Councilmember Wants MetroCard Donation System To Benefit Low-Income Riders

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Councilmember Wants MetroCard Donation System To Benefit Low-Income Riders

 

BY EMMA WHITFORD IN NEWS ON JUN 14, 2016 4:45 PM

 

(Getty).

 

A resolution introduced this month by a Bronx city councilmember calls on the MTA to create a donation system for New Yorkers to fund MetroCards for low-income riders.

 

"Public transit fare has increased three times since 2009, causing low income New Yorkers to spend more of their family budget on transit expenses," Fernando Cabrera told AM New York, which first reported the story. "Currently there are no programs to help poor New Yorkers with public transit costs."

 

The resolution, which is symbolic because the MTA is controlled at the state level, also calls for a collection system for unused MetroCards with hanging balances. The MTA did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but spokesman Kevin Ortiz told the outlet that the MTA will "look at all fare media ideas during our next round of fare adjustments slated for next year."

 

Advocates argue that the reduced-fare options already in place in NYC exclude the city's most cash-strapped commuters. For example, many employers are required to offer a tax deduction for commuting expenses—a benefit for New Yorkers with full-time jobs, primarily middle- and upper-class. Reductions for the elderly and disabled exclude many of the working poor, and monthly unlimited passes offer savings for those who can afford putting up $116.50 at once at the beginning of the month.

 

The donation proposal comes on the heels of a campaign spearheaded by the Riders Alliance and the Community Service Society, calling on the city to establish a half-price MetroCard program for the working poor. According to a report released in conjunction with the joint Riders Alliance-Community Service Society campaign [PDF], about 800,000 New Yorkers, excluding seniors and the disabled, live at or below the federal poverty threshold, or $11,880 for a single adult. Under the proposed plan, a single ride would cost about $1.35; riders who purchase monthly cards could save up to $700 per year.

 

Rebecca Bailin of the Riders Alliance said Tuesday that while Cabrera's resolution is encouraging, her group is still pushing for a broader policy change. "We appreciate the thinking. We think he's really on the right track," she said, adding that with a new half-fare policy, "people can have a way to apply, and it's fair and not ad hoc."

In the coming weeks, Bailin's group is hopeful that Community Service Society head David Jones,one of three nominees to the MTA's Board of Directors, will be accepted to his post.

 

"If it happens soon that's really big news," she said. "He's fighting for this issue."

 

Source: http://gothamist.com/2016/06/14/metrocard_donations.php

[R10 2952]

SMH... The logical solution would've been for the city and state to contribute their fair share of funding to transit.  That way, fares would not have gone up so drastically in the first place.  And before any of you throw statistics at me that a ride on 30-day unlimited is less than the fare or whatever, let me remind you that the fares have increased more than the rate of inflation.  This is unjustifiable.  And now some councilman wants to set up a donation fund; what is this, Walmart? I don't think he really cares about transit- he's just trying to pander and get votes.  If the state and city are not going to contribute, then fvck 'em, I say. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

SMH... The logical solution would've been for the city and state to contribute their fair share of funding to transit.  That way, fares would not have gone up so drastically in the first place.  And before any of you throw statistics at me that a ride on 30-day unlimited is less than the fare or whatever, let me remind you that the fares have increased more than the rate of inflation.  This is unjustifiable.  And now some councilman wants to set up a donation fund; what is this, Walmart? I don't think he really cares about transit- he's just trying to pander and get votes.  If the state and city are not going to contribute, then fvck 'em, I say. 

Agreed... And some people regardless of the fare just DON'T want to pay.  No point in enabling those people even further.  If they can't afford to live here, then move somewhere cheaper.  They're already raising the minimum fare which will be $15.00 eventually, even for people with no skills or education, which is a joke in and of itself.  

[Interested Rider]

Another politician, another one who knows nothing about transit. When it comes to the subject of transit funding, there are a few politicians who know something and understand its problems but most politicians are totally clueless. If the organizations that are complaining about how much money that the lower income patrons are paying then how about creating jobs that pay decent wages not destroying jobs with their "solutions that are searching for problems" mantra which is part of the problem. Everyone in this city would be a lot better served by that move..  

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Another politician, another one who knows nothing about transit. When it comes to the subject of transit funding, there are a few politicians who know something and understand its problems but most politicians are totally clueless. If the organizations that are complaining about how much money that the lower income patrons are paying then how about creating jobs that pay decent wages not destroying jobs with their "solutions that are searching for problems" mantra which is part of the problem. Everyone in this city would be a lot better served by that move..  

The other thing that's comical is these Bronx politicians (the one in the article included) talk about how they're creating jobs, but they're all LOW paying jobs at DEAD-END companies.  I mean really... You are not going to make a career working at a Target (well some do of course, but you know what I mean ) or some other low paying job.  I laugh just thinking about it, but the people yelling for more money vote these clowns in.  Welfare pimps at its finest.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I would agree with this if the same people who farebeat will actually pay their fare. Until then, good luck with this. The MTA doesn't even break even with its operation costs (I believe fares make up somewhere around 50% of total operational costs, and then other funding subsidizes the rest). There is some truth to the low-income residents spending a lot more since 2009, but a substantial amount of people farebeat, and I believe that for many, the reduction in fares will do nothing. They'll just continue doing the same old thing, because at this point, it's more of a habit. Now, that's not to say that all low-income people don't pay their fare (that's far from the truth). If they didn't, pretty sure the MTA wouldn't have some high numbers on many Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn bus routes, and high ridership in many stations in the more transit-dependent areas of those boroughs.

 

While state funding isn't the only issue with relation to increased costs for both the agency and the rider, I do agree that the state should fund the transit system more as well, and moreso for improvements of infrastructure and other related components. 

[Around the Horn]

No way. This is not the way you fix this issue...

[checkmatechamp13]

The other thing that's comical is these Bronx politicians (the one in the article included) talk about how they're creating jobs, but they're all LOW paying jobs at DEAD-END companies.  I mean really... You are not going to make a career working at a Target (well some do of course, but you know what I mean ) or some other low paying job.  I laugh just thinking about it, but the people yelling for more money vote these clowns in.  Welfare pimps at its finest.

 

To be fair, if you start out at like 16-18, and work a few years, you might be able to get promoted to manager or something. Not a fantastic salary, but a livable one. 

 

In any case, there's already a project where people can donate the excess money on their MetroCard voluntarily (those little $0.55 bonuses or whatever that you get when you refill your MetroCard). 

 

http://www.nextstopproject.org/

 

As for half-price fares for low-income riders, to be fair, other cities like San Francisco have programs like that. Of course, like any form of welfare, it's prone to abuse. Honestly, I think this is more reasonable than a $15/hr minimum wage (of course, you could argue that it essentially subsidizes corporations, but in principle, I think it makes more sense to give people an easy way to access work, and then an incentive to move up, rather than just letting them stagnate at $15/hr).

[paulrivera]

I personally support low income discounts, as long as someone funds it and they keep the income limits below $20,000 per year per customer. Of course, you should need some kind of income to qualify too. If you make/collect $0 earned income or get $0 from Social Security, you wouldn't get a low income discount.

 

This donation system isn't the answer.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

To be fair, if you start out at like 16-18, and work a few years, you might be able to get promoted to manager or something. Not a fantastic salary, but a livable one. 

 

In any case, there's already a project where people can donate the excess money on their MetroCard voluntarily (those little $0.55 bonuses or whatever that you get when you refill your MetroCard). 

 

http://www.nextstopproject.org/

 

As for half-price fares for low-income riders, to be fair, other cities like San Francisco have programs like that. Of course, like any form of welfare, it's prone to abuse. Honestly, I think this is more reasonable than a $15/hr minimum wage (of course, you could argue that it essentially subsidizes corporations, but in principle, I think it makes more sense to give people an easy way to access work, and then an incentive to move up, rather than just letting them stagnate at $15/hr).

lol... That's exactly what it does, and we already have enough corporations being subsidized by paying next to nothing to their employees who then look to collect benefits to make up the difference

 

I personally support low income discounts, as long as someone funds it and they keep the income limits below $20,000 per year per customer. Of course, you should need some kind of income to qualify too. If you make/collect $0 earned income or get $0 from Social Security, you wouldn't get a low income discount.

 

This donation system isn't the answer.

I completely disagree.  I can confirm for a fact that low income folks generally pay very little in income taxes.  Looking at the monies I've earned over the years when I was a college student, you usually don't make much money since you can't work much in some cases, but a few years I earned anywhere from next to nothing to say $20,000 working part-time and during breaks, and I would do my own taxes or get them done through free places for college students and would owe nothing.  That seems more than charitable.  If these politicians want the fares lowered, then see that the gets more monies to stop raising the fares every two years.  I also don't support the donation system because I think it encourages a cycle of entitlement, and we already have enough of that as it is with people walking on the buses and not paying.  I see young folks on the subways trying to make a few bucks, and God forbid if someone doesn't want to buy what they're selling.  They automatically get angry as if they are owed something.  That's life.  Most folks go out and work damn hard for what they have, and when you look at how much New Yorkers pay in taxes and how the monies are used, it's really troubling.

[paulrivera]

If these politicians want the fares lowered, then see that the gets more monies to stop raising the fares every two years.

Which is how we got to this point in the first place. At this rate we'll have a $4 base fare within the next 10 years, the politicians should put up or shut up.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Which is how we got to this point in the first place. At this rate we'll have a $4 base fare within the next 10 years, the politicians should put up or shut up.

They want to pander.  That's what they're doing so that they secure votes to maintain their comfy lifestyles and continue to be poverty pimps. 

[Interested Rider]

Does anyone believe that New York State politicians will vote to increase funding for buses and subways as most of them hate our city? The only way any bit of extra funding for the city system gets allocated is when it is included in a package that benefits the upstaters and the suburbanites first. Funding for transit should be increased not only from the state but the city as well as transit is the blood that makes this city what it is but when you have elected officials who know nothing about transit and place their people on the MTA Board. Those  people know even less  as compared with someone who rides on a frequent basis so then ideas like this one all of a sudden gain traction, no matter how irrelevant it is.There are four new members from the city that were chosen by the illustrious one  awaiting the approval of the  New York State Senate. When I saw their  names I noted that with the exception of John Samuelsen who will be a non-voting member, one was a member of the council from Manhattan and the other two names I did not recognize so does one expect them to know anything about buses and subways?

 

As far as going after the fare beaters which should be done on a regular basis, let's face it as it alienates a core constituency of many of these elected officials and that does not fit into their agenda. The paper pushers do not like it either as it costs money and even though it may raise revenue, the heat from the higher ups is just not worth it in their mind. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Does anyone believe that New York State politicians will vote to increase funding for buses and subways as most of them hate our city? The only way any bit of extra funding for the city system gets allocated is when it is included in a package that benefits the upstaters and the suburbanites first. Funding for transit should be increased not only from the state but the city as well as transit is the blood that makes this city what it is but when you have elected officials who know nothing about transit and place their people on the MTA Board. Those  people know even less  as compared with someone who rides on a frequent basis so then ideas like this one all of a sudden gain traction, no matter how irrelevant it is.There are four new members from the city that were chosen by the illustrious one  awaiting the approval of the  New York State Senate. When I saw their  names I noted that with the exception of John Samuelsen who will be a non-voting member, one was a member of the council from Manhattan and the other two names I did not recognize so does one expect them to know anything about buses and subways?

 

As far as going after the fare beaters which should be done on a regular basis, let's face it as it alienates a core constituency of many of these elected officials and that does not fit into their agenda. The paper pushers do not like it either as it costs money and even though it may raise revenue, the heat from the higher ups is just not worth it in their mind. 

Why should it done on a regular basis when the middle class and upper class is left to pay for the difference?  

[CenSin]

So now the MTA is a charity? Too many Democratic career politicians try to stay in their positions by exploiting the plight of the poor. I say exploit because in the end, this is a lose-lose situation. The politician gets to keep her position, the MTA is no better financially, and the poor becomes addicted to the petty handouts meted out by people like her.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So now the MTA is a charity? Too many Democratic career politicians try to stay in their positions by exploiting the plight of the poor. I say exploit because in the end, this is a lose-lose situation. The politician gets to keep her position, the MTA is no better financially, and the poor becomes addicted to the petty handouts meted out by people like her.

They already are, thanks to the de Blasio administration...

[SubwayGuy]

I would agree with this if the same people who farebeat will actually pay their fare. Until then, good luck with this. The MTA doesn't even break even with its operation costs (I believe fares make up somewhere around 50% of total operational costs, and then other funding subsidizes the rest). There is some truth to the low-income residents spending a lot more since 2009, but a substantial amount of people farebeat, and I believe that for many, the reduction in fares will do nothing. They'll just continue doing the same old thing, because at this point, it's more of a habit. Now, that's not to say that all low-income people don't pay their fare (that's far from the truth). If they didn't, pretty sure the MTA wouldn't have some high numbers on many Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn bus routes, and high ridership in many stations in the more transit-dependent areas of those boroughs.

 

While state funding isn't the only issue with relation to increased costs for both the agency and the rider, I do agree that the state should fund the transit system more as well, and moreso for improvements of infrastructure and other related components. 

 

The MTA is not meant to run at a profit. In America, we've got to stop seeing things in such black and white, accountant stuck in a basement for a business, mentality.

 

Are you ready for this??

-The MTA is meant to run at a loss to provide a public benefit for the riding public and local business that acts as an enabler for the entire regional economy, which allows businesses to generate taxable income and economic activity that is beneficial to the overall state DESPITE what the MTA's income report and balance sheet look like at the end of the year.

 

Part 2:

-It was specifically created as a public benefit corporation, originally by the city (NYCTA) then by the state , with intentionally blurred lines between city and state, while it receives funding from both, and capital / disaster recovery + preparedness funding from the federal government because it allows all 3 entities - city, state, and federal - to dodge ultimate accountability for the struggles or decline of the MTA in bad times by pointing the finger at one of the other 3 and the MTA itself, while allowing all 3 to take credit for a "job well done" during good times.

 

Therefore, it is "chronically underfunded, but it's ____ fault, not ours", will never actually be profitable (since it never was intended to), and the management of the MTA always has the impossible Herculean task of providing service that meets a chronically decreasing threshold as it is forced to keep up with the greater and greater demands on funding that hasn't kept up with inflation. Every now and then, when the economy booms just enough to allow the MTA to do OK for a year or two, the money immediately is allocated for projects and spent, rather than saved for lean times, so that when lean times come, the MTA will be broke again, and the pols can cry about "auditing" the MTA or wonder what's going on over there.

 

It's been this way for decades and it's not going to change until individual politicians start getting called to the carpet from a "you screwed the ridership" standpoint.

 

Only one group actually makes money off the MTA.

 

Wall Street.

 

Seriously. Every time the MTA borrows money, they do so with municipal bonds issues by and through Wall Street that generate "debt service" expense to the MTA, which is money given by the MTA to bondholders as compensation for that "loan in lieu of funding". This is "in lieu", mind you, of proper government funding (which obviously comes from taxpayers who wouldn't receive interest, so no debt service costs), and it's also one of the more significant reasons operating costs are what they are. But fortunately, it's not ever going to be as big as "Wages & Salaries" since, after all, the MTA employs tens of thousands of people to maintain this empire of infrastructure and provide service that, somehow, miraculously still gets the job done for millions of people most days despite all odds against it...and so therefore politicans and idiots in the media can sit there and tell you why people like me, like Tom Prendergast, like Trainmaster and his pension, etc. are the reason the fare is going up, and not the debt service, the underfunding by politicans, the lack of a rainy day fund or any kind of proper planning, the destruction of elevated lines that would benefit today's city immensely which we can never get back because of NIMBYism and the exorbitant costs of construction today, or any of the other myriad reasons that "we can't have nice things anymore."

 

BOOM

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

The MTA is not meant to run at a profit. In America, we've got to stop seeing things in such black and white, accountant stuck in a basement for a business, mentality.

 

Are you ready for this??

-The MTA is meant to run at a loss to provide a public benefit for the riding public and local business that acts as an enabler for the entire regional economy, which allows businesses to generate taxable income and economic activity that is beneficial to the overall state DESPITE what the MTA's income report and balance sheet look like at the end of the year.

 

Part 2:

-It was specifically created as a public benefit corporation, originally by the city (NYCTA) then by the state , with intentionally blurred lines between city and state, while it receives funding from both, and capital / disaster recovery + preparedness funding from the federal government because it allows all 3 entities - city, state, and federal - to dodge ultimate accountability for the struggles or decline of the MTA in bad times by pointing the finger at one of the other 3 and the MTA itself, while allowing all 3 to take credit for a "job well done" during good times.

 

Therefore, it is "chronically underfunded, but it's ____ fault, not ours", will never actually be profitable (since it never was intended to), and the management of the MTA always has the impossible Herculean task of providing service that meets a chronically decreasing threshold as it is forced to keep up with the greater and greater demands on funding that hasn't kept up with inflation. Every now and then, when the economy booms just enough to allow the MTA to do OK for a year or two, the money immediately is allocated for projects and spent, rather than saved for lean times, so that when lean times come, the MTA will be broke again, and the pols can cry about "auditing" the MTA or wonder what's going on over there.

 

It's been this way for decades and it's not going to change until individual politicians start getting called to the carpet from a "you screwed the ridership" standpoint.

 

Only one group actually makes money off the MTA.

 

Wall Street.

 

Seriously. Every time the MTA borrows money, they do so with municipal bonds issues by and through Wall Street that generate "debt service" expense to the MTA, which is money given by the MTA to bondholders as compensation for that "loan in lieu of funding". This is "in lieu", mind you, of proper government funding (which obviously comes from taxpayers who wouldn't receive interest, so no debt service costs), and it's also one of the more significant reasons operating costs are what they are. But fortunately, it's not ever going to be as big as "Wages & Salaries" since, after all, the MTA employs tens of thousands of people to maintain this empire of infrastructure and provide service that, somehow, miraculously still gets the job done for millions of people most days despite all odds against it...and so therefore politicans and idiots in the media can sit there and tell you why people like me, like Tom Prendergast, like Trainmaster and his pension, etc. are the reason the fare is going up, and not the debt service, the underfunding by politicans, the lack of a rainy day fund or any kind of proper planning, the destruction of elevated lines that would benefit today's city immensely which we can never get back because of NIMBYism and the exorbitant costs of construction today, or any of the other myriad reasons that "we can't have nice things anymore."

 

BOOM

Yes, I understand that the MTA is not suppose be profitable and all, that is known. My problem is trying to implement this system for low-income residents, when there's a good percentage of people already farebeating in those areas. There will be a need for more funding, which is currently not being provided (nor does the city or state want to shell out more money for it). This will cut down on the revenue gained in those areas, and will do close to nothing to address the farebeating which is somewhat high in these areas. This will leave the MTA having to ask for more money, since they'll lose a good amount of money which they do need. Farebeating costs the MTA somewhere around $50 million annually IIRC. That's $50 million lost, which could potentially help in some form to cover costs for some services, instead of having to ask for funding. Those areas should not be getting a fare decrease when many people do not even bother to pay the fare, and/or have no intention to ever do so (since the program will primarily benefit those areas). If everyone paid their fair share, I would be more open to the idea. However that's not the case, and the MTA shouldn't have to implement this.

 

Yes, the MTA is not the best when it comes to the financial aspect, so any decrease in revenue will make the MTA more cash-strapped than it is, and then it will hurt more for the riding public when its low on money. At this time, losing revenue is something that we cannot afford. While I do feel that there is some mismanagement going on within the MTA and there are employees there that either do not do their jobs correctly or don't bother at all, I totally agree that the employees and their total earnings shouldn't be scapegoats for everything that is wrong with the MTA financially.

[B35 via Church]

I'm going to say this, and I quite frankly don't care who it offends...

 

If these same poor people stop spending what little money they do obtain (there's a reason I'm saying obtain instead of earn) on shit they WANT & don't NEED, then it won't be so much of a struggle to pay the fare.... I am so tired of the woe is me, I'm broke, I aint got shit to my name facade so many people like to claim (poor or otherwise).... If they were as poor as they like to portray that they are, there would be a plethora of petty crimes going on in this city.... And if these same poor people are pacifists & are "too proud to beg" (the common man, the gubbermintz, or whoever), then they've had been dead a long damn time ago - due to being unable to afford the necessary sustenance needed for survival....

 

Someone else said it earlier in the discussion, it isn't that the fare is too high for a lot of these folks, it's that they don't want to pay the fare, period... And then the next thing on these people's agenda will be free transit for NY-ers systemwide.....

 

man, I'm out....

[bobtehpanda]

I would rather we actually come up with some sort of well-designed social net rather than the hodgepodge shitshow of discounts and subsidies that we have right now.

[SubwayGuy]

I am not advocating anything less than enforcement of the fare. I personally can't stand quality of life violations and they need to be treated as serious offenses (ESPECIALLY for repeat offenders) and carry escalating real world punishments. Farebeating is one of the biggest, and enforcement of it HAS stopped more serious crimes like the morons they catch who are smuggling illegal and unregistered firearms around and can't be bothered to pay the fare to not call attention to themselves, and are caught because farebeating is enforced and prevented from possibly commiting violent crime.

 

But what I'm also saying is don't let a politicians suggestion for another handout based on the fact that fare keeps rising distract from WHY the fare keeps rising.

 

Would you accept a $10,000 / year scholarship to a private college where you knew the tuition would go up $8000 / year? Or would you rather not get a handout and go somewhere tuition was guaranteed for 4 years at the same starting price, but without a scholarship?

 

And yes, a good chunk of the "poor" in America aren't. Stupid shit like brand name clothing, sneakers, phones, and games are prioritzed over basic necessities like food, commuting to and from school, etc. But the problem there stems from culture not anything else. People will steal and cheat to get whatever they think they "need." When you craft a toxic pop culture that values going out to the club (party hardy!), womanizing (or man-izing, for the females), hustling (always pulling a fast one!), VIP experiences (we pay more for the same thing!), and further commercialize it into the next generation by convincing these people that their kids need the latest toys also, you create a complete consumer moneysuck, funded largely on credit, that isn't based on anything real, isn't sustainable (without throwing taxpayer money at it)...all in the name of the illusion of growth.

 

Add in a subprime mortgage to one of these people who clearly doesn't qualify for a paper IOU in third grade for a dollar bill loan to buy a soda, and you get 2008.

 

But here we go again...we've ramped the roller coaster back up the hill, set it loose and see if we fly this time instead of crash!

 

And we've got the middle class to keep paying for everything while the rich laugh their way to the bank, and every time the middle class asks for a break, we only help the dumbasses down at the bottom which makes the middle class SO ANGRY as they see people who work a fraction as hard as them and make all the wrong decisions enjoy the same quality of life they bust their balls for. And of course, the rich don't care because they are so rich that to them this is like pigeons fighting over a scrap of bread. "Welcome to America in the 21st Century...Kinda like the last 19th, but with more cellphonez!"

 

Seriously... you should notice this in our city. Everyone is off to do the same things. NYC was always crowded, but there wasn't this obsession with "finding new things to do (sometimes for the kids, sometimes just for adults) on the weekends. Hey picnic in the park. Used to be great. But now, I can't think of a single place to be in the world other than a US embassy in the Middle East with Hillary Clinton on guard duty, worse to be at than a public park crammed into a tiny slice of grass only slightly larger than your towel, with hundreds of other people's screaming spawn running all around your space as their parents laugh about it and send each other social media posts. And for couples, unless you're willing to fork over more money - all the free stuff is completely intolerable because of the crowds. Times Square for New Year's? Nothing says "next year is gonna be better than this one" better than standing in a throng sobering up over the course of 6 hours because you've been searched for alcohol before you entered the "safe space" waiting for a ball to drop for a mere 60 seconds, all while holding in your pee desperately as you realize there is absolutely nowhere you can "go". But despite the fact that these experiences are more or less completely miserable for all but the most stupid among us, people routinely line up and do them because the culture says to. Just like the culture tells young males they need to go to bars and clubs and buy women drinks to get with them, even though the woman you should "get with" is the one who doesn't require that, because any woman worth her salt isn't out for free drinks, but many are. But it gets you to open your wallet and stimulate the economy. Just like "needing" new Jordans, just like "having" to get your kid the new trendy toy, you name it.

 

When the best days with family can be spent at home. Because apparently no one plays board games anymore (that's for country bumpkins, you know). No one has a nice homecooked meal anymore, they gotta go out to BBQ's with everyone else and order overpriced Texas size margaritas instead of making ribs at home and having a couple beers.

 

And this consumer culture destroys people's earnings, and subsidies for the poor allow the stupid among them to live above their means, allow the smart the means to get out of the cycle of poverty. Meanwhile, the rich are perfectly content to use an angry middle class person's rage that someone making a third of their pay can afford to lease a Mercedes when they drive a beat up Toyota, to get that middle class person to vote against their own self interest out of frustration for the double standard with the poor person. Because the poor person's "social safety net" brings them up to the middle class person's standard of living, but the middle class person's standard of living "is too high" for any handouts, so they end up in the same place at the end of the day, just maybe after 30 years they'll actually own their residence and car and be without credit card debt, but they'll still eke out every paycheck to paycheck cycle and struggle with poverty in retirement all the same. Land of the Free!

 

And when someone actually has the gall to blame the rich, the familiar chorus from the rich-funded media and pundits is always "well they worked hard for it" even though the game is rigged in their favor...which, the dumb among the middle class will blindly agree with out of a sense of wishful thinking. After all, they believe in working hard for it (dangle that carrot), even if it's not true and more wealth is inherited in this country than earned, and the biggest projection of future wealth comes from your familial wealth and connections, but not your innate skills. But people don't like to believe in their own limitations, so this is a convenient lie to feed them in an attempt to get them to, once again, vote against their own self interest.

 

So the middle class gets screwed on both sides. And people are too dumb to know the difference, or to blame both sides, or to call politicians to the carpet for rigging the system and putting an anchor around the taxpayers who EARN (not passively accumulate) their income. Which is why I post what I post, because this SHOULD make you angry, and it SHOULD make you write letters and EMBARRASS your politicians, until they actually start doing things that are good for people who WORK and EARN for a living in an attempt to better their lives, without rewarding STUPID behavior.

 

And culturally this nation needs to get away from what is considered "pop" right now. The club sucks. Bars are better. You can have a conversation, there's no cover charge, etc. Sneakers are a giant waste of money. They lose a lot of their value the second you put them on your feet, and they don't last that long. But as long as society prioritizes what it does, this problem will continue to exist.

 

So remember this, every time you're sitting on a platform when there's construction, and there's no platform conductors there to answer your question, or when you're on a crowded Lexington Avenue train thinking about how 2nd Avenue was supposed to open 2 years ago (or, to be technical, 78 years ago), or when you're on a slow bus in the Bronx up 3rd Avenue instead of flying by on the elevated, or when you see a bum in the street with New Jordans and a smart phone shaking a cup at you, or when you look around the crowd in a bustling club and you don't notice a single millionaire on the crowded dance floor but plenty of pretenders "making it rain" with 1s and 5s, WHY things are the way they are, and please, for the love of the diminishing amount of good that is still left in this country (and there is enough), PLEASE, assign the blame to the right people, and make the right people pay to fix it.

[DaTransitMan4608]

I am not advocating anything less than enforcement of the fare. I personally can't stand quality of life violations and they need to be treated as serious offenses (ESPECIALLY for repeat offenders) and carry escalating real world punishments. Farebeating is one of the biggest, and enforcement of it HAS stopped more serious crimes like the morons they catch who are smuggling illegal and unregistered firearms around and can't be bothered to pay the fare to not call attention to themselves, and are caught because farebeating is enforced and prevented from possibly commiting violent crime.

 

But what I'm also saying is don't let a politicians suggestion for another handout based on the fact that fare keeps rising distract from WHY the fare keeps rising.

 

Would you accept a $10,000 / year scholarship to a private college where you knew the tuition would go up $8000 / year? Or would you rather not get a handout and go somewhere tuition was guaranteed for 4 years at the same starting price, but without a scholarship?

 

And yes, a good chunk of the "poor" in America aren't. Stupid shit like brand name clothing, sneakers, phones, and games are prioritzed over basic necessities like food, commuting to and from school, etc. But the problem there stems from culture not anything else. People will steal and cheat to get whatever they think they "need." When you craft a toxic pop culture that values going out to the club (party hardy!), womanizing (or man-izing, for the females), hustling (always pulling a fast one!), VIP experiences (we pay more for the same thing!), and further commercialize it into the next generation by convincing these people that their kids need the latest toys also, you create a complete consumer moneysuck, funded largely on credit, that isn't based on anything real, isn't sustainable (without throwing taxpayer money at it)...all in the name of the illusion of growth.

 

Add in a subprime mortgage to one of these people who clearly doesn't qualify for a paper IOU in third grade for a dollar bill loan to buy a soda, and you get 2008.

 

But here we go again...we've ramped the roller coaster back up the hill, set it loose and see if we fly this time instead of crash!

 

And we've got the middle class to keep paying for everything while the rich laugh their way to the bank, and every time the middle class asks for a break, we only help the dumbasses down at the bottom which makes the middle class SO ANGRY as they see people who work a fraction as hard as them and make all the wrong decisions enjoy the same quality of life they bust their balls for. And of course, the rich don't care because they are so rich that to them this is like pigeons fighting over a scrap of bread. "Welcome to America in the 21st Century...Kinda like the last 19th, but with more cellphonez!"

 

Seriously... you should notice this in our city. Everyone is off to do the same things. NYC was always crowded, but there wasn't this obsession with "finding new things to do (sometimes for the kids, sometimes just for adults) on the weekends. Hey picnic in the park. Used to be great. But now, I can't think of a single place to be in the world other than a US embassy in the Middle East with Hillary Clinton on guard duty, worse to be at than a public park crammed into a tiny slice of grass only slightly larger than your towel, with hundreds of other people's screaming spawn running all around your space as their parents laugh about it and send each other social media posts. And for couples, unless you're willing to fork over more money - all the free stuff is completely intolerable because of the crowds. Times Square for New Year's? Nothing says "next year is gonna be better than this one" better than standing in a throng sobering up over the course of 6 hours because you've been searched for alcohol before you entered the "safe space" waiting for a ball to drop for a mere 60 seconds, all while holding in your pee desperately as you realize there is absolutely nowhere you can "go". But despite the fact that these experiences are more or less completely miserable for all but the most stupid among us, people routinely line up and do them because the culture says to. Just like the culture tells young males they need to go to bars and clubs and buy women drinks to get with them, even though the woman you should "get with" is the one who doesn't require that, because any woman worth her salt isn't out for free drinks, but many are. But it gets you to open your wallet and stimulate the economy. Just like "needing" new Jordans, just like "having" to get your kid the new trendy toy, you name it.

 

When the best days with family can be spent at home. Because apparently no one plays board games anymore (that's for country bumpkins, you know). No one has a nice homecooked meal anymore, they gotta go out to BBQ's with everyone else and order overpriced Texas size margaritas instead of making ribs at home and having a couple beers.

 

And this consumer culture destroys people's earnings, and subsidies for the poor allow the stupid among them to live above their means, allow the smart the means to get out of the cycle of poverty. Meanwhile, the rich are perfectly content to use an angry middle class person's rage that someone making a third of their pay can afford to lease a Mercedes when they drive a beat up Toyota, to get that middle class person to vote against their own self interest out of frustration for the double standard with the poor person. Because the poor person's "social safety net" brings them up to the middle class person's standard of living, but the middle class person's standard of living "is too high" for any handouts, so they end up in the same place at the end of the day, just maybe after 30 years they'll actually own their residence and car and be without credit card debt, but they'll still eke out every paycheck to paycheck cycle and struggle with poverty in retirement all the same. Land of the Free!

 

And when someone actually has the gall to blame the rich, the familiar chorus from the rich-funded media and pundits is always "well they worked hard for it" even though the game is rigged in their favor...which, the dumb among the middle class will blindly agree with out of a sense of wishful thinking. After all, they believe in working hard for it (dangle that carrot), even if it's not true and more wealth is inherited in this country than earned, and the biggest projection of future wealth comes from your familial wealth and connections, but not your innate skills. But people don't like to believe in their own limitations, so this is a convenient lie to feed them in an attempt to get them to, once again, vote against their own self interest.

 

So the middle class gets screwed on both sides. And people are too dumb to know the difference, or to blame both sides, or to call politicians to the carpet for rigging the system and putting an anchor around the taxpayers who EARN (not passively accumulate) their income. Which is why I post what I post, because this SHOULD make you angry, and it SHOULD make you write letters and EMBARRASS your politicians, until they actually start doing things that are good for people who WORK and EARN for a living in an attempt to better their lives, without rewarding STUPID behavior.

 

And culturally this nation needs to get away from what is considered "pop" right now. The club sucks. Bars are better. You can have a conversation, there's no cover charge, etc. Sneakers are a giant waste of money. They lose a lot of their value the second you put them on your feet, and they don't last that long. But as long as society prioritizes what it does, this problem will continue to exist.

 

So remember this, every time you're sitting on a platform when there's construction, and there's no platform conductors there to answer your question, or when you're on a crowded Lexington Avenue train thinking about how 2nd Avenue was supposed to open 2 years ago (or, to be technical, 78 years ago), or when you're on a slow bus in the Bronx up 3rd Avenue instead of flying by on the elevated, or when you see a bum in the street with New Jordans and a smart phone shaking a cup at you, or when you look around the crowd in a bustling club and you don't notice a single millionaire on the crowded dance floor but plenty of pretenders "making it rain" with 1s and 5s, WHY things are the way they are, and please, for the love of the diminishing amount of good that is still left in this country (and there is enough), PLEASE, assign the blame to the right people, and make the right people pay to fix it.

I'd upvote this 3,000 times if I could.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I would rather we actually come up with some sort of well-designed social net rather than the hodgepodge shitshow of discounts and subsidies that we have right now.

How clever... A "social net" huh.... Just call what it is... A handout... 

[Eric B]

I am not advocating anything less than enforcement of the fare. I personally can't stand quality of life violations and they need to be treated as serious offenses (ESPECIALLY for repeat offenders) and carry escalating real world punishments. Farebeating is one of the biggest, and enforcement of it HAS stopped more serious crimes like the morons they catch who are smuggling illegal and unregistered firearms around and can't be bothered to pay the fare to not call attention to themselves, and are caught because farebeating is enforced and prevented from possibly commiting violent crime.

 

But what I'm also saying is don't let a politicians suggestion for another handout based on the fact that fare keeps rising distract from WHY the fare keeps rising.

 

Would you accept a $10,000 / year scholarship to a private college where you knew the tuition would go up $8000 / year? Or would you rather not get a handout and go somewhere tuition was guaranteed for 4 years at the same starting price, but without a scholarship?

 

And yes, a good chunk of the "poor" in America aren't. Stupid shit like brand name clothing, sneakers, phones, and games are prioritzed over basic necessities like food, commuting to and from school, etc. But the problem there stems from culture not anything else. People will steal and cheat to get whatever they think they "need." When you craft a toxic pop culture that values going out to the club (party hardy!), womanizing (or man-izing, for the females), hustling (always pulling a fast one!), VIP experiences (we pay more for the same thing!), and further commercialize it into the next generation by convincing these people that their kids need the latest toys also, you create a complete consumer moneysuck, funded largely on credit, that isn't based on anything real, isn't sustainable (without throwing taxpayer money at it)...all in the name of the illusion of growth.

 

Add in a subprime mortgage to one of these people who clearly doesn't qualify for a paper IOU in third grade for a dollar bill loan to buy a soda, and you get 2008.

 

But here we go again...we've ramped the roller coaster back up the hill, set it loose and see if we fly this time instead of crash!

 

And we've got the middle class to keep paying for everything while the rich laugh their way to the bank, and every time the middle class asks for a break, we only help the dumbasses down at the bottom which makes the middle class SO ANGRY as they see people who work a fraction as hard as them and make all the wrong decisions enjoy the same quality of life they bust their balls for. And of course, the rich don't care because they are so rich that to them this is like pigeons fighting over a scrap of bread. "Welcome to America in the 21st Century...Kinda like the last 19th, but with more cellphonez!"

 

Seriously... you should notice this in our city. Everyone is off to do the same things. NYC was always crowded, but there wasn't this obsession with "finding new things to do (sometimes for the kids, sometimes just for adults) on the weekends. Hey picnic in the park. Used to be great. But now, I can't think of a single place to be in the world other than a US embassy in the Middle East with Hillary Clinton on guard duty, worse to be at than a public park crammed into a tiny slice of grass only slightly larger than your towel, with hundreds of other people's screaming spawn running all around your space as their parents laugh about it and send each other social media posts. And for couples, unless you're willing to fork over more money - all the free stuff is completely intolerable because of the crowds. Times Square for New Year's? Nothing says "next year is gonna be better than this one" better than standing in a throng sobering up over the course of 6 hours because you've been searched for alcohol before you entered the "safe space" waiting for a ball to drop for a mere 60 seconds, all while holding in your pee desperately as you realize there is absolutely nowhere you can "go". But despite the fact that these experiences are more or less completely miserable for all but the most stupid among us, people routinely line up and do them because the culture says to. Just like the culture tells young males they need to go to bars and clubs and buy women drinks to get with them, even though the woman you should "get with" is the one who doesn't require that, because any woman worth her salt isn't out for free drinks, but many are. But it gets you to open your wallet and stimulate the economy. Just like "needing" new Jordans, just like "having" to get your kid the new trendy toy, you name it.

 

When the best days with family can be spent at home. Because apparently no one plays board games anymore (that's for country bumpkins, you know). No one has a nice homecooked meal anymore, they gotta go out to BBQ's with everyone else and order overpriced Texas size margaritas instead of making ribs at home and having a couple beers.

 

And this consumer culture destroys people's earnings, and subsidies for the poor allow the stupid among them to live above their means, allow the smart the means to get out of the cycle of poverty. Meanwhile, the rich are perfectly content to use an angry middle class person's rage that someone making a third of their pay can afford to lease a Mercedes when they drive a beat up Toyota, to get that middle class person to vote against their own self interest out of frustration for the double standard with the poor person. Because the poor person's "social safety net" brings them up to the middle class person's standard of living, but the middle class person's standard of living "is too high" for any handouts, so they end up in the same place at the end of the day, just maybe after 30 years they'll actually own their residence and car and be without credit card debt, but they'll still eke out every paycheck to paycheck cycle and struggle with poverty in retirement all the same. Land of the Free!

 

And when someone actually has the gall to blame the rich, the familiar chorus from the rich-funded media and pundits is always "well they worked hard for it" even though the game is rigged in their favor...which, the dumb among the middle class will blindly agree with out of a sense of wishful thinking. After all, they believe in working hard for it (dangle that carrot), even if it's not true and more wealth is inherited in this country than earned, and the biggest projection of future wealth comes from your familial wealth and connections, but not your innate skills. But people don't like to believe in their own limitations, so this is a convenient lie to feed them in an attempt to get them to, once again, vote against their own self interest.

 

So the middle class gets screwed on both sides. And people are too dumb to know the difference, or to blame both sides, or to call politicians to the carpet for rigging the system and putting an anchor around the taxpayers who EARN (not passively accumulate) their income. Which is why I post what I post, because this SHOULD make you angry, and it SHOULD make you write letters and EMBARRASS your politicians, until they actually start doing things that are good for people who WORK and EARN for a living in an attempt to better their lives, without rewarding STUPID behavior.

 

And culturally this nation needs to get away from what is considered "pop" right now. The club sucks. Bars are better. You can have a conversation, there's no cover charge, etc. Sneakers are a giant waste of money. They lose a lot of their value the second you put them on your feet, and they don't last that long. But as long as society prioritizes what it does, this problem will continue to exist.

 

So remember this, every time you're sitting on a platform when there's construction, and there's no platform conductors there to answer your question, or when you're on a crowded Lexington Avenue train thinking about how 2nd Avenue was supposed to open 2 years ago (or, to be technical, 78 years ago), or when you're on a slow bus in the Bronx up 3rd Avenue instead of flying by on the elevated, or when you see a bum in the street with New Jordans and a smart phone shaking a cup at you, or when you look around the crowd in a bustling club and you don't notice a single millionaire on the crowded dance floor but plenty of pretenders "making it rain" with 1s and 5s, WHY things are the way they are, and please, for the love of the diminishing amount of good that is still left in this country (and there is enough), PLEASE, assign the blame to the right people, and make the right people pay to fix it.

I like your strong "populist" sentiment, but I still think too much blame is being placed on the poor, which still plays into the hands of the rich, even if you do include them in the blame (in contrast to the standard neo-con "corporatist" view which says they should have everything. This is one of the 3 dimensions of the political spectrum, https://erictb.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/political-matrix-is-actually-3d).

 

They have created what I call a virtual "Ice Age" of psuedo-scarcity, where they tighten everything for everybody, and their philosophy says that everyone who suffers did it to themselves, (because they weren;'t as "diligent, creative,

innovative, smart, delaying gratification, future oriented", ad nauseam, as the rich). That includes the middle class, in addition to the poor.

 

So it's true that people get priorities mixed, but then that's everybody. In such a climate of "scarciy", not only do you have less to make "wiser" choices with, but the very stress of this tends to make us "dissociate" and end up spending on what's basically "escapism" or "distraction".

So yes, that can be a problem, but to direct that much anger at the poor falls right into the rich's "divide and conquer" scheme. You're not interacting much with the rich, who are pulling the strings, but we do interact more with the poor, who are not pulling the strings, even if they do overspend. This ends up getting the most focus in political discourse, and then the most sought to be corrected, which still does not fix the problems. We're fighting each other, and that's probably what the rich are laughing at the most, as they remain virtually invisible and untouchable in the process! The plot going all the way back to slavery was always to manipulate the populists (in one way or another), who were their biggest threat, and it has seeming always been working for them!

[LTA1992]

How clever... A "social net" huh.... Just call what it is... A handout... 

 

As a person who is currently homeless and trying to get government assistance, I can personally say it's not a handout. You have to earn the things you need. The issue is that a lot of people will earn their benefits, and then do nothing afterward.

 

Me though, he he, naaaaaaah. I start working' next week. The bottom of societies ladder is not for moi. I do agree with all the posters who said that farebeaters are going to continue doing so regardless. Even if they have the money, they'll still try to get over. I've had that specific conversation with a lot of people I know. They do it even if they are walking distance from home and it's annoying. Here I am, a guy who has walked from Staten Island to Park Slope just to get to and from work (and more recently, from Bethpage to Jamaica because my pride blocked me from asking for the money I needed to get to and from my job that day) and some people have the audacity to try and skip on the fare when they actually have it?

 

A shame. Really. I'd advocate for European style fines upwards of 500 dollars plus over a program to give low income residents discounts. I know it's hard but people need to work harder if they want to survive here. People always complain about how high our relatively and artificially low fares are, but don't want to work to afford it. I realize I sound repetitive, but that's just what's floating in my mind right now.