Grand River Transit

[ac3r]

That bus looks like it's a prop from a science fiction film or something. Pretty cool looking!

[bgb_ca]

Looks like the reduced (Senior/Child) fare is going bye bye as of July 1st, being replaced with their Affordable Transit Program.

https://www.grt.ca/Modules/News/index.as...b175b042cf&feedId=bbee2b8e-91b6-4696-8c3d-481dbf28de8e,24b9d7cd-762a-4496-ad74-4e816cb9adc8,d23e5a74-6488-4978-9740-594267f59ea8,38cb3425-641c-49a2-a83b-f03081ea8431,31820c97-a4b0-4704-ab8b-7c088247077a,69a9e0f5-98d5-4bcc-8f1e-5537cb4c997b

[jeffster]

Looks like the reduced (Senior/Child) fare is going bye bye as of July 1st, being replaced with their Affordable Transit Program.

https://www.grt.ca/Modules/News/index.as...37cb4c997b

This has to the be the stupidest thing they have come up with. Many parents with high school students aren't rolling in cash, yet the cut-off is ridiculously low. Imagine, this stupid region considers a family of 4 earning $37,000 as rich.

Further to that, you brought in your widowed parent who still likes to get around? No more discounts, as your family is rich.

The region should steal Scotia Banks Moto "You're richer than you think!".

Not overly surprised considering who our regional chair is.

I am OK with subsidizing those who can't afford it, but for some families, getting a second car might be a cheaper option than buying passes.

[danbrotherston]

Looks like the reduced (Senior/Child) fare is going bye bye as of July 1st, being replaced with their Affordable Transit Program.

https://www.grt.ca/Modules/News/index.as...37cb4c997b

This has to the be the stupidest thing they have come up with. Many parents with high school students aren't rolling in cash, yet the cut-off is ridiculously low. Imagine, this stupid region considers a family of 4 earning $37,000 as rich.

Further to that, you brought in your widowed parent who still likes to get around? No more discounts, as your family is rich.

The region should steal Scotia Banks Moto "You're richer than you think!".

Not overly surprised considering who our regional chair is.

I am OK with subsidizing those who can't afford it, but for some families, getting a second car might be a cheaper option than buying passes.

I do think more targeted fare programs make sense. Some seniors are well off, and don't need a subsidy.

I agree that the cut off is way too low, but they do that to limit the cost of the program.

I agree with the sentiment though...our region is very big on the "fake progressive" liberal situation. We should have broader more significant subsidies for those who struggle to afford transit.

I do disagree though, there is no situation where a family will get a second car for less than transit...the adult pass is 90 per month or 1080 per year...even if you got a free car, insurance plus gas will be more than that. There are plenty of folks who might choose to own a car even though it is more expensive, but that decision will not be financially motivated.

[ijmorlan]

I do disagree though, there is no situation where a family will get a second car for less than transit...the adult pass is 90 per month or 1080 per year...even if you got a free car, insurance plus gas will be more than that. There are plenty of folks who might choose to own a car even though it is more expensive, but that decision will not be financially motivated.

But remember that in this area, a car is worth much more than transit (assuming a free driver is available).

For a family of 5, those passes would add up to $5400 per year, which might be into the range of covering a basic used vehicle and which regardless is a substantial fraction of any lower income person’s income. I agree that seniors as a class don’t need a discount; the seniors for whom such a policy is designed should be covered by a non-age-specific program (well, actually I think there should be a guaranteed annual income and no special programs to make things cheap for poor people, but that’s another story).

Kids are another matter. Don’t they know that you need to get your clients hooked early?

[danbrotherston]

I do disagree though, there is no situation where a family will get a second car for less than transit...the adult pass is 90 per month or 1080 per year...even if you got a free car, insurance plus gas will be more than that. There are plenty of folks who might choose to own a car even though it is more expensive, but that decision will not be financially motivated.

But remember that in this area, a car is worth much more than transit (assuming a free driver is available).

For a family of 5, those passes would add up to $5400 per year, which might be into the range of covering a basic used vehicle and which regardless is a substantial fraction of any lower income person’s income. I agree that seniors as a class don’t need a discount; the seniors for whom such a policy is designed should be covered by a non-age-specific program (well, actually I think there should be a guaranteed annual income and no special programs to make things cheap for poor people, but that’s another story).

Kids are another matter. Don’t they know that you need to get your clients hooked early? 

Transit passes and especially tickets can be shared. If this is a second car for occasional use--even by various people, then a single transit pass, or a bunch of tickets will serve the same purpose.

If all these people need daily access to transportation, then they would also EACH need their own car, so it would also be five times as expensive as a single car.

If some of them are kids, then frankly the value of having them be able to get around on their own without being dependent on their parents would exceed the value of a car.

That being said, I wonder what the age is that people around here would start calling the police upon seeing a child on their own.

[jeffster]

This has to the be the stupidest thing they have come up with. Many parents with high school students aren't rolling in cash, yet the cut-off is ridiculously low. Imagine, this stupid region considers a family of 4 earning $37,000 as rich.

Further to that, you brought in your widowed parent who still likes to get around? No more discounts, as your family is rich.

The region should steal Scotia Banks Moto "You're richer than you think!".

Not overly surprised considering who our regional chair is.

I am OK with subsidizing those who can't afford it, but for some families, getting a second car might be a cheaper option than buying passes.

I do think more targeted fare programs make sense. Some seniors are well off, and don't need a subsidy.

I agree that the cut off is way too low, but they do that to limit the cost of the program.

I agree with the sentiment though...our region is very big on the "fake progressive" liberal situation. We should have broader more significant subsidies for those who struggle to afford transit.

I do disagree though, there is no situation where a family will get a second car for less than transit...the adult pass is 90 per month or 1080 per year...even if you got a free car, insurance plus gas will be more than that. There are plenty of folks who might choose to own a car even though it is more expensive, but that decision will not be financially motivated.

The problem with the limit is that it is way too low. As I said, $37,000/year for a family of 4, for example, is close to poverty. So if they have a couple school aged children, this is an additional $300/year (if 10 months). While that doesn't seem like a lot, for those already struggling to pay for this service and make ends meet, it is a lot of money.

Though personally, for kids that are borderline too close for the yellow bus, yet too far to walk it every day, even the old rate was too much. I took the bus to high school for 4 years, and I am trying not to date myself, but according to the inflation calculator, my cost was either $25/month or $45/month in 2021 dollars.

Should be noted, that those who can afford university, still have a $96 pass that's good for 4 months (though Conestoga is $300). It's a regressive system that attacks the lower middle and middle class.

We now have a system that the smartest and richest get the cheapest rate, while the absolute poorest get a bit of a discount (though still 100% more expensive than a U-Pass) and an f-u to everyone else including the college kids who are in college likely because university is too costly. What an ass backwards region. What the hell. Oh, and if you qualify because you work for a corporation that is part of TravelWise, you too get a discount, but go screw yourself if you work in a crappy factory or at ShortStop. Those corporate people can actually AFFORD to pay full fare, I should know, as I work for one.

Also, I think it's disgusting that in this day and age the region is asking for income verification. Yes, RoW, people really want to show you how poor they are, how they have a shitty job, and how stupid they are because they can't get a job that pays more than $15/hour. Yet they have enough honour and self-worth to at least try to work FT to support their family on $40G a year. What a bunch of ignorant assholes working for the region. Totally disconnected from reality. Wow. Give your ratepayer some dignity. It's one thing to confirm ODSP, OW, or that you fought in WW2 or Iraq or wherever, but confirming that you're poor is just so out of touch. I just can't imagine how embarrassing it will be for low income earners collecting tax information from all members of the household to prove that they're piss poor.

Man, why am I so pissed off with this? It's not like it affects me... but I see this as being so wrong on so many levels. But I am sure brainiacs that are better than the rest of us think this is a terrific idea, and people like me have zero clue what we're talking about.

[danbrotherston]

I do think more targeted fare programs make sense. Some seniors are well off, and don't need a subsidy.

I agree that the cut off is way too low, but they do that to limit the cost of the program.

I agree with the sentiment though...our region is very big on the "fake progressive" liberal situation. We should have broader more significant subsidies for those who struggle to afford transit.

I do disagree though, there is no situation where a family will get a second car for less than transit...the adult pass is 90 per month or 1080 per year...even if you got a free car, insurance plus gas will be more than that. There are plenty of folks who might choose to own a car even though it is more expensive, but that decision will not be financially motivated.

The problem with the limit is that it is way too low. As I said, $37,000/year for a family of 4, for example, is close to poverty. So if they have a couple school aged children, this is an additional $300/year (if 10 months). While that doesn't seem like a lot, for those already struggling to pay for this service and make ends meet, it is a lot of money.

Though personally, for kids that are borderline too close for the yellow bus, yet too far to walk it every day, even the old rate was too much. I took the bus to high school for 4 years, and I am trying not to date myself, but according to the inflation calculator, my cost was either $25/month or $45/month in 2021 dollars.

Should be noted, that those who can afford university, still have a $96 pass that's good for 4 months (though Conestoga is $300). It's a regressive system that attacks the lower middle and middle class.

We now have a system that the smartest and richest get the cheapest rate, while the absolute poorest get a bit of a discount (though still 100% more expensive than a U-Pass) and an f-u to everyone else including the college kids who are in college likely because university is too costly. What an ass backwards region. What the hell. Oh, and if you qualify because you work for a corporation that is part of TravelWise, you too get a discount, but go screw yourself if you work in a crappy factory or at ShortStop. Those corporate people can actually AFFORD to pay full fare, I should know, as I work for one.

Also, I think it's disgusting that in this day and age the region is asking for income verification. Yes, RoW, people really want to show you how poor they are, how they have a shitty job, and how stupid they are because they can't get a job that pays more than $15/hour. Yet they have enough honour and self-worth to at least try to work FT to support their family on $40G a year. What a bunch of ignorant assholes working for the region. Totally disconnected from reality. Wow. Give your ratepayer some dignity. It's one thing to confirm ODSP, OW, or that you fought in WW2 or Iraq or wherever, but confirming that you're poor is just so out of touch. I just can't imagine how embarrassing it will be for low income earners collecting tax information from all members of the household to prove that they're piss poor.

Man, why am I so pissed off with this? It's not like it affects me... but I see this as being so wrong on so many levels. But I am sure brainiacs that are better than the rest of us think this is a terrific idea, and people like me have zero clue what we're talking about.

Two things here...one, you are making assumptions about the wealth of university students, assumptions which are not justified in all cases.

Second, the UPass is not a government subsidy, it is a student subsidy. Students who don't ride transit (perhaps because they are wealthy and can afford a car) subsidize students who cannot afford a car. Students are subsidized by other students.

It's a program that the STUDENTS voted on, and Conestoga also had the opportunity to vote on. Mind you, they eventually did support it, but not in time not to get fucked over by our shitty provincial government.

And for travelwise, I agree those people are unlikely to need a transit subsidy, I am curious though, I am unsure how that program is funded, if workplaces are funding it, then that's perfectly fine, a workplace can (and should) choose to subsidize transit for their employees.

As for means testing, I have no real problem with it. I'd rather we live in a society with a guaranteed basic income, but that isn't the reality we have right now, and given that our government is unwilling to fund transit like they fund roads, and there are limited dollars to spend and a reasonable means testing makes those dollars go farther, those who need them get them, and those who don't help fund our transit service.

But I'm not sure why you are seeming to take this personally. I see nothing wrong with getting upset about injustices in the world that don't affect you, it's the definition of empathy. I just don't happen to think this is a particularly significant one.

That being said, as I said, I agree, the limits are far too low.

[ijmorlan]

By the way, is it really the case that the program gives people with income less than a certain number a fixed percentage off, and those with income perhaps $1/year more no discount? If so that is disgusting. Don’t these people understand the concept of marginal tax rates? If the program started phasing out at the specified limits and finished phasing out at double the limits it would be at least defensible even if not ideal.

[jeffster]

By the way, is it really the case that the program gives people with income less than a certain number a fixed percentage off, and those with income perhaps $1/year more no discount? If so that is disgusting. Don’t these people understand the concept of marginal tax rates? If the program started phasing out at the specified limits and finished phasing out at double the limits it would be at least defensible even if not ideal.

It literally a cut-off. If you made $1 more, you go from a discount to full price.

[jeffster]

The problem with the limit is that it is way too low. As I said, $37,000/year for a family of 4, for example, is close to poverty. So if they have a couple school aged children, this is an additional $300/year (if 10 months). While that doesn't seem like a lot, for those already struggling to pay for this service and make ends meet, it is a lot of money.

Though personally, for kids that are borderline too close for the yellow bus, yet too far to walk it every day, even the old rate was too much. I took the bus to high school for 4 years, and I am trying not to date myself, but according to the inflation calculator, my cost was either $25/month or $45/month in 2021 dollars.

Should be noted, that those who can afford university, still have a $96 pass that's good for 4 months (though Conestoga is $300). It's a regressive system that attacks the lower middle and middle class.

We now have a system that the smartest and richest get the cheapest rate, while the absolute poorest get a bit of a discount (though still 100% more expensive than a U-Pass) and an f-u to everyone else including the college kids who are in college likely because university is too costly. What an ass backwards region. What the hell. Oh, and if you qualify because you work for a corporation that is part of TravelWise, you too get a discount, but go screw yourself if you work in a crappy factory or at ShortStop. Those corporate people can actually AFFORD to pay full fare, I should know, as I work for one.

Also, I think it's disgusting that in this day and age the region is asking for income verification. Yes, RoW, people really want to show you how poor they are, how they have a shitty job, and how stupid they are because they can't get a job that pays more than $15/hour. Yet they have enough honour and self-worth to at least try to work FT to support their family on $40G a year. What a bunch of ignorant assholes working for the region. Totally disconnected from reality. Wow. Give your ratepayer some dignity. It's one thing to confirm ODSP, OW, or that you fought in WW2 or Iraq or wherever, but confirming that you're poor is just so out of touch. I just can't imagine how embarrassing it will be for low income earners collecting tax information from all members of the household to prove that they're piss poor.

Man, why am I so pissed off with this? It's not like it affects me... but I see this as being so wrong on so many levels. But I am sure brainiacs that are better than the rest of us think this is a terrific idea, and people like me have zero clue what we're talking about.

Two things here...one, you are making assumptions about the wealth of university students, assumptions which are not justified in all cases.

Second, the UPass is not a government subsidy, it is a student subsidy. Students who don't ride transit (perhaps because they are wealthy and can afford a car) subsidize students who cannot afford a car. Students are subsidized by other students.

It's a program that the STUDENTS voted on, and Conestoga also had the opportunity to vote on. Mind you, they eventually did support it, but not in time not to get fucked over by our shitty provincial government.

And for travelwise, I agree those people are unlikely to need a transit subsidy, I am curious though, I am unsure how that program is funded, if workplaces are funding it, then that's perfectly fine, a workplace can (and should) choose to subsidize transit for their employees.

As for means testing, I have no real problem with it. I'd rather we live in a society with a guaranteed basic income, but that isn't the reality we have right now, and given that our government is unwilling to fund transit like they fund roads, and there are limited dollars to spend and a reasonable means testing makes those dollars go farther, those who need them get them, and those who don't help fund our transit service.

But I'm not sure why you are seeming to take this personally. I see nothing wrong with getting upset about injustices in the world that don't affect you, it's the definition of empathy. I just don't happen to think this is a particularly significant one.

That being said, as I said, I agree, the limits are far too low.

I did not know that about University, but I don’t know the details. I only knew about Conestoga having a much higher rate.

As for TravelWise, I’m not sure if it is subsidized by the employer. That said, being the amount of government workers that can use this service (the cities, the region, the libraries, for example), that subsidy is going to be paid by taxpayers either way.

As for means testing, the approach is all wrong, and very old school and ass backwards. For example, the GST credit and Trillium are all means tested. However, as a taxpayer, you’re not having to do any work for that extra cash, if you qualify. It’s automatic. The household income testing for the GRT, is wrong because you need to collect tax information from all members of the family, you need to highlight take-home pay for all members, and you need to ensure them that you’re living well below the poverty level. This is what makes it wrong.

Take a single senior, for example: the cutoff is $18,900, any senior that worked at all (even for a year or two) won’t qualify for transit: OAS and GIS maximums (low income seniors) is already $18,500, this is the least amount of money you can get. If you receive $90 in CPP, some of GIS will be taken away, and likely leave you with an income around $19,000/year. What I saying is, the only seniors that might qualify are those that came to Canada and don’t qualify for much or any OAS, GIS and CPP. If you were born and raised in Canada, you won’t get this transit discount.

The region needs to look at how they can get young riders to use the transit, and cheap transit is one way. If you’re a student, and even taking a yellow bus, give them a ride for $1.50 or less, so when they are done with school, they are more inclined to us a bus, rather than buy a car. Get them hooked at a young age.

[tomh009]

Take a single senior, for example: the cutoff is $18,900, any senior that worked at all (even for a year or two) won’t qualify for transit: OAS and GIS maximums (low income seniors) is already $18,500, this is the least amount of money you can get. If you receive $90 in CPP, some of GIS will be taken away, and likely leave you with an income around $19,000/year.  What I saying is, the only seniors that might qualify are those that came to Canada and don’t qualify for much or any OAS, GIS and CPP. If you were born and raised in Canada, you won’t get this transit discount.

The region needs to look at how they can get young riders to use the transit, and cheap transit is one way. If you’re a student, and even taking a yellow bus, give them a ride for $1.50 or less, so when they are done with school, they are more inclined to us a bus, rather than buy a car. Get them hooked at a young age.

Yes, basically the program gives a 50% discount to seniors who are living on OAS+GIS only (or equivalent), and none to ones who have substantial other income. Currently all seniors get a 16.7% discount on the monthly passes. While the cutoff is too low it's still far better than the current reduced fare system. A graduated approach to the discounts would be better but I think to make this work the region would need to get the income data from CRA as a manual system gets way too complex. Maybe they are working on this? Or maybe CRA won't do it as a matter of policy? Don't know.

Current student pass is $75, or around $0.90/ride assuming you ONLY use it for getting to school and back. The future discounted pass is about $0.55/ride, and the undiscounted still not much over a dollar. If you're looking at a few-times-a-month usage scenario, the discounted fare (with the card) is $1.49, which meets your criteria.

Overall, moving to this system is the right direction. Hopefully, with experience, it can be expanded and improved in the future.

[ijmorlan]

By the way, is it really the case that the program gives people with income less than a certain number a fixed percentage off, and those with income perhaps $1/year more no discount? If so that is disgusting. Don’t these people understand the concept of marginal tax rates? If the program started phasing out at the specified limits and finished phasing out at double the limits it would be at least defensible even if not ideal.

It literally a cut-off. If you made $1 more, you go from a discount to full price.

Contemptible. It shouldn’t even be legal to operate a program like that (although even with each individual program phasing out in an apparently-reasonable way, it’s still possible for the overall effect to be unacceptable).

[Acitta]

Take a single senior, for example: the cutoff is $18,900, any senior that worked at all (even for a year or two) won’t qualify for transit: OAS and GIS maximums (low income seniors) is already $18,500, this is the least amount of money you can get. If you receive $90 in CPP, some of GIS will be taken away, and likely leave you with an income around $19,000/year.  What I saying is, the only seniors that might qualify are those that came to Canada and don’t qualify for much or any OAS, GIS and CPP. If you were born and raised in Canada, you won’t get this transit discount.

I am on CPP-OAS and am less than 2500 over the cutoff.

[tomh009]

It literally a cut-off. If you made $1 more, you go from a discount to full price.

Contemptible. It shouldn’t even be legal to operate a program like that (although even with each individual program phasing out in an apparently-reasonable way, it’s still possible for the overall effect to be unacceptable).

It's one more step than today. And one more step than with property taxes. If today's scheme isn't illegal, I don't see why this should be.

I suspect the real problem here is the challenge with the access to income data: without it, it's really hard to do graduated discounts effectively.

While it's far from perfect, this is still much better than the current scheme, at least in my bopinion.