Wow. Apparently, I live in a $1.5 million home. So how does a semi-impoverished blogger like me afford a mansion like that? Well it all depends on how you The Seattle Times does the math.
Zillow.com “zestimates™” that the modest, South Seattle home I purchased ten years ago for $187K would now set you back a cool half-million bucks, but according to the math wizards at the Times, that number is completely meaningless. No, rather than using present day dollars to calculate the cost of my house — you know, the actual purchase price — the Times insists on valuing my home in terms of “year of expenditure” dollars, ie the principal borrowed plus every penny of interest over the course of the loan.
At least, that’s how the Times insists on calculating the cost of the light rail portion of the Roads and Transit package headed to the ballot this November. Rather than simply reporting the $10.8 billion price of the rail proposal, they insist on presenting a $30 billion price tag after 40 years of interest and inflation is worked in. Likewise, a half-million dollar mortgage at 7-percent would total about $1.5 million in principal and interest over the course of a 40-year loan. See how that works?
But of course, I don’t live in a $1.5 million house. I live in a half-million dollar house. That’s about what it would fetch on the open market, and that’s about what it would cost me to replace it with a comparable house in the same neighborhood. To claim my house is worth three times that price would be just plain silly. And misleading.
The same holds true of light rail.
What a silly argument. Perhaps the answer is to have all the taxpayers pony up the present value of the project, up front. That way the true cost of paying over time will be irrelevant, as is assumed by goldie.
It is easy to see why the left predicted the economy in 2004 would be worse thna the great depression. Economic illiteracy knows no bounds…
Repeat after me: a taxpayer-funded public transportation project is not the same as a mortgage. I can’t sell my share in a public transportation project if I want out (as with a home), and I certainly won’t watch the value of the project appreciate in any meaningful sense (as with a home).
When I bought my home, the list price was meaningful because I could have plunked it down right then and there and purchased the place. ST2’s “list” price (cost of construction) is not as meaningful, since the agency doesn’t even have the option of doing everything up-front.
Taxpayers will be funding roughly $30 billion over 40+ years. That is the actual cost to the public, and the cost by which ST2 should be measured. I’m not taking a pro or con position as regards ST2 (or Roads + Transit generally), but I can comfortably say that your financial methodology is terrible.
The cost over time in year of expenditure dollars *is* largely irrelevant, especially because of the way we’re paying for it.
Paying for infrastructure with a sales tax at a set percentage doesn’t yield the same amount of money every year. It typically yields more each year, because population increases, and because inflation makes the costs of the goods purchased go up as well (in addition to the incomes of those buying them).
“How much we’re paying” is a half cent on the dollar increase in the sales tax. “How much it costs” is 10.84 billion 2006 dollars for the infrastructure, plus 1.55 billion 2006 dollars for the first 20 years of operations.
Let’s frame this right: Sound Transit 2 will help create a long-term solution to our region’s transportation problems. Have you seen traffic lately? We need alternatives. This is the next step toward getting them.
joykiller:
Transportation infrastructure appreciates in value dramatically. What, do you think that when a piece of infrastructure is privatized, the sale price is the original cost?
Goldy,
Take the money and run! If you can sell the place for $1.8 million, do it and move to a cheap place to live!!
Roger Crappit @ 2
And when the conservatives predicted that the 1993 tax increase would be “a job-killer in the short-run” (Dick Armey), will “lead to a recession [and]…increase the deficit” (Newt Gingrich), “the deficit will be up” (Bob Packwood), would “stifl[e] growth” (Bob Dole), was that “economic illiteracy?
Because after all, tax revenues went up (even the WSJ admitted it was only half due to the tax hike), and by 2000 the budget was balanced, the national debt pricipal was paid down (a little) and conservatives were calling for interest rate hikes to slow down economic growth.
They got them (do you know how many hikes between 1999 and 2001), and the economy was strangled into the 2001 recession. Good fun was had by all.
But the conservatives are gifted economic seers, right?
joykiller @3,
You miss the point entirely. The average person doesn’t purchase items, calculating the amortized cost of the purchase, be it a house or a car or a fancy dinner on your credit card. They compare the relative values of items based on their actual purchase price. It is intentionally misleading to talk about almost any other purchase in terms of purchase price, but a light rail system in terms of year of expenditure dollars. It makes it impossible to do an apple to apple comparison.
Imagine you’re purchasing a car. One dealer says their car costs $25,000, and the other dealer says their’s costs $33,500. You’re going to assume the former is cheaper. But if the latter includes all taxes, fees and interest, they’re actually the same damn price. It would be impossible to make an informed decision if some cars are listed at MSRP, some at Dealer Invoice, and some a Dealer Invoice plus $500, plus taxes, fees, and interest payments over a 60-month loan.
It may or may not be more accurate to talk about year of expenditure, but it doesn’t better inform a public that is accustomed to comparing the relative value of expenditures in terms of purchase price.
Of course, if you pay out the term of your loan, you DO end up paying 1.5 million, which would be your total COST for the home.
Bye the way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyone else notice what happened to the SR16 commute when they INCREASED capacity?
Now if the RTID package was primarily concerned with BUILDING CAPACITY (translated as general purpose lanes for our liberal friends)rather than ultra high cost, low return transit….. We might have something to discuss.
Tacoma Narrows is proof positive that if planners were concerned with moving single occupancy vehicles, they would build more lanes. Of course that is NOT what the failed DOT or political philosophy is… Liberals are under the illusion that families want to live in Seattle, in high rise, dense urban housing, transit friendly environment….
The exodus to the subs from Seattle spells that myth out. Ditto the Seattle Schools.
If you want my vote, build roads.
I forgot to mention the 22.7 million NET jobs added during The Clinton administration, didn’t I? Silly of me.
RS @ 9
When you focus on moving people and not cars, the calculus changes.
Question 1: Do we use “year of expenditure” dollars when we vote on supporting school construction, parks, emergency services, or fire districts?
Question 2: How reliable are “year of expenditure” estimates? India is using up steel, China is doing the same with concrete. Who knows what labor costs will be due to health care. YOE is really “best guess”.
Capital investment should be listed as year *of* dollars.
@9
The way I read the RTID, it focuses on smoother major chokepoints in the region – with new lanes, smoother interchanges – AND road safety – rebuilding a 520 bridge that can’t withstand an earthquake.
It is impossible to build so many roads so you drive like there is no traffic – have you been to L.A?
Goldy, I think that RS @ 9 is correct that the cost of the project is what it costs, not what it’s worth. However, in an inflationary period, future dollars cost less to pay.
But Everything Else?: Constant dollars are an extremely useful way to look at costs.
13
I lived in LA for a while, and it made me realize that those who whine about traffic here have never seen any.
15
That’s what I’m saying. This is a balanced approach to a complex problem. If there was a silver bullet that would solve our traffic problems in the Puget Sound reason – people would do that…but there is no silver bullet.
And for those who think roads is a silver bullet – go to L.A.
I respectfully point out that the evidence is pretty compelling just a few miles south of Seattle.
Adding capacity clearly helped the commute, and ease congestion.
Right Stuff: What, exactly, are you claiming “eased congestion”?
@18 adding lanes.
17/18 Yeah…it’s such a bitch to drive there, it raises the average driver’s adrenaline level enough to overcome the worst case of hay fever.
When Dubya boasts about the “reduced” $250 billion annual deficit he’s saddling the next several generations with, he doesn’t tell you about the cost of all those years of debt service required to pay for the immense piles of money he’s borrowing from China and Japan.
It’s a damn-sight more than $250 billion, and that’s compounded on the huge deficits from his previous budgets. Dubya is an even bigger over-spender than St. Ronnie, and that’s saying a lot.
@5: When I sell my house, it will have (most likely) appreciated, and I will recognize a financial gain. The odds of ST selling off its assets are almost nil, and even if it did, I would recognize that gain indirectly at best. Rail projects are not houses.
@8: You’re right, people don’t talk about the cost of cars or appliances or electronics after taking into account inflation and financing costs (though perhaps they should). But we’re not comparing the cost of ST2 to the cost of a television, we’re comparing it to the cost of…not ST2.
Frankly, the most accurate way of valuing the cost of anything is to include the associated financing costs — how much cash is actually going out the door? But as I’ve pointed out, there are good reasons for homes and other consumer products to have a list price, because they can be purchased at that price up front. (They can also be re-sold or paid off early without incurring all financing costs.) ST2 cannot be completed up front, and the $10.8 billion figure doesn’t represent the true cost to the taxpayer.
I will concede, however, that the $30 billion figure is a bit misleading as well, as many people don’t realize it’s in year-of-expenditure dollars. The most meaningful figure, I think, would be an estimate that included all capital, construction, AND financing costs but was discounted back to 2007 dollars.
BTW…since whatever trollfuck posted the first comment in this thread chose to raise the Plame lawsuit dismissal, it turns out that….GUESS WHAT? The judge who did the dismissin’ is one John Bates. Dunno if he earned a “masters” degree (heh heh) but he’s a Bush appointee who was previously Ken Starr’s little errand boy in the Whitewater pers-uh, prosecution.
Move along, folks. Nothing here anyone with two brain cells to rub together wouldn’t have expected.
Yeah, what #’s 4 and 7 said.
Not really relevant, but Zillow has my house pegged at 440K. I could sell it for 325K. Zillow’s a we bit off the mark.
So called “conservatives” don’t know their ass from third base about what’s good for the economy, or for society in general.
Public transportation is a global imperative, and the only reason one doesn’t want to pay for it is because they don’t want to ride it. That makes them environmental criminals worthy of a vacation at Guantanamo.
You assholes who voted for George W. Bush can’t be taken seriously when you talk of economic matters. You’re all too happy to spend like there’s no tomorrow, as long as you hobby horse corporation profiteers from the expenditures.
Invest in something else. Like a brain transplant.
Now that we know what happened to Mike Webb, I guess I understand why none of you fucking hypocrites took me up on my idea to “Adopt a Looter” after Katrina took out Nawlins.
You sure talked a good story though…
@9
What on earth are you talking about?
The new Narrows Bridge has been open for less than a week, way too soon for anyone to make any claims of success or failure.
‘Oh and the new bridge is set up so that light rail can run on it.
@25
And you Liberals are all to happy to spend *everyone else’s* money to fund *your* little pet projects. Who the fuck made you God? Maybe I don’t want to ride the bus. If you don’t like it, move somewhere else.
@26
Katrina took out Nawlins and looters we allowed to run rampant because your boys didn’t do their jobs.
WASHINGTON In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans’ Superdome and overwhelm rescuers
http://www.editorandpublisher......1002114558
FartArt@23:
“Plame’s lawyers said from the beginning the suit would be a difficult case to make. Public officials normally are immune from such suits filed in connection with their jobs.”
Hmmm…? Why did you leave that tidbit out of your post?
ArtFarty@23:
“In this case, Bates said, Congress passed the Privacy Act to cover many of Plame’s claims. Courts have held that the Privacy Act cannot be used to hold government officials personally liable for damages in court.”
Wow… Whodathunkdat?
I’m still looking for GBS’ Merry Fitzmas.
Oh wait… That’s the blog thread line of Assie Voice.
@28
If I can use mass transit and my bike to get around that’s one less car you have to deal with(and I drive slow!) and less pollution we all have to breath. You still benefit from transit and bike path spending even if you don’t use them.
My tax dollars pay for all sorts of stuff that I think is stupid, but that you might like, the cross-base highway comes to mind.
@28
The PNW is a rather liberal place, why don’t you move instead.
-And you Liberals are all to happy to spend *everyone else’s* money to fund *your* little pet projects. Who the fuck made you God? Maybe I don’t want to ride the bus. If you don’t like it, move somewhere else. –
Thomas Jefferson misses the point. These taxes are not imposed by “the liberals”, they are imposed by the voters themselves.
If you’re going to use that screen name, kiddo, you had better start figuring out what the words “democracy” “elections” and “popular vote” mean.
Transit consistently polls higher than roads out here. Heck, it polls higher in the red regions of most western metropolitan areas (Dallas, Denver, Salt Lake come to mind)
There is only a small pocket of Sound Politics “we’re against everything” Libertarians left who spin this garbage. The rest of suburban America got on the train a long time ago.
Then there’s Right Stuff, who usually bases his opposition to transit on pure fiction. I could go on as to why his Tacoma Narrows example is an extremely poor one (except tolling WILL limit trips – ie, “social engineering”) as far as congestion relief goes. I’ll save that for the next time he comes out from under his rock.
PuddyBud above,
What the fuck???? Three posts in a row? The anti-Puddy troll who lives under the inter-tubes bridge to HorsesAss must have fallen asleep on the job!!!
Oh…wait…I forgot. That is just your little fantasy from another episode of PuddyWorld™.
#9 Right Stuff is correct. Build more roads, and drive more cars. Then build more roads, and then drive more cars, more roads, more cars. Heck, you can build an autobahn and 50,000 people can live in Ellensburg, and Cle Elum. We can triple our gasoline consumption. Yeee Hawwww!!!! Our military can handle all them ayrabs right? Killem all and take their oil. Why did God put all our oil under their sand right?
Mass transit is the only solution. The non retards understand this.
You think the 60% of Americans that are overweight would actually walk to a train station, or bus stop? Ain’t no way. We want our cake, and our global warming too. Where’s my Hummer, and my pickup truck!
Every American needs to pack on another 100 pounds too right?
Add in $10 a gallon gas, which is still less than burning a gallon costs society when adding cancer, and other diseases caused by exhaust, military costs, and environmental damage.
If it was a pain in the ass, and $50.00 to drive 50 miles to work every day, maybe Joe Escalade would move his would never walk more than a block fat ass closer to work, or a transit line.
Heck, who needs polar bears anyway!
We gotta subsidize all them oil companies. Exxon needs another $50 billion sucked out of our future well being.
By the way Right Stuff. What kind of mileage does your rig get? Double digits?
If the light rail plan forced all the people out of their cars who voted for it and it was almost entirely financed by users fees it wouldn’t be half bad. I would never vote for it, but I wouldn’t be against it either.
@34
Because *I’m* not the one that thinks he should be able to decide how everyone else lives. If you want that level of social engineering, you should be the one to leave. The PNW might be Liberal, or more accurately the Seattle/Portland metro areas – the rest of the region? I’d say not.
@39
How is it that I’m deciding how you should live?
37 Actually, mass transit may no longer be a solution. More than half a century of oil-car-and-highway lobby induced urban sprawl in all directions may have brought us to the point where there is no workable public-works solution.
Remember, for the most part the municipalities where rail transit has actually worked are places where the rails were there first, and suburban development happened along the tracks.
The final solution, such as it will be, will more likely involve people altering their lifestyles and choosing to live in closer proximity to the places where they work, shop and play.
Too bad the fucker that killed Mike Webb didn’t take out MTR at the same time.
@39
Hmmm…
Well lets see, the San Juans and the Bellingham area are pretty darn liberal. The 2nd CD is, currently, big D.
Jolene Unsoeld was one of the more liberal members of congress while she was in it representing 3rd CD (1989–1995). Unsoeld was preceded by Don Bonker (D) who was preceded by Julia Butler Hansen (D) (1960–1974). The 3rd CD seat is currently held by the Sierra Club endorsed (I think he used to help run the SW Washington chapter- not sure on that) Brain Baird. The only (R) to represent SW Washington since 1960 (maybe before. I didn’t look.) Is Linda Smith from 1995–1999. Smith went down in flames against Patty Murray losing the ‘98 senate race by 16%. To Recap: SW Washington voted big D for all but two congressional elections between 1960 and 2007.
On to the 6th CD. Norm Dicks baby! 1977-Present. Norm is the happy holder of the safest seat in The Peoples House. Norm represents the entire Olympic Peninsula. Norm was preceded by Floyd Hicks (1964-1975) and guess what Hicks was big D. Norm’s a centrist with a pretty good environmental record as of late and helped get funding for Tacoma’s link light-rail. http://www.flickr.com/photos/7.....573453802/
On to The 5th CD. The 5th was represented by Tom Foley (D) for thirty years. Ron Simms grew up in Spokane and Mike Lowry grew up outside of Spokane in St. John.
Our State Senate majority leader, Lisa Brown (D!), is from Spokane. I lived in Spokane for about two years, still visit quite frequently and can attest to liberalism being alive and well in Spokane. Walla-Walla has a growing stake in the green economy and it’s interest in the left is growing along with its profits from wind power and organic food and wine. R’s, currently, don’t have much to do with the green economy.
On to the 4th CD. The 4th CD was made habitable by the WPA and other big government programs. The 4th is home to huge Govmnt programs like Hanford, the army’s Yakima firing Range and a NSA listening post:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....ill30.html
The 4th CD elected Dem’s to congress between 1971 and 1981 (Mike McCormack) and 1993 – 1995 (Jay Inslee). Even in our alleged Rock Ribbed Republican area there’s a history of liberalism and big government helping folks live better!
I stand by my statement that the PWN is a liberal place.
Maybe we can set up Okanogan County (population 39,000) (Fewer people then Olympia!) as some sort of reservation for conservatives?
I wish I could support Sound Transit’s light rail expansion proposals, but I can’t. If there were a spur to Southcenter & Renton, that would be productive, but it’s not in the proposal. “Being considered” they say. Liars. If the expansion south of Seatac simply reached Des Moines or Federal Way and not necessarily Tacoma, that would be a reasonable. The tunnel under Capital Hill and Portage Bay to Hukster Stadium is going to take 8 years, and any north expansion will not be productive until the line reaches Northgate, how many more years that will take, who knows? I think a BRT system north would be a better bet for now.
All this talk about hidden interest costs makes me laugh. It’s just what the Times want Seattlers to waste their time with. The real consideration is whether the light rail expansion plan is worthy. I have considerable doubts and I’m a light rail supporter.
@43
Hmmm… How about if we look at how WA and OR voted by county in the last two Presidential Elections?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/p.....ntymap.htm
Looking at this, it seems to me as if most of the NW didn’t vote for the Liberal (of course they didn’t really vote for the Conservative either, but who knew?). Though I will concede that the Liberal sway in WA is a little beyond just Seattle. But not by that much.
As for the congresscritters? At that level its as much a question of personality as it is politics.
@19
Absolutely not!
I will take to the streets, ring doorbells and hold aloft electic torches to stop increased in land use for highway lanes.
Your convenience isn’t worth the loss of a livable earth.
” inflation makes the costs of the goods purchased go up as well (in addition to the incomes of those buying them).”
that assertion is based on a completely false premise. Ben is a MSFT employee, he is living in a fantasy land bubble where incomes always rise. He is young, and has no clue.
Even if you have a job now, you won’t always. Incomes do NOT rise for many people at the rate of inflation.
I’m in favor of transit, and trains aren’t a bad option in some locations.
BUT . . . . this ST2 and RTID proposal is dependant on the wrong kind of tax (sales tax). That is a regressive tax. It does not encourage good behavior (like a gas tax). It falls on the unemployed, the marginally-employed, and the working poor the hardest. We pay too high a sales tax rate already, because those nice liberal Dems we want controlling this state and region are fucking Nazis when it comes to tax policy: they won’t tax businesses because they won’t get campaign contributions, so they just keep raising the sales tax rates.
Face it, ST2 and RTID deserve to be shot down. Not because they would bring trains in 25 years, but because they would increase the sales tax too high. Businesses and property developers are those who stand to gain financially from ST2 and RTID – but they won’t be paying the most for those upgrades. In contrast, poor people will be paying too much for them, and most of them won’t be using the trains (or highways) much. A few commuters who live a long way from where they work will benefit, but no way should the poorest of our neighbors be forced to pay for a relatively few commuters who have made a profligate lifestyle choice and want to externalize their social costs onto us.
Vote NO. An improved revenue package, less reliance on long term debt, and more accountablity to ensure efficient spending is needed. One of those kinds of improved packages will be put on the ballot shortly if this first bloated effort fails.
No more roads. Enough, already.
@45
You’re talking 8 years where I’m talking 30! More than 30 when you consider how much eastern Washington benefited from “Big government socialism” programs like the WPA, the Grand Coulee Dam, Columbia Basin Irrigation Project and Hanford.
Sure, Okanogan County votes overwhelmingly Republican, but Okanogan county has a population of 39,000. You argument only holds water if you vote by land mass.
Wells:
BRT would need the same amount of space to operate as light rail does – that’s most of the cost here, creating new underground and elevated right of way. To serve the same places (which are not in the middle of freeways, by and large you would still have to create the same infrastructure, just not put rails on it – and that would cost nearly as much, with lower quality of service and higher operations and maintenance costs per passenger served.
Renton? Southcenter? Are these suddenly urban cores? We’re connecting Seattle, Tacoma, and Bellevue, then on to Overlake – upon which much of the economic growth for this area is dependent. Continuing to Redmond makes sense as Redmond starts to build 6-8 story condos downtown. We’re incrementally building BRT for Southcenter and Renton – just like you want. Perhaps you’re just noticing that BRT isn’t all that good of a deal?
testes:
If incomes didn’t rise with inflation, we would all be destitute – but the reality is that for most people, incomes do rise, especially as the economy continues to move toward information.
What would be in your “improved” revenue package? A constitutionally prohibited gas tax? An I-776 prohibited MVET? How about a property tax? I hear those go over well. Food and many basic needs are exempt from this state’s sales tax. I can’t fix that a sales tax is regressive, but does that mean we shouldn’t do anything until we fix it? It could be a hundred years before we built transit – and in that time, other cities would leave us in the dust.
Thomas Jefferson: The Sound Transit/RTID districts are fairly progressive. The places where this will be on the ballot – the places where taxes will be collected to pay for it – voted for the moderate, Kerry.
Best In Show:
If people don’t want to pay for transit, why was the unpopular RTID package attached to Sound Transit 2 to give it a hope of passing?
chadt says:
No more roads. Enough, already.
You must be a DOT Planner. That seems to be their motto.