you’re there but really easy to shit on from the outside, like the author is.
But hey, conservative think tanks always paid the best for trashing the process. I wish I could have just sat my integrity aside to cash their checks. Libs don’t pay shit for it.
As for the author, my question is what in your piece went unexamined that would support a rail link and why did you choose to leave that part out? What is the strongest argument for the rail? What’s the second strongest? There have been many big rail projects that were called out for expense but ended up defining regions and positively transforming them. Would you have argued against those too?
These are the comments I look for when I link articles, especially if I don’t fully understand the topic at hand. Thank you for your insight!
Total be clear I’m in favor of more public transit than less. Our city was never meant to have this many people or cars on the road. If we can shift away from individuals in cars, that’s a huge win for Seattle.
For sure. I know you’re not the author. I’m stating that again in case there’s confusion for anyone else.
Man it used to piss me off when people would throw stones from outside. Like be involved, sure. That’s great.
But we’re in here with budgets and stakeholders tryna find a path forward that works that isn’t kicking the can and instead makes real decisions about the future of the city and when the fuckin answer is the same old tired ass conservative shit, man it’ll drive you crazy. You start dismissing them out of hand but that sucks because they’re your citizens too.
At least the libs had interesting positions. It was questions of fairness and justice and stuff like that.
It was always either No from conservatives because of money or kicking the can cause they want to say no but can’t for some reason.
My brothers and sisters in Christ when we get fuckin consent decreed and the feds break their whole foot off in our ass I promise the cost will be worse
Sorry. Trauma dumping.