I appreciate your engagement; however, I wish you had read with care.

"Third, the GET effectively taxes ***all to pay for a good which primarily benefits only some within the City and County of Honolulu***. . .There are valid arguments against taxing the residents of Kauai for a rail they can’t ride. ***Similar arguments for those on the Windward side of Oahu***"

My counterfactuals are not endless; I provide three–the "present housing crisis, deferred maintenance for existing infrastructure, and lingering concerns for the state pension fund." If you can not make an argument for prioritizing rail over only three pressing issues, I would not trust you with $2B in taxpayer dollars.