I hate these ‘free transit’ comparsions. New York can’t afford to complete second ave subway and many other extentions and service upgrades. Finishing those upgrades would do far more than free transit. Sure there need to be programs for the poor, but the vast majority of riders are not poor and don’t need fare savings near as much as more service. Even the poor: many live in places with poor transit service and would be helped more if New York spent money on service - they could save a lot paying full fare and getting rid of the car if only the service was good enough.
the above in New York which has good for US service, other cities even more so.
Look at it this way. How much does it cost to maintain the OMNY and MetroCard systems, to maintain the turnstile infrastructure, and to maintain staff to prevent people from skipping payment?
From a quick search it seems the OMNY system cost $772 million to create and $15.5 million a year to maintain.
Stats say that 82% of those ticketed for fare evasion and 92% of those arrested were people of color. There’s a social cost to that, but I couldn’t begin putting a number to it.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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)
I hate these ‘free transit’ comparsions. New York can’t afford to complete second ave subway and many other extentions and service upgrades. Finishing those upgrades would do far more than free transit. Sure there need to be programs for the poor, but the vast majority of riders are not poor and don’t need fare savings near as much as more service. Even the poor: many live in places with poor transit service and would be helped more if New York spent money on service - they could save a lot paying full fare and getting rid of the car if only the service was good enough.
the above in New York which has good for US service, other cities even more so.
I hate these “we can’t afford to do things for the public good” statements…
If public transportation were prioritized it could afford to do it.
Better services means nothing of people can’t figure out how to get there.
Open the buses, then better services
There are always more things doing than there is time or money - the two are independant limits though related. We need to prioritize.
Look at it this way. How much does it cost to maintain the OMNY and MetroCard systems, to maintain the turnstile infrastructure, and to maintain staff to prevent people from skipping payment?
From a quick search it seems the OMNY system cost $772 million to create and $15.5 million a year to maintain.
Stats say that 82% of those ticketed for fare evasion and 92% of those arrested were people of color. There’s a social cost to that, but I couldn’t begin putting a number to it.
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.
That’s what is being suggested. Social protections, and free and open transport is absolutely a social protection, are shown to reduce crime.
Fares and tolls make $6.870 billion annually. It is literally more expensive to charge people than to make it free.
They are making an order of magnitude more than they cost by your own numbers
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.
Total budget is $19.379 billion.
https://www.mta.info/budget/MTA-operating-budget-basics
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)
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.
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)