267
Zohran Mamdani, in the New York City mayoral debate: "Free buses would cost $700M. Cuomo gave more—$959M—to Elon Musk for a failed Tesla factory." (files.catbox.moe)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/publictransport@slrpnk.net
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -8 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Those system generate far more money than they cost. (Though personally I'd recomend randon fare inspections with fines large enough to make it not worth riisking.

i have to idea what the stats mean - but it doesn't matter. Fix crime and get the poor help - both are important. Those of color who can afford should pay those who can't should get help.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (10 children)

    Fares and tolls make $6.870 billion annually. It is literally more expensive to charge people than to make it free.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    They are making an order of magnitude more than they cost by your own numbers

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I listed the annual cost for one system. I did not add the costs for policing, the turnstiles, station staff to man the turnstiles, or any of a dozen different adjacent costs. My numbers in no way should be seen as a comprehensive total cost.

    The largest share of MTA revenue — $7.222 billion — comes from dedicated taxes and subsidies the Authority receives from the cities and states that we serve. Another $6.870 billion comes from fares and tolls. Federal COVID-related aid, which the MTA received in 2020 and 2021, adds up to $2.877 billion.

    Total budget is $19.379 billion.

    https://www.mta.info/budget/MTA-operating-budget-basics

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

    you have presented no evidence that fare enforcement is evpensive - and pleny of evidence that fares are significant sources of income (and likely were higher in the past)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If this was a private venture, it would have gone bankrupt long ago. Revenue is a mere fraction of expenditures, a bit more than 1/3. Taxes are the most significant source of funding at 37%.

    I think it absurd to have to prove that fare enforcement is more expensive than simply not doing it. That is an obvious fact and if we can't agree on that, there is no point in further conversation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    This was a private venture and it was making plenty of money until the City prevented fare increases (1920/1930s), resulting in the subways going bankrupt in the 1950s and the city taking over.

    Maybe I misunderstood the rest of your argument - I understood you to be claiming that the system should be free because fares are not that making much money anyway. If you are only talking about enforcement for those who don't pay their fare - I still disagree, but the data is not clear at all and I will admit that. (what we don't know is how many will stop paying when they know there is no enforcement) Fare enforcement is for sure something that needs to be weighed - there is a line where you are spending more on enforcement than it is worth, and so some people should get away with cheating. However you still need to have enough enforcement that most people feel it isn't worth risking (partially this is keep honest people honest)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    Not quite. The private subway companies signed contracts in 1913 fixing the rates at 5 cents. Then WW1 started and caused inflation. The private rail lines put themselves out of business by agreeing to a deal they couldn't uphold. That's capitalism baby!

    You are right that I support free fares because it doesn't make that much anyway. The cost or charging includes the digital pay system management contract of the OMNY system, the purchase and maintenance contract for the turnstiles themselves, the pay and benefits costs of MTA employees and police stationed at each stop to prevent fare jumpers, the cost of trial and potential jail for fare jumpers, and probably other ancillary costs associated with charging fares.I can't begin to calculate these costs. How would I even calculate the cost of something more esoteric like the environmental cost of the people who drive that would instead take the train if it were free?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Most people drive because the service is not useful. Take your free fares for the rich and use the money instead to give them service so good they will use it. Sure some will drive no matter what but most drive because transit isn't useful for their trips. Since money isn't the limit in the first place free won'tiget them to ride.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't think it's crazy to think a previously pay service will see some degree of increase in isership if it becomes free. Maybe it would be a little, maybe it would be a lot. That's why estimating the cost savings is hard.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •