MTA fare hikes still on the table next year despite pledge of ‘indefinite’ delay

[Via Garibaldi 8]

MTA fare hikes still on the table next year despite pledge of ‘indefinite’ delay

By David Meyer November 17, 2021 5:32pm Updated

MTA Chief Financial Officer Bob Foran said the system still needs additional revenue after getting federal funds. Gregory P. Mango

Fare thee unwell. 

The MTA has only figured out how to balance its budget through the middle of next year and may be forced to raise fares in July despite Gov. Kathy Hochul’s pledge earlier this week to delay fee hikes “indefinitely.” 

MTA Chief Financial Officer Bob Foran said Wednesday the MTA’s current financial plan would require four percent fare increases every two years starting next summer. 

Officials will have to make “hard, ugly choices” in order to keep fares static while avoiding massive deficits, Foran told MTA board members. 

“We need additional revenues coming in,” he said. “We have to look at those hard, ugly choices of things that have to be done. The federal funds are a godsend, but they are a bridge to the future.”

Hochul and MTA Chairman Janno Lieber on Monday said the bipartisan infrastructure package just signed by President Joe Biden had allowed the MTA to delay fare hikes “at least six months.”

Governor Hochul had previously said the MTA would not increase fares in 2022.

Gabriella Bass

The budget framework presented by Foran and Deputy Chief Financial Officer Jail Patel on Wednesday showed officials have only figured out how to stave off fare hikes through “mid-2022” — and will lose $105 million as a result.

After 2022, “the plan’s balanced bottom-line is … contingent on fare and toll increases in ’22, ’23 and ’25, which contribute a total of $1.8 billion in revenue,” Patel said.

Come 2025, the MTA will have to borrow $1 billion to balance its budget, she said.

The MTA’s rocky finances have been in crisis since the start of the COVID-19, which annihilated revenues from rider fares and state taxes. Billions of dollars in federal aid have helped the transportation authority avert financial peril for now.

“We’ve been saying this since 2017. We have been structurally out of balance every year since then,” Foran said. “We’ve been saying we need additional recurring revenues coming in every year.”

Foran said the MTA’s “ugly choices” could include concessions from labor and “aligning our service to the public’s needs.” Lieber denied the latter would amount to service cuts.

Foran added the MTA would have to make difficult choices in order to keep fares the same. Matthew McDermott

He said called delaying fare hikes “a business decision” because higher costs could suppress ridership. While he conceded “small” fee increases in mid-2022 or later may still be in the table, he said he wants to move the MTA from relying on fares to make ends meet.

“Riders have choices. People are trying to figure out what’s their new pattern: Are they commuting to work? Are they staying at home [and] how frequently? We how do they reorganize their lives after COVID? We don’t want to do anything that discourages them coming back to transit,” he said. “We found out during COVID for New York [that] we’re like the police, we’re like fire department, we’re like sanitation. We’re an essential service that needs to be paid for – and it shouldn’t be on the backs of the riders.”

Source: https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/mta-fare-hikes-still-possible-in-2022-despite-indefinite-delay/

[CenSin]

14 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

“aligning our service to the public’s needs.”

*sigh* those bullshit weasel words…

• rightsizing → firing as many people as we can get away with
• difficult decision → an easy decision routinely made by companies looking to cut costs—typically by jettisoning their expendable employees
• affected jobs → employees on the death row
• making changes → something you should be very afraid of—like a new fee being tacked onto the bill
• re-accomodate → beating the crap out of someone (especially a paying customer)
• development opportunity → not paying you more but giving you extra work
• empowering employees → pushing the responsibilities (work) down the totem pole
• let’s go Brandon…

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, CenSin said:

*sigh* those bullshit weasel words…

• rightsizing → firing as many people as we can get away with
• difficult decision → an easy decision routinely made by companies looking to cut costs—typically by jettisoning their expendable employees
• affected jobs → employees on the death row
• making changes → something you should be very afraid of—like a new fee being tacked onto the bill
• re-accomodate → beating the crap out of someone (especially a paying customer)
• development opportunity → not paying you more but giving you extra work
• empowering employees → pushing the responsibilities (work) down the totem pole
• let’s go Brandon…

What's the disturbing go me is they've received $14 billion last year and will get another $10 billion this year, and a chunk of that money is allocated for capital projects and the rest for the operational budget, so on the one hand they claim they have enough funding to carry them through to 2024, with no fare hikes or service cuts, but then on the other hand, just days later, they're claiming that they still need to look at fare hikes in 2022. What a mess... I get that their long-term situation isn't clear, but when you have the Governor saying and promising one thing and then the head of the  reversing direction just days later, it erodes public trust.

[paulrivera]

And then they wonder why people actually believe the conspiracy theory about having “2 sets of books”…

Im telling you, they’re gonna keep their word about no fare hikes (albeit kicking and screaming while having their arm twisted), but they’re going to get their service cuts in one way or the other.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, paulrivera said:

And then they wonder why people actually believe the conspiracy theory about having “2 sets of books”…

Im telling you, they’re gonna keep their word about no fare hikes (albeit kicking and screaming while having their arm twisted), but they’re going to get their service cuts in one way or the other.

I plan on speaking next month before the board, or I'll speak remotely if they still have that option because this is BS. Nobody knows what's going on. It's the blind leading the blind.

Edited November 18, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[bobtehpanda]

On 11/18/2021 at 7:02 AM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

What's the disturbing go me is they've received $14 billion last year and will get another $10 billion this year, and a chunk of that money is allocated for capital projects and the rest for the operational budget, so on the one hand they claim they have enough funding to carry them through to 2024, with no fare hikes or service cuts, but then on the other hand, just days later, they're claiming that they still need to look at fare hikes in 2022. What a mess... I get that their long-term situation isn't clear, but when you have the Governor saying and promising one thing and then the head of the  reversing direction just days later, it erodes public trust.

So as far as I remember, the biannual fare hikes are enshrined in state law as a result of the recession rescue package, and I didn't hear anything about the Legislature repealing it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

58 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

So as far as I remember, the biannual fare hikes are enshrined in state law as a result of the recession rescue package, and I didn't hear anything about the Legislature repealing it.

You are likely correct, but if they figure out a funding situation (lawmakers that is), they need to repeal that.

[bobtehpanda]

2 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You are likely correct, but if they figure out a funding situation (lawmakers that is), they need to repeal that.

Time to wait for the members of the Legislature to do the right thing.

May as well wait for the heat death of the universe.

[Lawrence St]

On 11/23/2021 at 2:33 AM, bobtehpanda said:

Time to wait for the members of the Legislature to do the right thing.

May as well wait for the heat death of the universe.

If it does come down to cutting service, any bus that duplicates the subway or has low ridership and a high subsidy, as well as the  and  need to go first. I'm sorry, but that's the way it has to be.

[Mtatransit]

On 11/18/2021 at 10:53 AM, paulrivera said:

Im telling you, they’re gonna keep their word about no fare hikes (albeit kicking and screaming while having their arm twisted), but they’re going to get their service cuts in one way or the other.

I would argue that the service cuts are already implemented.

On the subway front, 

Frequencies are drastically slashed back already especially on the B Div. What used to be every 8 minutes on weekend turned into 10 minutes, and now every 15 minutes. Service every 20 minutes reserved only for late night, is now common place throughout the system, and comes much earlier than the traditional late night periods. They currently blame it on crew shortage, but there is nothing to indicate that the headways we use to have will ever come back. (just look at how long the temporary QBL weekend 12 minutes headway lasted).

On the bus front.

Missing trip left and right. Sooner or later, MTA is going to try to space out the trips better with the now reduced workforce, and keep it that way. That is really what I will think will happen.

The next service cut unless dire will not be as obvious as we are cutting XY Line but more of, lets cut the 8:05, 8:20, 8:35 and 8:50 trips and replace it with 8:00, 8:20, and 8:40 like they have been doing for years now, but probably more often

 

[R10 2952]

Although I'm generally skeptical to any initiatives that try to hold the MTA or the Albany bosses accountable (seeing how so many efforts have fallen flat on their face over the years), one thing I do feel very strongly about is that the ill-conceived mandate for biennial fare increases needs to be repealed, whatever amount of citizens' initiative or protest it requires.

If memory serves me correctly, it was a last-minute corollary that came up late in the 2008 MTA bailout negotiations, and was forced on the agency by Malcom Smith and his caucus cronies in the State Senate (the same prick that was imprisoned on corruption a few years later).  The relief turned out to be temporary anyway, because the state raided a similar amount in funding away from the agency not long afterwards, leading to the service cuts going through as originally planned.

Given the exceptional (even by NYS standards) amount of bad faith, smoke-blowing, water-muddying, horse-trading and other crap that surrounded that particular deal, I would say the bullshit biennial fare increases are a prime candidate for elimination.

Edited December 2, 2021 by R10 2952

[MHV9218]

On 11/18/2021 at 9:57 AM, CenSin said:

*sigh* those bullshit weasel words…

• let’s go Brandon…

Can you stick to the topic? I'm glad you think the guy who talked for four years straight about "Infrastructure Week" and never signed a single thing would have been better for the MTA. At least we have a bipartisan stimulus bill and work is actually getting done.

[JAzumah]

On 11/23/2021 at 2:29 AM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You are likely correct, but if they figure out a funding situation (lawmakers that is), they need to repeal that.

They have not!

[JAzumah]

1 hour ago, MHV9218 said:

Can you stick to the topic? I'm glad you think the guy who talked for four years straight about "Infrastructure Week" and never signed a single thing would have been better for the MTA. At least we have a bipartisan stimulus bill and work is actually getting done.

He IS on topic. 

When you see Goldman Sachs talking like this, people should play attention. There are a number of counterproductive policies that the city, state, and federal governments are implementing under "executive order" that would NEVER pass muster. These actions have consequences for the city's future health. The recovery in NYC is based on the financial industry scaling back up (in part) and it looks like that are continuing to use Texas and Florida as a hedge. If they continue to do that, commuter rail ridership will NEVER return. How many other industries are doing this quietly? How many industries are offloading space in NYC from landlords that refuse to cut them a price break?

Goldman Sachs CEO Says Declining New York City May Lose Status As Global Financial Hub

[T to Dyre Avenue]

4 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

Can you stick to the topic? I'm glad you think the guy who talked for four years straight about "Infrastructure Week" and never signed a single thing would have been better for the MTA. At least we have a bipartisan stimulus bill and work is actually getting done.

Who said anything about that guy? What Foran is saying here, should be the real cause for concern. I mean the MTA is going to receive many billions of dollars in Federal. Other transit agencies are somehow able to do more with less, including the CTA and LACMTA. Why can’t the MTA? I agree that the bipartisan stimulus bill and let’s keep getting the work that’s being done, done.

On 11/26/2021 at 12:58 PM, Lawrence St said:

If it does come down to cutting service, any bus that duplicates the subway or has low ridership and a high subsidy, as well as the  and  need to go first. I'm sorry, but that's the way it has to be.

Fare hikes and service cuts should be off the table entirely right now. It is both ridiculous and greedy of MTA top brass to even be talking about that now. Other transit agencies do more with less, so the MTA has no excuses to cut service and/or raise fares in the face of receiving many billions of dollars in Federal aid. 

3 hours ago, JAzumah said:

They have not!

Then the Governor and the State Legislature need to get off their asses and codify into State Law a true source of dedicated funding right now and stop the bullshit.

3 hours ago, JAzumah said:

He IS on topic. 

When you see Goldman Sachs talking like this, people should play attention. There are a number of counterproductive policies that the city, state, and federal governments are implementing under "executive order" that would NEVER pass muster. These actions have consequences for the city's future health. The recovery in NYC is based on the financial industry scaling back up (in part) and it looks like that are continuing to use Texas and Florida as a hedge. If they continue to do that, commuter rail ridership will NEVER return. How many other industries are doing this quietly? How many industries are offloading space in NYC from landlords that refuse to cut them a price break?

Goldman Sachs CEO Says Declining New York City May Lose Status As Global Financial Hub

Given that a big pop up with Ben Shapiro saying I should help stop vaccine mandates flashed on my iPhone screen the second I attempted to read the article and that the Daily Wire cited the New York Post, I’m a bit skeptical about how much truth there is in this article. Now I’m not here to get all political about the Post and Shapiro (I save that for Twitter, 😆). But I will say in response to your question (which is a good one and which I bolded) that if greedy landlords are going push businesses and corporations out of New York, then maybe it’s time to reevaluate just how easy/difficult it should really be for landlords to evict corporate tenants. If the businesses/corporations are doing good business and paying their rents promptly, it shouldn’t be so easy for landlords to kick them out.

For what it’s worth, I think the notion that New York is going to lose its status as a global financial hub is a bunch of bullshit. I mean, I read articles about how Brexit was going to cause London to lose its financial status and corporations were going to move to other cities, including New York - the exact opposite of what this Daily Wire is trying to convey. It’s all a bit alarmist to me.

Edited December 4, 2021 by T to Dyre Avenue

[JAzumah]

6 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Then the Governor and the State Legislature need to get off their asses and codify into State Law a true source of dedicated funding right now and stop the bullshit.

They are the ones dipping their hands into the MTA revenue stream to fix problems everywhere. They are one of the biggest reasons why the MTA needs to increase the fare every 2 years. The MTA wants to function in spite of state general fund raids.
 

6 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Now I’m not here to get all political about the Post and Shapiro (I save that for Twitter, 😆).

Transit funding is very political. We can't avoid that discussion no matter how hard we try.

The Post provides a different perspective and the reality is that some cities are surviving more on their history than actual quality management. It is true for NYC, Chicago, and San Francisco. The entrenched power structure in NYC and San Francisco have very little interest in standalone affordable housing, which could be a major driver in subway ridership. Second Avenue was upzoned in the 1950s in expectation of subway service. All of that is political.
 

6 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

For what it’s worth, I think the notion that New York is going to lose its status as a global financial hub is a bunch of bullshit.

I don't. There is nothing stopping the financial industry from relocating to West Palm Beach and Miami or Houston. No state income tax. Safer environment. Great weather 9-10 months of the year. Rail expansion in both places. Massive intercontinental flight hubs in both places. The largest number of Fortune 500 companies are in Texas and it has been that way for the last 10 years or more. 

[T to Dyre Avenue]

14 hours ago, JAzumah said:

They are the ones dipping their hands into the MTA revenue stream to fix problems everywhere. They are one of the biggest reasons why the MTA needs to increase the fare every 2 years. The MTA wants to function in spite of state general fund raids.
 

Transit funding is very political. We can't avoid that discussion no matter how hard we try.

The Post provides a different perspective and the reality is that some cities are surviving more on their history than actual quality management. It is true for NYC, Chicago, and San Francisco. The entrenched power structure in NYC and San Francisco have very little interest in standalone affordable housing, which could be a major driver in subway ridership. Second Avenue was upzoned in the 1950s in expectation of subway service. All of that is political.
 

I don't. There is nothing stopping the financial industry from relocating to West Palm Beach and Miami or Houston. No state income tax. Safer environment. Great weather 9-10 months of the year. Rail expansion in both places. Massive intercontinental flight hubs in both places. The largest number of Fortune 500 companies are in Texas and it has been that way for the last 10 years or more. 

I’ll agree with the parts about state legislators not keeping their hands out of the MTA revenue stream and that transit funding is very political. That’s obvious and it’s got to change or it’s going to keep wrecking the system. And there is some truth to NYC, SF and Chicago pols banking on surviving on their cities’ histories rather than building on it - although Chicago did build a pretty decent amount of new ‘L’ lines post-WW2, even though they eliminated a lot, including their very extensive surface rail system. But no, resting on your laurels should be a big no-no for any politician worth their salt (then again, too many aren’t).

The rest I disagree with. And I don’t want to drag the thread way off topic, so I’m not going to discuss why.

Edited December 5, 2021 by T to Dyre Avenue

[JAzumah]

52 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The rest I disagree with. And I don’t want to drag the thread way off topic, so I’m not going to discuss why.

I understand why you don't want to go there, but the MTA has actually talked about how they project their revenue in the past. In the time that they were accused of having two books, the MTA simply had multiple projections of the future. Everything I mentioned in the last post is an input into the MTA's modeling of future revenue.

That includes the number of large businesses that locate in the Midtown and Downtown CBDs. They drive traffic on the MTA's entire network. It has an impact on the value of real estate transactions in the MCTD (Metropolitan Commuter Transit District). It affects how aggressively road pricing can be done for congestion pricing. It impacts how many people need to travel during rush hours and to which destinations. If your head office moves from Manhattan to Miami and you live in NJ, nothing has changed for you, but no NYS entity gets any of that money any more. 

By the way, who prices the bonds that the MTA sells? That would be the financial industry.

Goldman's advice is an early warning signal for corporate America. This time last year, the restrictions were eased because the New York Stock Exchange threatened to move to Florida. The NYSE has tons of businesses that depend on being near the stock exchange and they would have moved as well. NYC is trying to sell itself as open because being heavily restricted was crushing all of these heavily invested businesses and they were about to gulp the economic Slim-Fast and essentially "start over" somewhere else.

The economy in New York City's metro area is the single biggest driver for the MTA's economic projections. They are putting on a brave face, but they are terrified that people can earn a living without riding mass transit in this region. Frankly, all of us are. How do you run public transport reliably with 40% of your commuters traveling 3x weekly? The state of the current city and the shape of the future city drives the MTA's revenue projections, including needed fare hikes.

The MTA will need a fare hike in April, but they will have to do more than that. They will have to articulate their vision for the region and for their own progress. They will have to weigh in on general COVID policies. They will have to convince businesses to stick around. They will have to be more nimble with bus and rail capacity. They can take some of those buses they can't fill right now and accelerate some smaller rail projects. As much as we want to silo different MTA issues, we can't really do that as so much goes into their revenue projections. Our weak political leadership impacts their revenue.

Fun fact: 13 GOP folks in the House pushed through the infrastructure bill. All of them were from the New York Metropolitan Area. Irrespective of how people feel about Republicans (I am one of them), this bill only passed because there was real money for real infrastructure in the region. They are catching hell from the rest of the GOP over it, but they made the right decision for us. Therefore, it would behoove people around here to sell better transit and better cities to EVERYONE and not just the little urbanist bubbles. There is a LOT of transit being built in red states and the thing that drives their costs up is lack of density. They know how to fix that problem and that is to steal big corporations from stagnant blue regions and move their workforces south and west. If that continues to happen, there would be no way out for the MTA.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

On 12/4/2021 at 10:21 AM, JAzumah said:

They have not!

I know, hence why I said "if"...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 hour ago, JAzumah said:

I understand why you don't want to go there, but the MTA has actually talked about how they project their revenue in the past. In the time that they were accused of having two books, the MTA simply had multiple projections of the future. Everything I mentioned in the last post is an input into the MTA's modeling of future revenue.

That includes the number of large businesses that locate in the Midtown and Downtown CBDs. They drive traffic on the MTA's entire network. It has an impact on the value of real estate transactions in the MCTD (Metropolitan Commuter Transit District). It affects how aggressively road pricing can be done for congestion pricing. It impacts how many people need to travel during rush hours and to which destinations. If your head office moves from Manhattan to Miami and you live in NJ, nothing has changed for you, but no NYS entity gets any of that money any more. 

By the way, who prices the bonds that the MTA sells? That would be the financial industry.

Goldman's advice is an early warning signal for corporate America. This time last year, the restrictions were eased because the New York Stock Exchange threatened to move to Florida. The NYSE has tons of businesses that depend on being near the stock exchange and they would have moved as well. NYC is trying to sell itself as open because being heavily restricted was crushing all of these heavily invested businesses and they were about to gulp the economic Slim-Fast and essentially "start over" somewhere else.

The economy in New York City's metro area is the single biggest driver for the MTA's economic projections. They are putting on a brave face, but they are terrified that people can earn a living without riding mass transit in this region. Frankly, all of us are. How do you run public transport reliably with 40% of your commuters traveling 3x weekly? The state of the current city and the shape of the future city drives the MTA's revenue projections, including needed fare hikes.

The MTA will need a fare hike in April, but they will have to do more than that. They will have to articulate their vision for the region and for their own progress. They will have to weigh in on general COVID policies. They will have to convince businesses to stick around. They will have to be more nimble with bus and rail capacity. They can take some of those buses they can't fill right now and accelerate some smaller rail projects. As much as we want to silo different MTA issues, we can't really do that as so much goes into their revenue projections. Our weak political leadership impacts their revenue.

Fun fact: 13 GOP folks in the House pushed through the infrastructure bill. All of them were from the New York Metropolitan Area. Irrespective of how people feel about Republicans (I am one of them), this bill only passed because there was real money for real infrastructure in the region. They are catching hell from the rest of the GOP over it, but they made the right decision for us. Therefore, it would behoove people around here to sell better transit and better cities to EVERYONE and not just the little urbanist bubbles. There is a LOT of transit being built in red states and the thing that drives their costs up is lack of density. They know how to fix that problem and that is to steal big corporations from stagnant blue regions and move their workforces south and west. If that continues to happen, there would be no way out for the MTA.

 

23 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Who said anything about that guy? What Foran is saying here, should be the real cause for concern. I mean the MTA is going to receive many billions of dollars in Federal. Other transit agencies are somehow able to do more with less, including the CTA and LACMTA. Why can’t the MTA? I agree that the bipartisan stimulus bill and let’s keep getting the work that’s being done, done.

Fare hikes and service cuts should be off the table entirely right now. It is both ridiculous and greedy of MTA top brass to even be talking about that now. Other transit agencies do more with less, so the MTA has no excuses to cut service and/or raise fares in the face of receiving many billions of dollars in Federal aid. 

Then the Governor and the State Legislature need to get off their asses and codify into State Law a true source of dedicated funding right now and stop the bullshit.

Given that a big pop up with Ben Shapiro saying I should help stop vaccine mandates flashed on my iPhone screen the second I attempted to read the article and that the Daily Wire cited the New York Post, I’m a bit skeptical about how much truth there is in this article. Now I’m not here to get all political about the Post and Shapiro (I save that for Twitter, 😆). But I will say in response to your question (which is a good one and which I bolded) that if greedy landlords are going push businesses and corporations out of New York, then maybe it’s time to reevaluate just how easy/difficult it should really be for landlords to evict corporate tenants. If the businesses/corporations are doing good business and paying their rents promptly, it shouldn’t be so easy for landlords to kick them out.

For what it’s worth, I think the notion that New York is going to lose its status as a global financial hub is a bunch of bullshit. I mean, I read articles about how Brexit was going to cause London to lose its financial status and corporations were going to move to other cities, including New York - the exact opposite of what this Daily Wire is trying to convey. It’s all a bit alarmist to me.

Sorry, but finance companies have already been moving some operations elsewhere, while keeping their headquarters here, though I do agree that having NYSE move elsewhere would harm NYC, but listen, NYSE would stand to lose as well. After all, it started here in NYC and is one of the largest exchanges in the world. That means lots of tax $$$ for NYC. It has remained here in part because of the prestige that Wall Street brings. That said, a lot of the big boys moved back house operations elsewhere years ago. Some moved to New Jersey, some to Connecticut and others to places like Florida. These are parts of the business that could be done anywhere and made no sense to be in high tax, high cost places like NYC from an operations standpoint.

Now, for all of other highly paid folks like the analysts, management folks, etc., sure you can move elsewhere, but the question is, will you be able to find the talent in those places, so I think that's more important than the whole remote situation. If ridership comes back, it's been projected to take years to happen, and as far as I'm concerned, many companies see that having either a full remote or hybrid option actually means HIGHER productivity, LOWER overhead costs, HIGHER retention rates, etc. That's why Goldman Sachs made moves recently to keep their workforce happy with incentives such as higher compensation packages and a more flexible work schedule. Technology has shown us that either full remote or hybrid work CAN work in most cases. There will be some places where perhaps more in-face, human interaction is necessary to finish projects, etc., but that is more of the exception and not the rule.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[JAzumah]

13 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Now, for all of other highly paid folks like the analysts, management folks, etc., sure you can move elsewhere, but the question is, will you be able to find the talent in those places, so I think that's more important than the whole remote situation.

Read that GS article I posted. The demand to move from NYC is so high, they are no longer taking outside applications for their Florida office.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

1 minute ago, JAzumah said:

Read that GS article I posted. The demand to move from NYC is so high, they are no longer taking outside applications for their Florida office.

This has been going on since COVID started and the whole WFH situation has dragged on. Florida isn't the only place. You've got Austin Texas, for example, which has turned into this arts, financial, tech hub of sorts, but it's still low-cost compared to places like NYC. Florida is welcoming lots of New Yorkers with open arms in a number of sectors and people and companies alike are accepting the offers. Low cost of living, no state income taxes, and overall lower tax rates.

However, you do have people that come back to NYC. Look at how many people that were living elsewhere moved back. The cachet of NYC still speaks for something and includes the talent pool. 

[B35 via Church]

On 11/18/2021 at 9:57 AM, CenSin said:

*sigh* those bullshit weasel words…

• rightsizing = difficult decision = affected jobs = making changes = re-accomodate = development opportunity = empowering employees → firing as many people as we can get away with

Simplified.

On 11/26/2021 at 1:47 PM, Mtatransit said:

I would argue that the service cuts are already implemented.

On the subway front, 

Frequencies are drastically slashed back already especially on the B Div. What used to be every 8 minutes on weekend turned into 10 minutes, and now every 15 minutes. Service every 20 minutes reserved only for late night, is now common place throughout the system, and comes much earlier than the traditional late night periods. They currently blame it on crew shortage, but there is nothing to indicate that the headways we use to have will ever come back. (just look at how long the temporary QBL weekend 12 minutes headway lasted).

On the bus front.

Missing trip left and right. Sooner or later, MTA is going to try to space out the trips better with the now reduced workforce, and keep it that way. That is really what I will think will happen.

The next service cut unless dire will not be as obvious as we are cutting XY Line but more of, lets cut the 8:05, 8:20, 8:35 and 8:50 trips and replace it with 8:00, 8:20, and 8:40 like they have been doing for years now, but probably more often

Cuts are already/definitely happening.... On a large scale, they don't have to apprise the public of every paper cut - just the blatantly obvious slash wounds & deep stab wounds....

The passive/slick actions of theirs are what you're speaking to.... When the MTA gears commentary regarding cuts to the public on a large scale, they are speaking to making major/macro actions...

12 hours ago, JAzumah said:

Transit funding is very political. We can't avoid that discussion no matter how hard we try.

Right,.. While $$$$$ is the obvious catalyst/factor, public transit in general is political... Once you get into things that massively affects society (negatively or positively) - even if you don't use public transit, political involvement is inevitable.... I'd go as far as to say discussion spaces like these wouldn't really exist if the nuances that comprise public transit weren't ultimately political.... It would be myopic to believe public transit was as black & white as say, mixing kool aid in sugar & going OooOhH Yeah!!!!!!!! after ingestion....

In his defense though, he did say he'd rather have that part of the discussion on another platform (twitter).... Can't really blame him for sparing the forum here (basically) from a bunch of red vs. blue shit.....

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

In his defense though, he did say he'd rather have that part of the discussion on another platform (twitter).... Can't really blame him for sparing the forum here (basically) from a bunch of red vs. blue shit.....

Right. The politics is not helpful, particularly when locally both sides basically don't admit the MTA has a spending problem, and if they do, they signed off on that every two years fare hikes thing and called it a day, maybe sprinkled in some good ol' "two books auditing" to make it sound like they wanted to do something. Uncle Sam cannot fix the fact that the MTA's financial problems are structural in nature.

Quite frankly, I don't remember the last time we had a Governor, State Assembly Speaker, or State Senate Leader who did not eventually have some federal indictment against them. I'm not holding out my hopes for Hochul, Stewart-Cousins, or Heastie either.

[bobtehpanda]

22 hours ago, JAzumah said:

I don't. There is nothing stopping the financial industry from relocating to West Palm Beach and Miami or Houston. No state income tax. Safer environment. Great weather 9-10 months of the year. Rail expansion in both places. Massive intercontinental flight hubs in both places. The largest number of Fortune 500 companies are in Texas and it has been that way for the last 10 years or more. 

There is, and it's called the laws of physics.

The financial industry, particularly investment banking, is about executing transactions as fast as possible, because if you let someone in front of you go first they can snatch a better price before you can. They will literally spend billions of dollars laying new cable across the Atlantic to save 5 milliseconds. 5 milliseconds could be the difference between hundreds of millions of dollars in profit.

How that comes into play is that New York is

• the physical home of the stock exchange
• one of the closest big cities to London and Europe, which is why
• it's the landing point of nearly all major transatlantic cables

Any firm moving to another city to do financial transactions would have to add in the additional transaction time of the distance it takes to send information from wherever they are to New York and onwards. The speed of light is not instant, it still will be slower for messages to travel a longer distance. The only cities with shorter distances would be in New England or eastern Canada, neither of which is particularly appealing compared to New York.