When rating it with the number of passengers that have to be carried everyday, overall appearance, overall quality level (maintenance). I'm gonna check out the New York map.

wow I didn't know their subway is so HUGE

Why even ask such a question?

These 'vs' threads are stupid.

"Which is better, the NYC subway or Toronto's?"

I'm sorry, what did you just ask?

I didn't realize the subways were so different. Nevermind.

I'm sorry, what did you just ask?


LOL!!!!

NYs are dirty. I thought TO's would be nicer but I guess theyre dirtier than NYs.

^ NYC subway is dirty and gritty, and the stations look like they're going to fall apart. On the other hand, it gets you literally EVERYWHERE. As a result of its utility, there's no comparison I think.

LOL - Toronto Fanboy.

I love the oldschool charactor of a lot of the NYC subway stations have. Yes they many be smelly, and looking like they are falling apart, and are moist, but dam they are fine.

Can't wait to move there for a couple of years - Nov 2 is the day. Am I stupid to go to NYC on election day???

NYs are dirty. I thought TO's would be nicer but I guess theyre dirtier than NYs.

This pic belongs to HKSkyline:
http://files.photojerk.com/hkskyline/RIMG6633.jpg
(Toronto)

http://home.swipnet.se/~w-21791/u-newyork.jpg
(New York)

I think you can see the difference when it comes to dirt Benji. Your ability to be ignorant of something and comment on it is irritating.

Wtf, I heard it from other people too you know, listen to Salvius!

And listen to what I said I said TO's are dirtier that NYs, read my post correct next time.

NYs are dirty. I thought TO's would be nicer but I guess theyre dirtier than NYs.

Okay, I am going to quote you for the second time in this thread for the same dumb comment.

Yes I realize that you said Toronto's subway is dirtier than New York's child and that is where you WERE WRONG. Toronto's subway is much cleaner than New York's is. The MTA is much larger, older, more heavily traveled and more complicated than the TTC's subway. Now if you made a mistake, it happens and all I was doing was correcting you.

Sal said nothing to that effect, stop trying to deflect blame on other people.

The word "idiot" used in your post IS a personal attack, I suggest you edit it out before a mod reads it.

Okay, I am going to quote you for the second time in this thread for the same dumb comment.

Yes I realize that you said Toronto's subway is dirtier than New York's child and that is where you WERE WRONG. Toronto's subway is much cleaner than New York's is. The MTA is much larger, older, more heavily traveled and more complicated than the TTC's subway. Now if you made a mistake, it happens and all I was doing was correcting you.

Sal said nothing to that effect, stop trying to deflect blame on other people.

The word "idiot" used in your post IS a personal attack, I suggest you edit it out before a mod reads it.
Make up your mind! I said NYs were dirty, then you show a clean NY pic. I say TO is clean, you show a dirty TO pic. Then you get pissed at me for actually complimenting TO, what Can I do to please you ?? I compliment TO, you complain, what the hell is going on? Then I say TO's is cleaner and then you say TO's is cleaner, Thats what I was saying. Dont make a fool of your self.

well I didn't want people to argue over it cuz I realized it was an unfair comparison since MTA is so huge. If TTC had that many riders it would probably be kinda dirty too.

Make up your mind! I said NYs were dirty, then you show a clean NY pic. I say TO is clean, you show a dirty TO pic. Then you get pissed at me for actually complimenting TO, what Can I do to please you ?? I compliment TO, you complain, what the hell is going on? Then I say TO's is cleaner and then you say TO's is cleaner, Thats what I was saying. Dont make a fool of your self.

Listen, before I even posted the pic, you said:

NYs are dirty. I thought TO's would be nicer but I guess theyre dirtier than NYs.

Now this is the way I read what you are trying to say; you said that the MTA is dirty and you think that TO's would be cleaner but that it is dirtier than New York's.

Now this poorly written post has had both of us fight tonight over something that is apparently not what you beleive.

In the future perhaps you should not make a fool of yourself by righting a post that contradicts what you actually mean.

To me, NYC's subway system is like a giant web of interstates zooming through the 4 boroughs... with both collector and express lanes. TO's is friendlier, but NYC has that indescribable cool factor attached to it.

I've ridden on both Toronto's (a zillion times) and NYC subways.

The problem is, NYC system is so huge, you could find the dirtiest, the cleanest, the largest and smallest of the two!

Seriously, I did find NYC subways to be older and dirtier. Nothing wrong with that though, the stations certainly have more character. And they weren't terribly dirty or anything, but the car I was in was much worse when I left it! (I puked all over the floor on New Years Eve!!! how humiliating)

As far as aesthetics go, though, niether can hold a candle to the Montreal system. It's funky as hell. Check out this link... someone else sourced it here somewhere (can't remember). It's a thumbnail map of the whole system... lots of cool pictures (http://www.metrodemontreal.com/list-thumb.html) Makes me want to move to Montreal!

Having said that, Toronto's sin is that it's stations are so incredibly DULL. WIth a few exceptions, they are all pretty much the same green/beige tiled shit. Depressing! But reliable!

Wtf, I heard it from other people too you know, listen to Salvius!

My post was indeed conifrming that NYC subways are dirty as hell. Toronto's are not. NYC subway gets you anywhere in the city, Toronto's does not.

I've ridden on both Toronto's (a zillion times) and NYC subways.

The problem is, NYC system is so huge, you could find the dirtiest, the cleanest, the largest and smallest of the two!

Seriously, I did find NYC subways to be older and dirtier. Nothing wrong with that though, the stations certainly have more character. And they weren't terribly dirty or anything, but the car I was in was much worse when I left it! (I puked all over the floor on New Years Eve!!! how humiliating)

As far as aesthetics go, though, niether can hold a candle to the Montreal system. It's funky as hell. Check out this link... someone else sourced it here somewhere (can't remember). It's a thumbnail map of the whole system... lots of cool pictures (http://www.metrodemontreal.com/list-thumb.html) Makes me want to move to Montreal!

Having said that, Toronto's sin is that it's stations are so incredibly DULL. WIth a few exceptions, they are all pretty much the same green/beige tiled shit. Depressing! But reliable!

Ours would be less utilitarian and more colorful too if we got a gigantic grant from the feds to build it...

Ours would be less utilitarian and more colorful too if we got a gigantic grant from the feds to build it...

Oh yeah? I was wondering... oh well. It's a good cause!

I'm impressed with what i've seen with regards to the TTC, I haven't used the subway in New York so can't comment much on them but with regards to the TTC i have found it Clean and efficient. When i was there in downtown I travelled from St George all the way to town center and never once met a stop that was dirty or that made me feel apprehensive really i'm impressed with the TTC.

Listen, before I even posted the pic, you said:



Now this is the way I read what you are trying to say; you said that the MTA is dirty and you think that TO's would be cleaner but that it is dirtier than New York's.

Now this poorly written post has had both of us fight tonight over something that is apparently not what you beleive.

In the future perhaps you should not make a fool of yourself by righting a post that contradicts what you actually mean.
Hahahahahaha I'm an idiot:D

I actually love the NYC subway, even with all it's inconsistancies and frustrations. The MTA is said in NY to stand for "Mostly Tragic Accidents," but the system is remarkably effecient all things considering. Some of the stations of ugly and all of them could use a wash, but many have recently been restored. The 1/9 line is a National Historic Landmark due to the mosiacs designed by the Heins & LaFarge back in the day (they were the original architects of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine).

I love the elevated tracks of the 7--practically a Coney Island roller coaster. The historic City Hall station (now closed) and the magnificent barrel-vaulted stations in Washington Heights are also notable.

The MTA has spent billions in the past few years cleaning up and renovating our subway system. Toronto's is very nice but it isn't even as large as Chicago's or Boston's subway system.

Come on, it's GOT to be larger than Boston's piddly subway. You swing a cat in Boston, it sees all six stations!

The MTA has spent billions in the past few years cleaning up and renovating our subway system. Toronto's is very nice but it isn't even as large as Chicago's or Boston's subway system.

This is true, but thats not to say that Toronto's downtown isn't adequately served. In addition to the 80 or so KMs of subway, Toronto has 140 or so KMS of streetcar, of which, grid downtown very successfully. I would obviously prefer more HRT but we do with what limited money is respent in Toronto that is actually generated.

Washington DC's subway was really amazing, the stations were huge and the lights were dimmed which made a calming atmosphere

Chicago's EL is really more like an elevated LRT....I would compare this more to Toronto's streetcar network, rather than the TTC's massive T-1 trains.

As far as size goes, there is no comparison to NYC...I'm sure NYC has abandoned more subway route than Toronto has built in total. The NYC subways are hardly the nightmare of the 1970's and 80's. Toronto's smaller system is in better overall shape, as the city has maintained it in pretty good shape over the last 50 years. NYC has such an old and massive system, that keeping it in good shape is just so impossibly expensive...probably one of the reasons that city is broke.

Toronto's system might not have the miles of track that even some of those sprawly cities like Atlanta has built of late, but it is much better used and designed. And little Toronto was just the 5th city in NA when it embarked on it's subway system right after the war...in fact, while other cities were embarking on inner-city decay, depopulation of the inner-city and suburban hell building, Toronto was entering it's big growth period, and decided to put the focus on the inner-city.







KGB

Toronto's subway would be much larger than it is if it was up to the people of the city and the city council. Sadly, it is the Feds and the Province that are in the possition to approve expantion so nothing gets built.

:no: New York has a federal government that is willing to help it along, Toronto does not.

hey, this should be in the v.s. forum. I wanna hear more opinion from New Yorkers

If you're undecided about what's the difference between two cities you may take a look at it:

New York...

http://de.geocities.com/nyc_rail/nyc.htm

Toronto...

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/toro/toronto.htm

I think the NYC subway is in reasonably good shape. Some of the restored/rebuilt stations are beautiful, unlike 99% of the dreck that gets built here these days.

I confess I thought the TO system was larger. But I kind of like the green tiles. Very 1950s.

Regarding the comment about Boston's system. This is just the heavy rail subway, the city also has a massive commuter rail network that reaches all the way into Rhode Island. Many of the stations are incredible, too, with shopping arcades and restaurants like Bertucci's located within the stations.

http://www.mbta.com/traveling_t/images/subway/linemaps/SPIDER-MAP.gif

Commuter rail map:

http://www.mbta.com/traveling_t/images/commuterrail/maps/cr_map.gif

I think NYC's subway sytem is superior to Toronto's for the simple reason that it makes more of the city accessable by subway. Toronto's will get you to every section of the city, and a huge part of the city is located on the subway lines, but the extensiveness is not there.

The older section of the city (downtown/midtown) has the very nice streetcar networks...great for short trips above ground...very euro.

Also, Toronto is tops for having "stuff" with direct subway access....not that I would recomend it, but it's quite possible for a person to live their lives without ever going outside.






KGB

If I added it up right:

New York's MTA has 368 Km of track and 468 stations

Boston has 101.5 Km of track and 105 stations

Toronto has 71.3 Km of track and 74 stations

sorce: http://www.urbanrail.net/

Even at 74 stations, I bet the transfer points are counted twice!
If only George Bush were the leader of Canada --- Toronto would have more money for subways, and that's a fact. Unlike the US, Canada wages war on, well, wages earned in the cities.

Also, Toronto is tops for having "stuff" with direct subway access....not that I would recomend it, but it's quite possible for a person to live their lives without ever going outside.

Almost. Finding decently priced residential that's connected is difficult, but there are plenty of reasonable spots within tens of paces of an entrance. College Park is probably going to be one of the better subway connected residential buildings.

This is just the heavy rail subway, the city also has a massive commuter rail network that reaches all the way into Rhode Island.

See note below about the green line, and also note that the Silver line near the core is a BRT much like what York Region is in the process of building.

Boston has 101.5 Km of track and 105 stations

Not to be picky, but you counted the entire Green Line, in which case Spadina, Queens Quay, Queensway portion of Queen, and possibly the rebuilt St. Clair would be valid additions for Toronto since they also have exclusive and mixed modes.

Green line at different time frames.

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/bost/bost-green-park-st2x.jpg

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/bost/bost-green-park-st1x.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org/i23000/wimg_23387.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i31000/img_31439.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i23000/img_23401.jpg

"Finding decently priced residential that's connected is difficult"


How much cheaper could the condos be? Compare them to NYC...then you will start seeing how ridiculously low priced they are. There are also rentals attached....Manulife and Y&E.

Boston's "real" subways have 53 stations....the green line and Mattapan-Ashmont Line are just streetcars. The TTC's subway and light rail system is larger than Boston's....it has more ridership as well.





"Even at 74 stations, I bet the transfer points are counted twice!"

So were Boston's. And of course they need to be counted separately...two different lines with different platforms...they just happen to be one on top of another.






"If only George Bush were the leader of Canada."


And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously??????








KGB

Opps, I didn't realize that Boston's Green line was a Street car line. In that case, the rail network in TO is much larger.

KGB, I think he was serious about the George Bush comment.


PS: Has anybody noticed that their posts counter has dropped? I had over 1050 posts and now its 600 something.

"I think he was serious about the George Bush comment."


Oh...I know he was.






KGB

^I wouldn't doubt it.

AreBe, this right wing stuff is a little over the top eh.

Anyways, it is not the size of the subway, its the usage it gets. Now I have heard that over the entire range of tranist systems in N. America, New York, Montreal and Toronto were in a three way tie for most used transit systems. So Toronto's might be smaller but it is no less valuable.

If Toronto didn't get subway projects canceled (Eglinton W., DRL) or cut off (Sheppard), or extentions indeffinately delayed (Y/S, and further west extention from Kipling (Bloor-Danforth-Dundas Line?)), the system could really rival NYC since it is so strategically and arterially (is that a word?) laid out.

Opps, I didn't realize that Boston's Green line was a Street car line. In that case, the rail network in TO is much larger.

KGB, I think he was serious about the George Bush comment.


PS: Has anybody noticed that their posts counter has dropped? I had over 1050 posts and now its 600 something.
The Green Line travels above and underground. I remember taking it underground to the Harvard station when I visited Boston a couple years ago. Those old school Green Line cars suck.

The point actually was that I made Boston's Subway system seem artificially larger than it acually is. If street cars were considered part of a subway system on a subway map, Toronto's subway map would be unreadable because of the shear number of street car lines.

I shouldn't review other cities transit systems when I do not know them that well.

For reference, here is a map of the NA's (minus Ciudad de Mexico) second longest subway network, the Washington METRO: 103 miles (165 km) of track and 86 stations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/images/metmap.gif

The Green Line travels above and underground. I remember taking it underground to the Harvard station when I visited Boston a couple years ago. Those old school Green Line cars suck.

So do the Toronto Streetcars... one line even has it's own fully underground station, but it's not considered a subway/heavy rail whatever

Length of track is really pointless...Washington has built a lot of track, and blew a lot of money...but what good did it do....it didn't spur much ridership or urban development...the USA knows how to get the least use from spending the most money...it's the same with everything....public transit or health care.

Toronto's subway serves a much more compact built form around it's subway system, with higher ridership and better intigration.

There are actually 4 underground streetcar stations in Toronto.






KGB

Length of track is really pointless...Washington has built a lot of track, and blew a lot of money...but what good did it do....it didn't spur much ridership or urban development...the USA knows how to get the least use from spending the most money...it's the same with everything....public transit or health care.

Toronto's subway serves a much more compact built form around it's subway system, with higher ridership and better intigration.

There are actually 4 underground streetcar stations in Toronto.
KGB

Oh yeah, Spadina and Union... then Queens Quay ... oh yeah, and St. Clair.

KGB you're so AWARE

I was just recently in NYC and I visit there regularly as I have family there. I live in Toronto.

There are plusses and minuses to both systems...

This is what I like about NYC Subways:

- Lots of subway lines. You can get to most places pretty easily by the subway without walking far
- Relatively cheap
- Runs 24 hours a day
- Express subways that can get you uptown and downtown really quickly
- Not as crowded as I thought it would be during rush hours
- Works well for a city that size
- Lots of trains it seems and the waits were not long
- Easily connects to regional commuter trains

This is what I do not like about NYC Subways:

- The mapping system for the stations are crazy. Unless you are from New York...Forget it...You WILL get lost at some point. One reason is that there can be two stations with the same name i.e. Fulton Street Station but on different lines.
- Filthy - Due to sheer age and not cleaning it regularly
- Different train routes on the same lines....Once again...Getting lost is real easy if you get on the wrong train and it goes up a different spur
- Lack of good lighting or emergency alerting features. Lots of wierdos walking around especially at night
- Trains are generally in fair/poor condition. Lots of scratchitti on the windows and etching

This is what I like about Toronto Subways:

- Really clean (Just like the city)
- Stations are clear to locate and mapping is easy to understand
- A must to use to get around if you travel/live south of Bloor Street
- Lots of streetcar lines over and underground
- Great lighting and emergency alerting features
- Good signage
- Trains in good condition

This is what I do not like about Toronto Subways:

- Shut down after 2AM (Streetcars all night)
- Many of the lines do not go anywhere...What I mean is that if you live in any suburb i.e. Pickering, Mississauga, or Markham outside of the city proper, guess what - you have to drive on that damn Highway 401 (Always jammed - All 16 lanes at any point of the day) at some point to get to a connecting station to get anywhere. I think that is my biggest complaint. (Suburban guy) It is the way Toronto is built - Huge urban sprawl unlike NYC which is very compact.
- Poor connections from the subway to the Regional Train System (Go Transit)
- No express trains. If you travel, for instance from McCowan Station to Kipling, you'd might as well write a novel as it will take a long long time to go through and stop at each and every station
- Bad connections to the other lines.. Yonge/Bloor Station is one of the only viable options which is super-crowded most of the time

Like I said, I have used both and there are good and bad for both...

Any suggestions?

"Many of the lines do not go anywhere"

So..if they don't go to the 905...they aren't going anywhere? Excuse me, but I would consider the 905 "nowhere" LOL

Not trying to make the TTC (which is a municipal transit ssytem) go to the 905 (which is out of it's jurisdiction) is why it's so successful. This is why it is heads and tails above any American shit transit.

Sorry...if the Pickeringites ( ? ) don't like the fact that our subway doesn't go there...A: I don't give a shit. B: let them spend billions and build one.






"Poor connections from the subway to the Regional Train System (Go Transit)"


96% of all trips on GO trains begin or end at Union Station...and you can't get better connected to the subway than that.







KGB

- Runs 24 hours a day
- Express subways that can get you uptown and downtown really quickly


I've heard this is because it's quad-track, so the maintenance requirements of subways allows for all-night service. All sections of track must be checked every 72 hours, I'm told.

- Different train routes on the same lines....Once again...Getting lost is real easy if you get on the wrong train and it goes up a different spur


This exists in other cities as well. Stockholm, Tokyo, and many others. Branch-service is nothing new really.
Check the train's destination sign. If it isn't going your way, don't get on. This is not hard, and should not be something to complain about. While it does mean you might have to wait for the next train, it's still good service that those branch lines exist. Some trains also short-turn. An example on the TTC is rush-hour trains sometimes turn back south at St.Clair West. This won't work for you if heading to Yorkdale.


- Lots of streetcar lines over and underground
- Shut down after 2AM (Streetcars all night)


There is very little of the streetcar system that is underground. Not that it is a bad idea though, and there are good places to put such. Streetcars do not run all night though, the Queen car is the only exception. As for the subway shutdown, much like the London Underground, the reason is maintenance requirements.


- Many of the lines do not go anywhere...What I mean is that if you live in any suburb i.e. Pickering, Mississauga, or Markham outside of the city proper, guess what - you have to drive on that damn Highway 401 (Always jammed - All 16 lanes at any point of the day) at some point to get to a connecting station to get anywhere. I think that is my biggest complaint. (Suburban guy) It is the way Toronto is built - Huge urban sprawl unlike NYC which is very compact.


What does TTC stand for? TORONTO Transit Commission. Are Markham, Pickering, Mississauga Toronto? No, they are not. This may change in 20 years, but the subway stays in Toronto because it has no business outside the city at the moment. They are talking about conceptual plans to take the subway beyond the borders, but I wonder how they will handle the durisdictional redtape.



- Poor connections from the subway to the Regional Train System (Go Transit)


Main Street and Dundas West conncetions are indeed poor. Kipling and Union are good though, Leslie isn't bad, and the new Kennedy GO station will be a good connection as well. The problem isn't so much the connections here are poor, it's that GO Transit has no frequency.

- No express trains. If you travel, for instance from McCowan Station to Kipling, you'd might as well write a novel as it will take a long long time to go through and stop at each and every station


To travel across the entire Bloor-Danforth line takes about an hour. The entire Yonge Line (excluding U/S) takes less than 45 minutes. This is reasonable. Not satisfied? Use GO Transit.


- Bad connections to the other lines.. Yonge/Bloor Station is one of the only viable options which is super-crowded most of the time

Spadina is the only bad connection. St.George is as simple as connections get, with the exception of the model where two train lines service the same platform (usually the trains are travelling in the same direction from that same platform too in this model). Yonge-Sheppard and Bloor-Yonge are fairly well designed too, although island-platforms would have been ideal, IMO. Kennedy is okay, more stairs than typical transfers is all. What's a good transfer in your world?

New York's subways do not service areas outside of the actual city either--it seems weird to expect this.

I'm not aware of any city that provides subway services beyond the metropolitan border (although light rail and commuter trains are of course a different story).

I travel on GO Transit (Georgetown line) from Malton to Union. THen I have to pay an extra $2.25 for the subway. If TTC made it a free transfer from GO to TTC subway, I would say Toronto subway is better.

So in other words...if the TTC gave you a free ride, you would love it?

Yea...free is always popular...isn't it? LOL!!






KGB

I travel on GO Transit (Georgetown line) from Malton to Union. THen I have to pay an extra $2.25 for the subway. If TTC made it a free transfer from GO to TTC subway, I would say Toronto subway is better.

That's kinda outrageous since the TTC is grossly underfunded as it is. Where I live (oakville) they can somehow afford the $1.50 reduction in fare when I show my GO pass but I wouldn't really expect it from toronto.

You could argue this the other way as well, that GO could have a rip off ticket attached to theirs that is valid for the TTC. At the end of the month TTC charges GO $1.90 (token rate) per ticket collected.

Then let GO jack up their ticket price by the difference (probably 50 cents on average).

Out of GO's 70k/day ridership, TTC might get a transfer from 1/4 of them, or 4.5 million rides per year -- a 1% increase for substantial cost (reduced fare, etc.)

On the other hand, GO might get an extra 1.8Million riders per year (7000 per day) which is a 10% increase at a "subsidy per new rider" significantly lower than the TTCs. ($1.25 out of $2, or $1.25 out of ~$9)

That's kinda outrageous since the TTC is grossly underfunded as it is. Where I live (oakville) they can somehow afford the $1.50 reduction in fare when I show my GO pass but I wouldn't really expect it from toronto.
A combined TTC/GO Ticket used to exist (Twin Pass), but was discontinued, partly because the cost-savings were very small, but mainly because the TTC said it couldn't afford its share of the cost reduction in the program.

I was just recently in NYC and I visit there regularly as I have family there. I live in Toronto.

There are plusses and minuses to both systems...

This is what I like about NYC Subways:

- Lots of subway lines. You can get to most places pretty easily by the subway without walking far
- Relatively cheap
not if your broke and you gotta take it everday
- Runs 24 hours a day
yeah but you gotta wait like 30 min between 12 and 5 am
- Express subways that can get you uptown and downtown really quickly
- Not as crowded as I thought it would be during rush hours
maaaan....I hate taking the train during rush hour, it really depends on the line and where your taking it to/from
- Works well for a city that size
- Lots of trains it seems and the waits were not long
- Easily connects to regional commuter trains

This is what I do not like about NYC Subways:

- The mapping system for the stations are crazy. Unless you are from New York...Forget it...You WILL get lost at some point. One reason is that there can be two stations with the same name i.e. Fulton Street Station but on different lines.
nah, i'd say just take your time w/ the map...you don't have to be from new york to understand it
- Filthy - Due to sheer age and not cleaning it regularly
- Different train routes on the same lines....Once again...Getting lost is real easy if you get on the wrong train and it goes up a different spur
- Lack of good lighting or emergency alerting features. Lots of wierdos walking around especially at night
- Trains are generally in fair/poor condition. Lots of scratchitti on the windows and etching

This is what I like about Toronto Subways:

- Really clean (Just like the city)
- Stations are clear to locate and mapping is easy to understand
- A must to use to get around if you travel/live south of Bloor Street
- Lots of streetcar lines over and underground
- Great lighting and emergency alerting features
- Good signage
- Trains in good condition

This is what I do not like about Toronto Subways:

- Shut down after 2AM (Streetcars all night)
- Many of the lines do not go anywhere...What I mean is that if you live in any suburb i.e. Pickering, Mississauga, or Markham outside of the city proper, guess what - you have to drive on that damn Highway 401 (Always jammed - All 16 lanes at any point of the day) at some point to get to a connecting station to get anywhere. I think that is my biggest complaint. (Suburban guy) It is the way Toronto is built - Huge urban sprawl unlike NYC which is very compact.
- Poor connections from the subway to the Regional Train System (Go Transit)
- No express trains. If you travel, for instance from McCowan Station to Kipling, you'd might as well write a novel as it will take a long long time to go through and stop at each and every station
- Bad connections to the other lines.. Yonge/Bloor Station is one of the only viable options which is super-crowded most of the time

Like I said, I have used both and there are good and bad for both...

Any suggestions?


now i've never been to toronto..but I'm always hearing about how clean the system is..and how clean the city is...that is why i'm itching to get up there just to see this city and the country in general....well i'm planning on visiting toronto and montreal hopefully next year

Fact: the US government, with President George Bush, provides far more support to cities sand to transit than the glorious, fault free an inherently superior Canadian Liberal one.

^AreBe, how many times do we have to go over this man.

It is not the party in power in the States that causes American cites to get more money, it is the overall system they have.

It's the organization of the Canadian Government that screws cities.

George Bush could give the shit off a dead dog's dick if the NYC Subway works, doesn't work, flips over and floods, catches fire, declares war on Albania, or turns into a giant peppermint stick.

Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously has been asleep for the last four years.

George Bush could give the shit off a dead dog's dick if the NYC Subway ... turns into a giant peppermint stick.


That's some nice imagery.

But yes, Bush could care less about the city. The big difference is that NYC has cash to draw from its own coffers whereas Toronto still has to beg for scraps from the government.

Fact: In George Bush's US, cities get more money than cities in Canada get. We can debate the reasons all we want, but, the fact remains that the feds in the US help American cities more than the Canadian feds help Canadian cities.
By all means, be less than impressed with Bush. But, be even less than impressed with the loathing the feds have for Toronto and Toronto's subway.

Let's use the hated Bush as a benchmark -- say what you want about George Bush, he helps cities more than Ottawa does! And if MArtin squirms about being unfavorably portrayed in comparison to Bush, well, ok, fine. Perhaps Martin might help build up Toronto's unjustly small subway.

^I'm not supporting any party in this, all I'm saying is that the Americans support their cities better than we do regardless of party politics.

Fact: In George Bush's US, cities get more money than cities in Canada get. We can debate the reasons all we want, but, the fact remains that the feds in the US help American cities more than the Canadian feds help Canadian cities.
By all means, be less than impressed with Bush. But, be even less than impressed with the loathing the feds have for Toronto and Toronto's subway.

Let's use the hated Bush as a benchmark -- say what you want about George Bush, he helps cities more than Ottawa does! And if MArtin squirms about being unfavorably portrayed in comparison to Bush, well, ok, fine. Perhaps Martin might help build up Toronto's unjustly small subway.

It was the Clinton administration that started large scale funding for cities & revitalized them. Though I commend Bush for not cutting the funding off in the last 4 years, his aggressive agenda for tax cuts and the War in Iraq might mean that cities will be put into a fiscal straightjacket again.

Can someone explain why US cities (allegedly) get more assistance than Canadian ones do on the federal level? It doesn't seem conisistant with what I know of Canadian social programs.

This whole line of debate is a red herring. Our federal government simply is not responsible for public transit....that's not it's job. Like health care, public transit is a provincial responsibility.

Someone was right...the government responsibilities are divided differenctly in Canada than they are in the US.

What level of what government that funds whatever is of no importance. The proof is in the pudding...we have a health care system that works better than the american one...our cities are healthier than american ones...our public transit is healthier than american ones. The fact the US federal government subsidizes public transit more than the Cdn one does is not important. It's all tax dollars...who cares what pot it comes from?

Municipally, NYC is screwed...NY State is pretty screwed too....the US federal government...screwed beyond comprehension.

So making out like there is something to envy about federal gov't transit funding really doesn't pan out in the end.






KGB

It was the Clinton administration that started large scale funding for cities & revitalized them. Though I commend Bush for not cutting the funding off in the last 4 years ....
GOOD POINT! Bush has continued on with the program that Clinton started: the large scale funding for cities. Conversely, here in Canada, our smug Liberal government has done nothing for Toronto. Heck, even when SARS hit, the feds took out ads that promoted ---- Montreal.

It's time to hold the feds to account for the small size of Toronto's subway.

If Bush were the Prime Minister of Canada, Toronto would get more funding than it gets now -- and that's something to think about. Hate Bush. Loath Martin!

"If Bush were the Prime Minister of Canada, Toronto would get more funding than it gets now -- and that's something to think about. Hate Bush. Loath Martin!"

Cute.

^AreBe, how many times do we have to go over this man.

It is not the party in power in the States that causes American cites to get more money, it is the overall system they have.

It's the organization of the Canadian Government that screws cities.

He's brainwashed.

If Bush were the Prime Minister of Canada, Toronto would get more funding than it gets now -- and that's something to think about. Hate Bush. Loath Martin!

I doubt Bush would actually have the initiative to start such an expensive program, especially when he has abortion bans, the war in Iraq, tax cuts, and same sex marriage bans to worry about. .. If Bush is PM of Canada, let's just hope Clinton was in Sussex Drive for 2 whole terms before him.

If Bush ever found himself PM, he'd probably have a brick thinking of how many more rights he would have to illiminate in Canada. He has a hard enough time in the rights-deprived USA as it is.






KGB