Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Turbo19

Maybe buses should be free...

Recommended Posts

20130622_blp507.jpg

 

AFTER riding a tram in Strasbourg, Matt Yglesias, a blogger with Slate, has decided that proof-of-payment fare-collection systems—in which fares are enforced by inspectors who levy steep fines when they catch you without a proper ticket—are better than pay-per-ride systems for public transport. But there's a more radical proposal that could work even better: making public transport free.

Proof-of-payment systems would undoubtedly be an improvement on the inefficient systems that currently dominate American city bus and subway lines. A few years ago a group of engineers at New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) calculated the amount of time wasted as passengers waited to board and pay fares on a single run of the Bx12 Limited bus route in the Bronx. The answer was 16 minutes and 16 seconds, or over a quarter of the entire run. A proof-of-payment system would save much of that.

Since that study, MTA has moved to proof-of-payment systems on several lines, including the Bx12 Limited. Waiting times have fallen and average speeds have improved. But making the buses free could work even better

Read More: Source

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20130622_blp507.jpg

 

AFTER riding a tram in Strasbourg, Matt Yglesias, a blogger with Slate, has decided that proof-of-payment fare-collection systems—in which fares are enforced by inspectors who levy steep fines when they catch you without a proper ticket—are better than pay-per-ride systems for public transport. But there's a more radical proposal that could work even better: making public transport free.

 

Proof-of-payment systems would undoubtedly be an improvement on the inefficient systems that currently dominate American city bus and subway lines. A few years ago a group of engineers at New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) calculated the amount of time wasted as passengers waited to board and pay fares on a single run of the Bx12 Limited bus route in the Bronx. The answer was 16 minutes and 16 seconds, or over a quarter of the entire run. A proof-of-payment system would save much of that.

 

Since that study, MTA has moved to proof-of-payment systems on several lines, including the Bx12 Limited. Waiting times have fallen and average speeds have improved. But making the buses free could work even better

 

Read More: Source

Yeaaaaaaah.......no.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, make them free! The 1% needs to pay for our commutes! Hurrdurr I'm so cool I'm with Occupy Wall Street hurrdurr.

 

How about no... enough tax dollars go to the TA as it is now. OK, the fare's high, fine, but this is New York.

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeaaaaaaah.......no.

LOL, I'm genuinely  split on the issue.

 

One view is the considerable savings of reduced dwell times at stops and savings in regard to manual fare collections, fare collection equipment, and fare media.

 

Another view is the decreased revenue received by fare collection, which composes at least 20% of MTA revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, I'm genuinely  split on the issue.

 

One view is the considerable savings of reduced dwell times at stops and savings in regard to manual fare collections, fare collection equipment, and fare media.

 

Another view is the decreased revenue received by fare collection, which composes at least 20% of MTA revenue.

 

Which also comprises in them losing more money and us, the customer, paying more. Plus with the SBS, they've been raking in money from all the farebeaters and such getting tickets.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which also comprises in them losing more money and us, the customer, paying more. Plus with the SBS, they've been raking in money from all the farebeaters and such getting tickets.

Like I said, I'm not keen on the idea, but it is interesting to weigh the pros and cons of both stances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last thing we need to do is make transportation free.  There are enough fare beaters tearing down the buses as it is.  If they can't afford the fares then that probably means they shouldn't be living in NYC because the fares are cheap compared to other costs such as food, mortgage or rent and so on.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, make them free! The 1% needs to pay for our commutes! Hurrdurr I'm so cool I'm with Occupy Wall Street hurrdurr.

 

How about no... enough tax dollars go to the TA as it is now. OK, the fare's high, fine, but this is New York.

The TA only gets tax dollars because the revenue generated by public transportation is split up and used to fund other non-revenue generating parts of the state. If the TA were allowed to recycle %100 of the revenue back into the transit system, they would not be constantly in debt and crying broke every year.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long been an advocate of this. A flat fare like we currently have is insanely unequal, as $2.50 out of a banker's pocket is a lot different than $2.50 out of a busboy's pocket. With a transit tax focused on the upper-middle and upper classes (the two most undertaxed brackets) you do away with that inequality, along with any worries about farebeating, fare collection, and all those other expenses. It's an elegant system and for many of us it would actually cost less, but for some reason people hear the word tax and they freak out.

Edited by MHV9218
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the idea of 15-20 people lining up at a stop so that they can pay their fare at the driver, but I highly disagree with making the buses free. Maybe introduce something like Europe, where they do a POP system, not just on the SBS routes, and with HEAVY ENFORCEMENT.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post right here is all the time I'm going to waste posting in this thread on this old, tired *public transportation should be free* point of view......

 

You make em free & you make the quality of service go down the tubes, the quality of equipment go down the tubes (you think the buses are filthy now... LMFAO), and yes, I'm gonna say it - the quality of life in this city go down the tubes..... I don't want to hear about putting police on the buses because that is not feasible & realistic.... You will hear about way more altercations; arguments/fights/stabbings/shootings happening on public transportation, have it be made free to the public.... You let any tom, dick, and harry freely use buses (in this case) & things will only go downhill from there on a number of levels....

 

Screw it, the more free shit you give more people, the more you will have people acting like f***in animals.....

An emphatic NO to this.

Edited by B35 via Church
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long been an advocate of this. A flat fare like we currently have is insanely unequal, as $2.50 out of a banker's pocket is a lot different than $2.50 out of a busboy's pocket. With a transit tax focused on the upper-middle and upper classes (the two most undertaxed brackets) you do away with that inequality, along with any worries about farebeating, fare collection, and all those other expenses. It's an elegant system and for many of us it would actually cost less, but for some reason people hear the word tax and they freak out.

Here we go again with the tax the upper-middle class and the wealthy...  <_< I pay my fair share in taxes.  Why should my trip on the local bus be more costly than that of a busboy because I'm an upper-middle class person? Hell if that's the case, I might as well take a taxi or better yet get a car and drive.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post right here is all the time I'm going to waste posting in this thread on this old, tired *public transportation should be free* point of view......

 

You make em free & you make the quality of service go down the tubes, the quality of equipment go down the tubes (you think the buses are filthy now... LMFAO), and yes, I'm gonna say it - the quality of life in this city go down the tubes..... I don't want to hear about putting police on the buses because that is not feasible & realistic.... You will hear about way more altercations; arguments/fights/stabbings/shootings happening on public transportation, have it be made free to the public.... You let any tom, dick, and harry freely use buses (in this case) & things will only go downhill from there on a number of levels....

 

Screw it, the more free shit you give more people, the more you will have people acting like f***in animals.....

An emphatic NO to this.

the sad part is that in parts of vermont public transit is indeed free yet they still don't act like animals however free won't work in a large city unless MTA has a side business that gains more value as a result of public transit unless the MTA owns several profitable businesses at once free ain't gonna work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free won't work for two reasons:

1) Bums that previously stayed on the trains (hey, one entrance can keep you in the system for days if you want) will get on buses (and if you thought subways with bums suck, how about buses?)

2) Hey, somebody has to pay for the fuel. Now, if the year is 2020 and solid-state graphene supercapacitors that offer better mileage and as-quick-as-liquid-fuel recharging are in mass production, and all the (MTA) buses are magically converted to efficient electric drive with graphene supercapacitors, then suddenly the buses cost literally a fraction to power as compared to diesel/CNG, and you might be able to save enough money to keep maintenance while cutting the fare on buses to zero. Even then, (MTA) has over 5,500 buses, right? Good luck converting all of those.

 

Number 2 is key, as the technology will eventually allow buses to be entirely free for smaller agencies that don't need to convert over 5,600 buses to electric w/graphene supercapacitors for energy storage.

 

I guess long story short, free buses ain't happening.

Edited by Culver
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free won't work for two reasons:

1) Bums that previously stayed on the trains (hey, one entrance can keep you in the system for days if you want) will get on buses (and if you thought subways with bums suck, how about buses?)

2) Hey, somebody has to pay for the fuel. Now, if the year is 2020 and solid-state graphene supercapacitors that offer better mileage and as-quick-as-liquid-fuel recharging are in mass production, and all the (MTA) buses are magically converted to efficient electric drive with graphene supercapacitors, then suddenly the buses cost literally a fraction to power as compared to diesel/CNG, and you might be able to save enough money to keep maintenance while cutting the fare on buses to zero. Even then, (MTA) has over 5,500 buses, right? Good luck converting all of those.

 

Number 2 is key, as the technology will eventually allow buses to be entirely free for smaller agencies that don't need to convert over 5,600 buses to electric w/graphene supercapacitors for energy storage.

 

I guess long story short, free buses ain't happening.

brilliant you raise a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again with the tax the upper-middle class and the wealthy...  <_< I pay my fair share in taxes.  Why should my trip on the local bus be more costly than that of a busboy because I'm an upper-middle class person? Hell if that's the case, I might as well take a taxi or better yet get a car and drive.

 

The upper-middle class and upper class do not pay their fair share in taxes. Why should it be more costly? How hard is this concept? if I make $20k a year, it's harder for me to pay $2.50 than if I make $200k a year. We should be striving to eliminate inequality, not embracing it. 

 

Screw it, the more free shit you give more people, the more you will have people acting like f***in animals.....

 

Nah fam I take issue with that right there. I don't think that's true, and moreover, way I see it, it's when you've got inequality that people act like animals, talking about stealing goods, attacking people, destroying things--that's the animalistic behavior. You don't see that kind of crime in more equal societies, that's a proven fact. The less inequality, the better behaved people are. It's not free sh!t that makes people go nuts.

 

@Culver: Both of those points are pretty moot. Fuel costs could easily be covered by taxation; no reason why a transit tax couldn't fund the entire budget, not just salaries etc. Bums and crime could be enforced by the police, who would have a much easier job regulating 40-foot buses in daylight than 600-foot trains in the dark.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long been an advocate of this. A flat fare like we currently have is insanely unequal, as $2.50 out of a banker's pocket is a lot different than $2.50 out of a busboy's pocket. With a transit tax focused on the upper-middle and upper classes (the two most undertaxed brackets) you do away with that inequality, along with any worries about farebeating, fare collection, and all those other expenses. It's an elegant system and for many of us it would actually cost less, but for some reason people hear the word tax and they freak out.

On the other hand, the flat fee system we use now actually is a form of class equalizer. Since the lower-classes are most dependent on public transportation and use it to travel the most distance, they end up getting the most value for their dollar in terms of distance traveled, while the members of the higher classes that go shorter distances are getting less value for their money,

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, the flat fee system we use now actually is a form of class equalizer. Since the lower-classes are most dependent on public transportation and use it to travel the most distance, they end up getting the most value for their dollar in terms of distance traveled, while the members of the higher classes that go shorter distances are getting less value for their money,

 

You can't say that the personal travel habits of the wealthy determined entirely by choice are at all akin to the necessary travel habits of the lower class. Dependent is the key word there. The upper class could easily get just as much value for their money; it's an apples to oranges argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The upper-middle class and upper class do not pay their fair share in taxes. Why should it be more costly? How hard is this concept? if I make $20k a year, it's harder for me to pay $2.50 than if I make $200k a year. We should be striving to eliminate inequality, not embracing it. 

 

 

Nah fam I take issue with that right there. I don't think that's true, and moreover, way I see it, it's when you've got inequality that people act like animals, talking about stealing goods, attacking people, destroying things--that's the animalistic behavior. You don't see that kind of crime in more equal societies, that's a proven fact. The less inequality, the better behaved people are. It's not free sh!t that makes people go nuts.

 

@Culver: Both of those points are pretty moot. Fuel costs could easily be covered by taxation; no reason why a transit tax couldn't fund the entire budget, not just salaries etc. Bums and crime could be enforced by the police, who would have a much easier job regulating 40-foot buses in daylight than 600-foot trains in the dark.

Why is it my fault that the bus boy earns $20k a year?  Maybe he isn't educated enough to do something that pays more.  I can tell you right now that single upper middle class professionals are killed in taxes here in NYC.  The country favors those who have families.  A friend of mine commented on how he earns $75 - 80k a year and how he is strangled in taxes and he lives in NJ.  My income is in the same bracket and I live in New York so you can imagine what I pay in taxes.  If anything I'm sure I supplement his $2.50 far more than he supplements my $2.50 ride.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did we turn from free rides to social hierarchies... very interesting switch.

 

It's a common occurrence on this site. It's best to try and get the thread back on topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a common occurrence on this site. It's best to try and get the thread back on topic. 

If neither of you can understand how free fares are tied into economic classes, then I don't know what to tell you.  Obviously someone has to pay for those "free rides", hence the discussion of who should pay for them.  MHV is making the argument that those who earn more should be forced to subsidize transit more and my argument is that many of us already do via taxes.

 

The free rides set up is being tried in a European city (I forget which one) as a way to lure people to using public transit more and people are skeptical about it because someone has to pay for it.  It's a huge expense and something that people wonder about in terms of how long it will last.

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it my fault that the bus boy earns $20k a year?  Maybe he isn't educated enough to do something that pays more.  I can tell you right now that single upper middle class professionals are killed in taxes here in NYC.  The country favors those who have families.  A friend of mine commented on how he earns $75 - 80k a year and how he is strangled in taxes and he lives in NJ.  My income is in the same bracket and I live in New York so you can imagine what I pay in taxes.  If anything I'm sure I supplement his $2.50 far more than he supplements my $2.50 ride.

 

Two problems I have with this post. Number 1, the sentiment that poverty is due to ignorance or due to choice. You think that this theoretical busboy's lack of education is by choice? That he turned his back on Harvard? No, when you're born into a poorer community you're born into less opportunity and you general choose the option that puts food on the table (a job at 16, maybe) over the option that doesn't (staying in school). So you're right, he isn't educated enough to do something that pays more. But that's the point: that's not his fault. This is an unequal country, and that lack of education is not his fault.

 

Number 2, you SHOULD supplement the $2.50 of a man in poverty more than he supplements yours, that's just how taxation works. Those with more help those with less; pretty simple principle. And you're not 'strangled in taxes,' don't give me that. When you consider all of the flat taxes that the poorest people are subjected to between transit fares, sales taxes, child support, etc., the burden is much worse on them than on you; just because you can't see it directly doesn't mean it's not there. In any case, the upper and upper middle class have some of the lowest tax rates in US history, so any idea that you're 'strangled' is just nonsense. 

 

MHV is making the argument that those who earn more should be forced to subsidize transit more and my argument is that many of us already do via taxes.

 

EVERYBODY should subsidize mass transit. With a progressive trasnit tax, those who can afford the most would pay the most.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two problems I have with this post. Number 1, the sentiment that poverty is due to ignorance or due to choice. You think that this theoretical busboy's lack of education is by choice? That he turned his back on Harvard? No, when you're born into a poorer community you're born into less opportunity and you general choose the option that puts food on the table (a job at 16, maybe) over the option that doesn't (staying in school). So you're right, he isn't educated enough to do something that pays more. But that's the point: that's not his fault. This is an unequal country, and that lack of education is not his fault.

 

Number 2, you SHOULD supplement the $2.50 of a man in poverty more than he supplements yours, that's just how taxation works. Those with more help those with less; pretty simple principle. And you're not 'strangled in taxes,' don't give me that. When you consider all of the flat taxes that the poorest people are subjected to between transit fares, sales taxes, child support, etc., the burden is much worse on them than on you; just because you can't see it directly doesn't mean it's not there. In any case, the upper and upper middle class have some of the lowest tax rates in US history, so any idea that you're 'strangled' is just nonsense. 

 

 

EVERYBODY should subsidize mass transit. With a progressive trasnit tax, those who can afford the most would pay the most.

Let me put it to you this way... The United States is a capitalist country and there will be some who earn more and some who earn less and I don't think that those who earn more should somehow feel guilty or have to have their pockets raped more because someone else didn't have the same opportunities.

 

Life is what you make of it.  I haven't had an easy road to get to where I am, but I've made the most of my opportunities and I sure as heck am not going to feel guilty for my success which has been earned mainly through hard work with some help from my parents along the way. I came from a middle class family of working professionals, so the notion that those who are upper middle class or are wealthy are all fed with a silver spoon is just ridiculous.  

 

If the bus boy had to work at a young age well that's his problem.  That's life.  No one is owed anything and no one should be given something just because.  I've got what I have through hard work and I don't think that I should have to fork over my hard earned money to some guy because he had some misfortunes in life.  

 

All you do with your mentality is create an environment of entitlement, which is what many people who are of less economic fortunes have. Oh I'm not as well off as this guy and it's HIS fault, so he MUST pay for me.  That's insane.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.