Anonymous wrote:I am sorry but I cannot even compare the DC metro with other better connected cities. Having lived in NYC for several years and visited Europe frequently, the Metro doesn't even come close. It is more of a commuter/light rail train compared to those systems; good for shuffling suburbanites in and out of the city for work, but not much else. The stations are so far apart is basically useless for daily local travel within the city. Public transit is supposed to be a fast, reliable and affordable alternative to driving. Sadly In this area, it is often cheaper and faster to drive depending on where you are going and the time of day.

So true. I live downtown and I never take the metro. It doesn't get me anywhere. I take the bus if I need to go somewhere, or I walk. If I can't bus or walk - fuck it.

The point is, she apparently wants to take away metro workers' health and pension benefits, which she finds "sickening."

If by "pension escalation" you mean more rapid accrual near retirement, no, this generally isn't going away for public sector workers. If you mean COLAs, I think they are a good thing, but again I'm not aware of states or the Feds dropping these except for some temporary hiatuses, like with the Feds. What is happening is higher worker contribution rates.

I think you nailed it. Not only does she want to take away the salaries, health and pension benefits (busting unions would not-so-coincidentally help with this), she wants her heroes on the Supreme Court to reverse "Obamacare" so these workers will really be up the creek without the paddle. Then - at last - she'd feel like she was doing better than someone else.

Not the PP you're responding to, but this makes no sense. Metro employees have very generous health benefits, subsidized by taxpayers in DC, MD and VA. Obamacare isn't aimed at them.

The PP is over the top in her reflexive hatred of all things union. Let's try to be better than that, OK? There's no sense pretending rapidly escalating pension benefits (which are no longer the norm in the private sector, and are being phased out of public sector employment), the cost of healthcare, and the inability to address these issues due to the peculiarities of the interstate compact that created WMATA aren't significant factors in Metro's performance issues.

Anonymous wrote:What is sickening exactly?? I think these salaries are reasonable and comparable to other private sector positions. Do you just hate the fact that many making these salaries are minorities? Would you feel better if these employees were living at the poverty level so that you can feel superior?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb people here.
We live in a high cost of living area and even metro workers are entitled, yes entitled, to a living wage.
Too bad the north had the civil war to end slavery

When the skill level and educational requirements of a job is less than those of HIGHER skilled but the salaries of the lower skilled are equal are more than that of the higher, then there is a problem.

SICKING waste of money and these are 3 years old, I am sure they have gone up since then.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/5764/what-do-metro-employees-really-make/

I think you nailed it. Not only does she want to take away the salaries, health and pension benefits (busting unions would not-so-coincidentally help with this), she wants her heroes on the Supreme Court to reverse "Obamacare" so these workers will really be up the creek without the paddle. Then - at last - she'd feel like she was doing better than someone else.

What is sickening exactly?? I think these salaries are reasonable and comparable to other private sector positions. Do you just hate the fact that many making these salaries are minorities? Would you feel better if these employees were living at the poverty level so that you can feel superior?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dumb people here.
We live in a high cost of living area and even metro workers are entitled, yes entitled, to a living wage.
Too bad the north had the civil war to end slavery

When the skill level and educational requirements of a job is less than those of HIGHER skilled but the salaries of the lower skilled are equal are more than that of the higher, then there is a problem.

SICKING waste of money and these are 3 years old, I am sure they have gone up since then.

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/5764/what-do-metro-employees-really-make/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ahhh DC metro workers... Reverse discrimination at its finest!

Do you think if you keep posting this unverifiable cr@p, people will start to believe it? Cause it's not working.

1) Where did I ask anyone to believe me?

2) it's verified by myself, DH, and family who have been treated poorly for no reason on multiple occasions and I do not need to go any further into it

3) I'm posting MY experience and truthful reflection

You can disagree all you like... It does not mean I'm wrong for a majority of my experiences.

Folks, here's a ranking of US cities by population (2010). Metro is far from perfect but look at the cities that are comparable to DC, which is ranked 24th. Sure, NYC and Chicago have better transit systems but would you really want to rely on mass transit even to get to work in most of the other cities listed? Really, based on size of the metro area, we've got a a pretty good system. But I agree, it could be better.

Rank-City-Population (2010)
1-New York-8,175,133
2-Los Angeles-3,792,621
3-Chicago-2,695,598
4-Houston-2,099,451
5-Philadelphia-1,526,006
6-Phoenix-1,445,632
7-San Antonio-1,327,407
8-San Diego-1,307,402
9-Dallas-1,197,816
10-San Jose-945,942
11-Jacksonville-821,784
12-Indianapolis-820,445
13-San Francisco-805,235
14-Austin-790,390
15-Columbus-787,033
16-Fort Worth-741,206
17-Charlotte-731,424
18-Detroit-713,777
19-El Paso-649,121
20-Memphis-646,889
21-Baltimore-620,961
22-Boston-617,594
23-Seattle-608,660
24-Washington-601,723
25-Nashville-601,222
26-Denver-600,158
27-Louisville-597,337
28-Milwaukee-594,833
29-Portland-583,776
30-Las Vegas-583,756

Anonymous wrote:Ahhh DC metro workers... Reverse discrimination at its finest!

Do you think if you keep posting this unverifiable cr@p, people will start to believe it? Cause it's not working.

Hah! Rome not Romeo. Damn you, spell check!

Romeo's subway stations are miles, miles! apart, unless you use the tram, and I can't see trams working here. And have you checked out how dirty the London system is, except right around the tourist areas like Westminster? And dont get me started on DD's recent experience with thievery on tge London tube. Seriously, guys, it's not that bad here.

Ahhh DC metro workers... Reverse discrimination at its finest!

Anonymous wrote:I am sorry but I cannot even compare the DC metro with other better connected cities. Having lived in NYC for several years and visited Europe frequently, the Metro doesn't even come close. It is more of a commuter/light rail train compared to those systems; good for shuffling suburbanites in and out of the city for work, but not much else. The stations are so far apart is basically useless for daily local travel within the city. Public transit is supposed to be a fast, reliable and affordable alternative to driving. Sadly In this area, it is often cheaper and faster to drive depending on where you are going and the time of day.

I think it depends on where you live. We use metro to go out in the evening and weekends all the time but we live close in and right by a stop.

I ride Metro every day. In the past 5 years it has skipped my station exactly once. OK the escalators are broken a lot, but most of us don't mind walking. And the station managers have been uniformly nice.

This whining is silly and makes you look either like haters with another (eg union-bashing) agenda, or spoilt brats with a huge sense of entitlement. You need to stop exaggerating, and pull on your big-girl panties and deal with that 1/5 years station skip.

I am sorry but I cannot even compare the DC metro with other better connected cities. Having lived in NYC for several years and visited Europe frequently, the Metro doesn't even come close. It is more of a commuter/light rail train compared to those systems; good for shuffling suburbanites in and out of the city for work, but not much else. The stations are so far apart is basically useless for daily local travel within the city. Public transit is supposed to be a fast, reliable and affordable alternative to driving. Sadly In this area, it is often cheaper and faster to drive depending on where you are going and the time of day.

Haven't read all the posts yet but I noticed that some folks are making comparisons to other subway systems in huge cities. One thing that I find phenomenal is that for the size of the city, DC's metro is pretty extensive. The city's not really all that big and my guess is that comparably sized cities do not have as extensive a subway as we do in DC.