Fare capping is not a solution

[BrooklynBus]

https://www.qchron.com/opinion/columns/fare-capping-is-not-the-solution-for-mta-riders/article_fd3295eb-6d4b-52de-b38c-5ef658dd439f.html

[Cait Sith]

Keep it in one section of the forum.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Cait Sith

[Lex]

In other words, proximity fares. Because everyone should need to carry around an oversized chart just to figure out how much their trip would cost...

[BrooklynBus]

2 hours ago, Cait Sith said:

Keep it in one section of the forum.

But it applies to both subways and buses (moreso to buses) and not everyone reads both forums. I rarely check the subway forum myself. 

[Wallyhorse]

22 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

But it applies to both subways and buses (moreso to buses) and not everyone reads both forums. I rarely check the subway forum myself. 

Exactly.

I don't usually read the bus forum either.  

Anyway, I get where the author is coming from on this, however, I don't see the mentality at the MTA changing either. 

[Lex]

7 hours ago, Wallyhorse said:

Exactly.

I don't usually read the bus forum either.  

Anyway, I get where the author is coming from on this, however, I don't see the mentality at the MTA changing either. 

You did notice who the author is, right?

[Wallyhorse]

22 hours ago, Lex said:

You did notice who the author is, right?

I know by his actual name. not by any handles. 

[MHV9218]

This is arguably a pretty regressive model, given that most people who live further away from the city center and commute for longer times have less money, not more. If we were talking wealthy people commuting in from the suburbs, that's one thing. But the effect here of a guy in East New York having to pay, let's say, $4.00 to get to Midtown, while a guy going from his house on the Upper East Side to Midtown paying $2.00 – I'm not really sure why that's a desirable outcome. Seems like penalizing people who live further away for living further away, even though it's rarely a choice that people do. I get that you're throwing in the bus trips, but I'd be surprised if there are really so many three-legged bus-bus-subway rides so much as just long, long bus-subway rides for most people coming into Manhattan from the boroughs. Your average Far Rockaway commuter is not going to benefit from an extra bus ride being thrown in, but would definitely be angry about paying more for the one-seat ride on the A. 

[BrooklynBus]

I never said anything about a $2 bus ride or soneone in the A paying more money, so I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as those needing three buses to make a trip, that is moreso the case in Queens than in other boroughs, though it is necessary in some isolated areas of Brooklyn also like Gerritsen Beach, Red Hook and Canarsie. Less of a problem in more centralized areas like Flatbush. All not areas for people of wealth. 

[MHV9218]

This is your language in the article:

"Since the MTA does not know where you get off, there should be a fare based on all transfers that can be made within two hours of entering the system. While not entirely eliminating double fares, which would still be required for extra lengthy trips, no one making a short trip would be penalized as is presently the case."

"Imagine how many more would use transit if the cost of a one-bus trip was reduced to $2.50; the subway fare and a two-bus trip, and a subway-bus transfer remained at $2.75; and a two-hour trip on unlimited buses and subways would cost $3, with a daily fare cap of $5.50 or $6."

This reads to me as suggesting that the cost of a trip would be dependent on its length, so that longer trips cost more, and shorter trips cost less. I chose the A as an example of a very long trip that could be a two-hour unlimited trip. Is this not what you're suggesting? 

 

[Lex]

4 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

I never said anything about a $2 bus ride or soneone in the A paying more money, so I have no idea what you are talking about. As far as those needing three buses to make a trip, that is moreso the case in Queens than in other boroughs, though it is necessary in some isolated areas of Brooklyn also like Gerritsen Beach, Red Hook and Canarsie. Less of a problem in more centralized areas like Flatbush. All not areas for people of wealth. 

In other words, you didn't really think about this.

I can't help but wonder if you've ever used BART or the DC Metro even once in your life. The only difference between what you want and what they have (aside from the inclusion/exclusion of buses) is the time penalty you want.

[Lex]

3 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

This is your language in the article:

"Since the MTA does not know where you get off, there should be a fare based on all transfers that can be made within two hours of entering the system. While not entirely eliminating double fares, which would still be required for extra lengthy trips, no one making a short trip would be penalized as is presently the case."

"Imagine how many more would use transit if the cost of a one-bus trip was reduced to $2.50; the subway fare and a two-bus trip, and a subway-bus transfer remained at $2.75; and a two-hour trip on unlimited buses and subways would cost $3, with a daily fare cap of $5.50 or $6."

This reads to me as suggesting that the cost of a trip would be dependent on its length, so that longer trips cost more, and shorter trips cost less. I chose the A as an example of a very long trip that could be a two-hour unlimited trip. Is this not what you're suggesting? 

 

It took me a bit to process this, but he contradicted himself with this one portion.

[Theli11]

I feel like the solution to the problem presented in the article is the allowance of a free 3-legged transfer. As someone who lives on the edge of Alphabet City along the FDR, the closest stations are too far away for me to walk to on a regular commute (like to school/work etc.) I'd usually take the bus to the train. If I need a bus at the other end of the route, I'd get double fared. Another example would be if I'm coming home along 5th Avenue and I need to take a bus. Worse Case Scenario is the only bus for 10 minutes is the M4 (which only goes to 31/5th Av and I still need to get to another downtown bus for the M14D or M8). If I transfer to another downtown bus I end up double fared or not having enough rides and being forced to walk home from Astor Place. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

25 minutes ago, Theli11 said:

I feel like the solution to the problem presented in the article is the allowance of a free 3-legged transfer. As someone who lives on the edge of Alphabet City along the FDR, the closest stations are too far away for me to walk to on a regular commute (like to school/work etc.) I'd usually take the bus to the train. If I need a bus at the other end of the route, I'd get double fared. Another example would be if I'm coming home along 5th Avenue and I need to take a bus. Worse Case Scenario is the only bus for 10 minutes is the M4 (which only goes to 31/5th Av and I still need to get to another downtown bus for the M14D or M8). If I transfer to another downtown bus I end up double fared or not having enough rides and being forced to walk home from Astor Place. 

I'm in the same predicament in Riverdale.  Double fare zone.  That's another reason I just stick with the express bus and then transfer from there, as technically the express bus cuts out the whole two fare situation, but in your case, you are quite isolated. I've had meetings for work over there in the past, and I have just grabbed an Uber.  It's a pain even from my office in Midtown. I couldn't imagine living over there unless I drove or something.

[BrooklynBus]

On 12/21/2021 at 2:50 PM, MHV9218 said:

This is your language in the article:

"Since the MTA does not know where you get off, there should be a fare based on all transfers that can be made within two hours of entering the system. While not entirely eliminating double fares, which would still be required for extra lengthy trips, no one making a short trip would be penalized as is presently the case."

"Imagine how many more would use transit if the cost of a one-bus trip was reduced to $2.50; the subway fare and a two-bus trip, and a subway-bus transfer remained at $2.75; and a two-hour trip on unlimited buses and subways would cost $3, with a daily fare cap of $5.50 or $6."

This reads to me as suggesting that the cost of a trip would be dependent on its length, so that longer trips cost more, and shorter trips cost less. I chose the A as an example of a very long trip that could be a two-hour unlimited trip. Is this not what you're suggesting? 

 

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. There would be a relationship to length but the fare wouldn’t be dependent on length. A lot would depend on how far you will be traveling on the last bus you are riding if you start with a bus or subway. You could travel 90 minutes on one or more trains and then ride another hour on your last bus for one fare. Or you could ride an hour on your first bus, take a train for 45 minutes and if the bus comes right away, ride another hour on the last bus. Those are extreme examples, all more than two hours for one fare. A typical example would be a 15 minute bus ride, an hour on the subway and another 30 minutes on a bus. (Waiting for the first bus does not count, but waiting for the first train would count.)

Don’t you think that is fairer than taking a bus for 15 minutes,10 minutes waiting, a second bus for 15 minutes, five minute wait, and a third bus for 15 minutes (an hour trip) for two fares? 

[BrooklynBus]

On 12/21/2021 at 6:29 PM, Lex said:

It took me a bit to process this, but he contradicted himself with this one portion.

I don’t see a contradiction. I am saying a max daily fare could also be an option. That would mean that All no one would be charged more than two fares a day. So if someone is charged a double fare in the morning for a long trip, his trip home would be free. 

5 hours ago, Theli11 said:

I feel like the solution to the problem presented in the article is the allowance of a free 3-legged transfer. As someone who lives on the edge of Alphabet City along the FDR, the closest stations are too far away for me to walk to on a regular commute (like to school/work etc.) I'd usually take the bus to the train. If I need a bus at the other end of the route, I'd get double fared. Another example would be if I'm coming home along 5th Avenue and I need to take a bus. Worse Case Scenario is the only bus for 10 minutes is the M4 (which only goes to 31/5th Av and I still need to get to another downtown bus for the M14D or M8). If I transfer to another downtown bus I end up double fared or not having enough rides and being forced to walk home from Astor Place. 

I believe last year there was a bill in the Assembly to require the MTA to provide three-legged transfers. Apparently it went nowhere. Just publicity for the person who introduced it so he becomes the good guy that cares. It is also possible that some trips could require triple fare which a three legged transfer wouldn’t solve. 

[Lex]

1 minute ago, BrooklynBus said:

I don’t see a contradiction. I am saying a max daily fare could also be an option. That would mean that All no one would be charged more than two fares a day. So if someone is charged a double fare in the morning for a long trip, his trip home would be free.

Then you must be blind because you literally presented the very thing you were railing against (as a concept) as a solution.

8 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. There would be a relationship to length but the fare wouldn’t be dependent on length. A lot would depend on how far you will be traveling on the last bus you are riding if you start with a bus or subway. You could travel 90 minutes on one or more trains and then ride another hour on your last bus for one fare. Or you could ride an hour on your first bus, take a train for 45 minutes and if the bus comes right away, ride another hour on the last bus. Those are extreme examples, all more than two hours for one fare. A typical example would be a 15 minute bus ride, an hour on the subway and another 30 minutes on a bus. (Waiting for the first bus does not count, but waiting for the first train would count.)

Don’t you think that is fairer than taking a bus for 15 minutes,10 minutes waiting, a second bus for 15 minutes, five minute wait, and a third bus for 15 minutes (an hour trip) for two fares? 

One of your suggestions for a daily cap was $5.50. The current fare is $2.75, and hitting this cap would come ridiculously quickly (two taps if spaced out to an appreciable degree, three otherwise). Your proximity-fare-that's-not-a-proximity-fare scheme would be far more work for no gain. I should also mention that the listed price for the Fun Pass (when discontinued) was $8.25, meaning that your daily cap proposal at $6 would be a bargain for a single day before adjusting for inflation (and the lower $5.50 would have a bit more appeal).

In the realm of transit, measures of time are useful for comparing the theoretical (schedules) to reality (either close or way off). Alone, they are useless for describing the quality of a passenger's journey. The hypotheticals you've presented are therefore utterly meaningless. Of course, once you start presenting more significant details, your "solution" shatters under .1% of its own weight, as it quickly becomes clear that origin/destination pairs will literally be all over the map, "robbing" those covering shorter distances while "rewarding" those covering longer ones (much like the flat fares you decry). Oops. Oh, and to offset that (without the time component), you'd need to set different prices for different O/D pairs, which only becomes more complex when you increase how many routes and stops there are, which easily depresses transit use for most people (sheer complexity and the penalties for taking longer trips, while shorter ones can ultimately be done by hoofing it, in most cases). Oops again.

[BrooklynBus]

1 hour ago, Lex said:

Then you must be blind because you literally presented the very thing you were railing against (as a concept) as a solution.

One of your suggestions for a daily cap was $5.50. The current fare is $2.75, and hitting this cap would come ridiculously quickly (two taps if spaced out to an appreciable degree, three otherwise). Your proximity-fare-that's-not-a-proximity-fare scheme would be far more work for no gain. I should also mention that the listed price for the Fun Pass (when discontinued) was $8.25, meaning that your daily cap proposal at $6 would be a bargain for a single day before adjusting for inflation (and the lower $5.50 would have a bit more appeal).

In the realm of transit, measures of time are useful for comparing the theoretical (schedules) to reality (either close or way off). Alone, they are useless for describing the quality of a passenger's journey. The hypotheticals you've presented are therefore utterly meaningless. Of course, once you start presenting more significant details, your "solution" shatters under .1% of its own weight, as it quickly becomes clear that origin/destination pairs will literally be all over the map, "robbing" those covering shorter distances while "rewarding" those covering longer ones (much like the flat fares you decry). Oops. Oh, and to offset that (without the time component), you'd need to set different prices for different O/D pairs, which only becomes more complex when you increase how many routes and stops there are, which easily depresses transit use for most people (sheer complexity and the penalties for taking longer trips, while shorter ones can ultimately be done by hoofing it, in most cases). Oops again.

Okay, you think $6 would be too much of a bargain for a daily pass. Fair enough, so you price it a little higher. I don’t see why my hypotheticals are meaningless. How am I robbing those covering shorter distances and rewarding those covering longer distances? I am doing the exact opposite. 

The transit fare has always made no sense. I just found an old book of transfers from 1973 and looked at a few of them. It turned out my friend why attended Kingsborough at that time paid a fare and a half (add a ride) to get to school using two buses because there was no free transfer. It turned out he could have gotten to school on one fare if he took four buses. 

If you are so smart, what is your solution to a fairer fare since you don’t like what I proposed? 

[B35 via Church]

Quote

"The answer is to have a fare not based on the number of vehicles required, but on the amount of time spent on the system, as I first suggested to them in 2017. Since the MTA does not know where you get off, there should be a fare based on all transfers that can be made within two hours of entering the system. While not entirely eliminating double fares, which would still be required for extra lengthy trips, no one making a short trip would be penalized as is presently the case."

Suffolk county (SCT) does this, to a point.... The paper transfer itself is 25 cents, but you can ride up to 2 bus routes for free (so, up to 3 total buses for $2.50 - the base fare [$2.25] + the cost of the xfer).... The grace period is also 2 hours.... They do it because their routes in general are infrequent; as a means of trying to encourage ridership..... Ironically, it's not widely taken advantage of by its riders because their routes are so infrequent... Here in NYC OTOH, that wouldn't be a problem - as subway lines & the vast majority of bus routes operate at better than coverage headways (30 mins. or so)....

Quote

"Only about 30 percent of bus trips can be made with a single bus. Imagine how many more would use transit if the cost of a one-bus trip was reduced to $2.50; the subway fare and a two-bus trip, and a subway-bus transfer remained at $2.75; and a two-hour trip on unlimited buses and subways would cost $3, with a daily fare cap of $5.50 or $6."

• Single bus trip: $2.50 (25 cent savings)
• Subway + up to 2 bus xfers: $2.75 (no monetary savings, but you get an extra xfer)
• Unlimited bus and/or subway trips for 2 hours: $3.00, with a daily cap of $5.50 or $6.00 (indeterminate about of monetary savings & xfers)

The last part of the suggestion is quite the leap from the first two parts of the suggestion.... But what I'm not understanding is how you scribe a whole article titled "Fare capping is not the solution for MTA riders", but then go on to suggest a cap as part of your suggestion? At that point, it becomes, the scenario that the MTA is suggesting a fare cap for isn't the solution, and your scenario/suggestion that includes a fare cap is a better solution.... For the record, I'm not even necessarily questioning your solution itself, as much as I'm questioning what your actual position is, when it comes to fare capping in general.... You can't expect readers not to pick up on that.... Said title implicates that you're totally against a fare cap of any sort (which is actually my sentiment when it comes to this fare cap shit the MTA is all of a sudden presenting, which piqued the interest into reading the article... well that, and @Lex's last post up until this point )....

Aye, it worked though... You got your click & view.

Quote

The MTA is too concerned with losing revenue by allowing round trips on one fare, which can be done anyway today in some cases with a little ingenuity. The MTA and its predecessors also did not allow many bus transfers or transfers to the subway for over 50 years using the same excuse that too much revenue would be lost.

Man, their so-called concern with losing revenue (regardless of by what measures) isn't much more than a dog & pony show... When I read an e-mail like what was copied & pasted onto this post from @Mtatransit, there isn't much that needs to be said...

Who needs ingenuity anymore, when Mf-ers waltz onto these damn buses & on through the emergency exits to enter the subway system, for the convenient price of zilch.....

[BrooklynBus]

15 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Suffolk county (SCT) does this, to a point.... The paper transfer itself is 25 cents, but you can ride up to 2 bus routes for free (so, up to 3 total buses for $2.50 - the base fare [$2.25] + the cost of the xfer).... The grace period is also 2 hours.... They do it because their routes in general are infrequent; as a means of trying to encourage ridership..... Ironically, it's not widely taken advantage of by its riders because their routes are so infrequent... Here in NYC OTOH, that wouldn't be a problem - as subway lines & the vast majority of bus routes operate at better than coverage headways (30 mins. or so)....

• Single bus trip: $2.50 (25 cent savings)
• Subway + up to 2 bus xfers: $2.75 (no monetary savings, but you get an extra xfer)
• Unlimited bus and/or subway trips for 2 hours: $3.00, with a daily cap of $5.50 or $6.00 (indeterminate about of monetary savings & xfers)

The last part of the suggestion is quite the leap from the first two parts of the suggestion.... But what I'm not understanding is how you scribe a whole article titled "Fare capping is not the solution for MTA riders", but then go on to suggest a cap as part of your suggestion? At that point, it becomes, the scenario that the MTA is suggesting a fare cap for isn't the solution, and your scenario/suggestion that includes a fare cap is a better solution.... For the record, I'm not even necessarily questioning your solution itself, as much as I'm questioning what your actual position is, when it comes to fare capping in general.... You can't expect readers not to pick up on that.... Said title implicates that you're totally against a fare cap of any sort (which is actually my sentiment when it comes to this fare cap shit the MTA is all of a sudden presenting, which piqued the interest into reading the article... well that, and @Lex's last post up until this point )....

Aye, it worked though... You got your click & view.

Man, their so-called concern with losing revenue (regardless of by what measures) isn't much more than a dog & pony show... When I read an e-mail like what was copied & pasted onto this post from @Mtatransit, there isn't much that needs to be said...

Who needs ingenuity anymore, when Mf-ers waltz onto these damn buses & on through the emergency exits to enter the subway system, for the convenient price of zilch.....

I never meant to suggest that fare capping was a bad idea. I even start the article listing its advantages over guessing if you should buy an unlimited. What I am opposed to is the MTA makes it seem like fare capping would make the fare equitable for all and no further measures need be taken and there is nothing wrong with many trips requiring double fare through no fault of the passenger. 

The other problem they are not including any daily fare capping regardless of what they would charge for it. As the article stated, with fewer people working five days a week and all the weeks with holidays in it, few will be able to benefit. Add sick days and vacation and the number is even lower. 

I believe  Chicago also offers second and third buses for 25 cents, at least it did when I was there. Other cities recognize the need for three buses so why doesn’t the MTA. They behave like all trips can be made on one fare and what’s with keeping three legged transfers a secret? 

[Mtatransit]

Now thinking about it, fare capping won't significantly increase weekday ridership (where MTA is still well below its former ridership) since riders would presumably not reach their cap yet, and will have no incentive to ride more often.

It may however incentive people to ride more on weekends, when service runs like garbage right now...

 

On the other hand, I wonder why with the introduction of the off peak city ticket and Atlantic Ticket, the MTA wouldn't just stick with one fare for both Express bus and LIRR/MNR intra-city off peak fare

Atlantic Ticket is $60 for a weekly + LIRR

Express 7 days is $62. 

If they just raise the weekly price by $2 and allow express bus usage as well as LIRR/MNR city usage it will really help those living far from the subway by increasing flexibility (and increase Exp bus ridership).

Edited December 30, 2021 by Mtatransit

[Lennyj17]

Pittsburgh's PAT system just instituted a Pass based system on all fares paid with (ConnectCard), no fare capping though. I think this is more fair and equitable to everyone and its just so simple. 

2.75$ 3-Hour Unlimited Pass. 

7$ - Single Day Pass 

25$ - 7 day 

97$ - 31 day

1072$ - 365 day