MTA eyeing 2017 bus, subway fare hike to $3; hopes to raise more than $300M

[bobtehpanda]

 Transportation sales taxes

 

Los Angeles is the best example of a big city using this method and Atlanta has a bill on the table for this November.

 

 

This has never came up on the agenda here in NY?

 

The main difference is that California has enshrined, in their constitution, that anyone with enough signatures can get an initiative on the ballot. New York has no mechanism to do that, and even if it did the MTA would lose any referendum it tried holding.

 

(Also, it's not necessarily a good thing, as the referendums are a good part of why California swings from budget crisis to budget crisis.)

[bobtehpanda]

Also, I wouldn't mind the fare going up, but the cash fare should definitely increase compared to the unlimited fares. The break-even point for unlimiteds is far too high.

[Caelestor]

Doing some math, a 4% fare increase would suggest a $2.58 ride (pay-per-ride). Thus the current system would switch to

• 16 percent bonus on $6+ refill
• $32.50 7-day unlimited metrocard (break even at 13 rides)
• $121.50 30-day unlimited metrocard (break even at 48 rides)
• $6.03 express bus ride, $59 10-ride

I recommend that the 30-day pass be set to $118.50 (break even at 46 rides), to induce more ridership during off-peak.

[MHV9218]

Well actually there was a commuter tax not that long ago, and folks in suburban areas were vehemently against it and I agree.  It unfairly taxes people with longer commutes, and those people tend to be more affluent and already pay high taxes as it is, so it's essentially a tax on those with more who already pay enough in taxes. 

 

Yes, that is in fact how progressive taxation should work: if you have more money, you pay more in taxes. And you'll find that the wealthy often pay a lot less in taxes than working people do, in large part because they have the means to find ways to avoid paying their taxes through offshore investments, loopholes, and the like. As long as the capital gains tax rate is so puny, the rich will pay far less than their fair share. It is a myth that the 'more affluent' are paying 'enough in taxes.'

 

 

 

You can also look at places like Staten Island which has vehemently been opposed to the ongoing fare hikes on the Verrazzano stating that no other borough has to pay to leave their own borough

 

The other point you miss is that with the possible exception of northern SI, people who choose to live in the suburbs, southern SI, and areas out of New York City, are actually choosing to be away from everything that's in the city and are consciously electing to choose to pay a higher fare to commute in. People who want space, greenery, and a suburban life have absolutely no right to a low-cost entrance into the city: you trade one for the other, which is why progressive commuter taxes (especially in the most affluent areas) are absolutely the right move.

 

he more the fare goes up, how many people just won't pay, be it out of disgust or because they can't afford it?  I travel through quite a few poor neighborhoods in NYC and sometimes I'm one of the few people paying the fare, so while it may seem reasonable for some of us, it clearly isn't so reasonable for many other people, so I think a lot of things need to be examined to ensure that we don't drive people away from using the system either because the alternatives are on par or cheaper than public transit, or because public transit is out of reach.  The one thing that doesn't seem plausible is having a fare increase every two years.  The fare increases have risen much higher than the rate of inflation and are not sustainable.

 

Farebeating is a relative drop in the bucket on the grand scale of problems, and those fare increases are the products of people you voted for. So I hope you enjoy them! And when you elect that fascist in the fall, kiss every ounce of transportation funding goodbye--you can hitchhike to work.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yes, that is in fact how progressive taxation should work: if you have more money, you pay more in taxes. And you'll find that the wealthy often pay a lot less in taxes than working people do, in large part because they have the means to find ways to avoid paying their taxes through offshore investments, loopholes, and the like. As long as the capital gains tax rate is so puny, the rich will pay far less than their fair share. It is a myth that the 'more affluent' are paying 'enough in taxes.'

 

 

The other point you miss is that with the possible exception of northern SI, people who choose to live in the suburbs, southern SI, and areas out of New York City, are actually choosing to be away from everything that's in the city and are consciously electing to choose to pay a higher fare to commute in. People who want space, greenery, and a suburban life have absolutely no right to a low-cost entrance into the city: you trade one for the other, which is why progressive commuter taxes (especially in the most affluent areas) are absolutely the right move.

 

 

Farebeating is a relative drop in the bucket on the grand scale of problems, and those fare increases are the products of people you voted for. So I hope you enjoy them! And when you elect that fascist in the fall, kiss every ounce of transportation funding goodbye--you can hitchhike to work.

Let's face it... You're an urbanite and I'm a suburbanite, so we're definitely not going to agree on this one.  You're right, folks like me elect to live away from the city (God knows I don't know how my friends tolerate living in the filth that is Manhattan), and yes I pay far more for my commute as a result, but those living in the suburban parts of the city or in the suburbs of Long Island or Westchester generally already live in upper middle to upper class communities and are paying enough in taxes.  An additional tax seems unreasonable, but your real grip is that you don't like the suburbs (for whatever reason) and prefer urban living.  So basically your mentality is Manhattan is the center of the universe, and to hell with everyone else who doesn't want to live in Manhattan.

[RailRunRob]

Let's face it... You're an urbanite and I'm a suburbanite, so we're definitely not going to agree on this one.  You're right, folks like me elect to live away from the city (God knows I don't know how my friends tolerate living in the filth that is Manhattan), and yes I pay far more for my commute as a result, but those living in the suburban parts of the city or in the suburbs of Long Island or Westchester generally already live in upper middle to upper class communities and are paying enough in taxes.  An additional tax seems unreasonable, but your real grip is that you don't like the suburbs (for whatever reason) and prefer urban living.  So basically your mentality is Manhattan is the center of the universe, and to hell with everyone else who doesn't want to live in Manhattan.

I was totally unaware I lived in the suburbs growing up. Well heck, you learn something new every day. Hey, guys, I'm from the burbs!!   yay!!!!!

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I was totally unaware I lived in the suburbs growing up. Well heck, you learn something new every day. Hey, guys, I'm from the burbs!!   yay!!!!!

Your area of Spuyten Duyvil is roughly 10 minutes from Westchester... It's still within the city but it sure as hell isn't urban that's for sure.  You're not in the suburbs, but you grew up in a suburban like neighborhood of NYC unless you think you lived in a easily accessible area with subway service (neither of which is true of Spuyten Duyvil?).  I lived in Staten Island for years... Yes, part of NYC... Is it urban? For the most part no.  It's isolated and quite suburban.

[RailRunRob]

Your area of Spuyten Duyvil is roughly 10 minutes from Westchester... It's still within the city but it sure as hell isn't urban that's for sure.  You're not in the suburbs, but you grew up in a suburban like neighborhood of NYC unless you think you lived in a easily accessible area with subway service (neither of which is true of Spuyten Duyvil?).  I lived in Staten Island for years... Yes, part of NYC... Is it urban? For the most part no.  It's isolated and quite suburban.

So would Wakefield and Eastchester (Bronx) be suburban there in walking distant of Westchester? What about Mount Vernon in Westchester suburbs? Just trying to get the lay of the land here.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So would Wakefield and Eastchester (Bronx) be suburban there in walking distant of Westchester? What about Mount Vernon in Westchester suburbs? Just trying to get the lay of the land here.

A lot of Northeast Queens could be considered suburban-like in nature and perhaps Woodlawn as it is rather isolated and has more in common with Yonkers just over the border. When I'm in Woodlawn and cross over into Yonkers, it's hard to tell the difference between NYC and Westchester. Feels like a small town.

[RailRunRob]

A lot of Northeast Queens could be considered suburban-like in nature and perhaps Woodlawn as it is rather isolated and has more in common with Yonkers just over the border. When I'm in Woodlawn and cross over into Yonkers, it's hard to tell the difference between NYC and Westchester. Feels like a small town.

I understand I've spent some time in Woodlawn. So the main factor here is the Subway?   Subway = Urban is that what were saying?  So a Parkslope, Brooklyn Heights, Williamsburg, Soho is urban correct?

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

A lot of Northeast Queens could be considered suburban-like in nature and perhaps Woodlawn as it is rather isolated and has more in common with Yonkers just over the border. When I'm in Woodlawn and cross over into Yonkers, it's hard to tell the difference between NYC and Westchester. Feels like a small town.

He asked specifically if Wakefield or Eastchester are suburban? Nice dodge there. 

[RailRunRob]

He asked specifically if Wakefield or Eastchester are suburban? Nice dodge there. 

 Worthy of being one of the best matadors. In fact neo would be jealous!

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Are you f**king kidding me?

 

That's it. I'm moving to Philadelphia after college...

Don't think SEPTA doesn't have its issues with funding, because it does. And it could really use a few more heavy and/or light rail lines to serve Philadelphia more efficiently.

[Around the Horn]

Still they don't raise the fares every two years and they provide better service on what they have.

 

I love Regional Rail for example.

 

As for expansions, with Knuppel in charge I firmly believe that once they get past the "lets get rid of the maintenance backlog" phase, you'll see more expansions on the table.

 

As of right now, expansions to Wawa on regional rail, and King of Prussia on the NHSL are essentially shovel ready and will start construction in 2017 and expansions to West Chester, Quakertown, the Broad Street line extension to the Navy Yard and the Roosevelt Blvd Line are in early planning phases.

 

With the Phila2035 plan, the city, SEPTA and other city agencies are showing an ability to come together and come up with a plan for the future Philadelphia (in 2035) which includes additional transit. One of the objectives in the plan is to completely reorganize Regional Rail and realize its potential. Considering SEPTA's attitude in the 80's, just the fact that they admitted that Regional Rail isn't meeting its potential is huge, then consider the city of Philadelphia is pushing them to fix it...

 

In short, I have more faith in SEPTA fixing the issues with their system than the MTA...

 

(also, I would be willing to have a discussion in the proper forum about the things SEPTA should do to improve its subways. I have a few ideas...[emoji3])

 

 

Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

EDIT: to add to my Phila2035 point, the governor of Pennsylvania, of all people, is pushing to reform the way the commonwealth's older cities receive funding, including consistent funding for transportation efforts. This too is a big change from the status quo. SEPTA and Philadelphia are in better hands than the MTA, and I expect we'll see a real noticeable change in the next ten to 15 years.

 

 

Sent from my iPod touch using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[Via Garibaldi 8]

He asked specifically if Wakefield or Eastchester are suburban? Nice dodge there. 

 

 

 Worthy of being one of the best matadors. In fact neo would be jealous!

I spoke about neighborhoods I'm familiar with.  I've never been in either neighborhood before, so I couldn't say.

 

I understand I've spent some time in Woodlawn. So the main factor here is the Subway?   Subway = Urban is that what were saying?  So a Parkslope, Brooklyn Heights, Williamsburg, Soho is urban correct?

The subway makes a difference I suppose in terms of the small town feel.  Woodlawn would be a lot different with one.  Park Slope, Brooklyn Heights and SoHo are all urban.... Charming but urban.... Very walkable and accessible via public transit....

[RailRunRob]

I spoke about neighborhoods I'm familiar with.  I've never been in either neighborhood before, so I couldn't say.

 

The subway makes a difference I suppose in terms of the small town feel.  Woodlawn would be a lot different with one.  Park Slope, Brooklyn Heights and SoHo are all urban.... Charming but urban.... Very walkable and accessible via public transit....

Understood, I can respect that. I'd say Wakefield and Eastchester are in the same classification from someone that's been to all four Neighborhoods especially on the back blocks . Also thanks for the clarification on Urban. I was under the crazy impression that Urban = Less than. I know crazy how could I even think that?!  Sorry about that.