Comments on: An FAQ on the MTA’s budget crisis

By: onecoolbrother

onecoolbrother — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 17:51:37 +0000

The operating budget to capital budget issue is absolutely confusing. I distinctly remember the MTA receiving a 300% surplus after full implementation of the Metrocard system. They were then so elated that that they green-lighted 25 billion worth of Capital projects. If the two are distinct and separate and “the vast majority of funding” for the capital programs come from the feds, why did the surplus dictate the capital plans. If all the money collected is only for operations then is it being proposed that their is no profit being made at all by the MTA?
How many of those employees at the MTA with the 125k+ earnings were management? Why is it that the CEO is supposed to be afforded concern for his lifestyle with a compensurate salary yet the worker who puts in the time and effort, most times on a dusty unhealthy track site vilified for working for a living. When it come to people who labor hard for their money all of a sudden this is not America anymore and socialism is the order of the day. NY is expensive and 100k is saying nothing to trying survive with a family in this zoo.
Bureaucracy is the MTA’s number one problem. The state government and our local officials for some reason cannot override the system and bring accountability and that is a heinous position to take. If that is the attitude then why have police? If you can’t have accountibilty they are saying that corruption will be allowed because they can’t bring reform to the system. The public is numb to any “poor us” rants from the MTA. Ever lie has been given to the public over the years to the tune of the public providing 67% of the MTA’s revenue and now it’s being said THIS TIME THE DEBT’S FOR REAL. I wonder many times why we are even up in arms about paying for transit. We should just boycott to our best degree, use bikes,walk and let it rot.

Rule #1 The MTA will never be allowed to go out of service. It is a part of NYC’s infastructure.

2. If it were to go under it would be bailed out just like the banking industry.

3. It has no credibility because it is the only agency with such an amazing unaccountability track record and access to the funds of the public.

*Also, instead of joking about the CEO salary issue, why don’t you see how much money would come back into the system if the MTA accounted for all of the contractor funds that have been misappropriated and uncollected over the years. That is in the millions.

By: Mahmoud

Mahmoud — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:56:34 +0000

I can’t believe that Sander is getting actual death threats! I mean, come on people! Death threats? The budget woes the MTA has had (and double book scandals, not to mention mismanagement of his predecessor who had NO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION EXPERIENCE) existed long before him, and he has been doing on the whole, a remarkable job. The problem is, the entity is run in secret – although he is trying to change that and has been more approachable in terms of accepting public comments, emails, etc, than most public officials – and its structure is never explained to the public. He was on Brian Lehrer again today (thursday on WNYC), and spoke about the challenges he faces. At least he tries to be accessible to a concerned population.

On the other hand, I don’t agree that $300K is small, although it is compared to CEO pay, but CEO pay is WAY out of proportion to reality and must be lowered drastically in future years. The difference between highest and lowest paid in this country dwarfs that in other industrial countries, and reflects the greatest scale at any time in the past 50 years. I know he works hard and could make more someone else, but I don’t think he needs too much of our sympathy in terms of pay.

By: Marc Shepherd

Marc Shepherd — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 13:03:08 +0000

I’m frankly not sure why anyone buys the unlimited card at all. The average month has 21 working days, so that’s 42 rides. So, to merely break even on the unlimited card would require seven weekend rides every month.

Yes, that’s basically right: if all you do is take the subway twice every weekday, with only light weekend use, the pay-per-ride card with the 15% discount is a better deal. There are many people who use transit a lot more than that, for whom the unlimited ride card is a bargain.

By: Second Ave. Sagas | A New York City Subway Blog » Blog Archive » » The MTA’s real estate quandary

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 06:03:31 +0000

[...] yesterday’s FAQ hit on a few of the big misconceptions surrounding the MTA’s current budget crisis, there is [...]

By: The breakdown « The Daily Commuter.

The breakdown « The Daily Commuter. — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:51:37 +0000

[...] highly recommend that you read it too if you haven’t already. For the particular post, click here. No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI [...]

By: Benjamin Kabak

Benjamin Kabak — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 05:08:35 +0000

Many middle-class and upper-middle-class folks have already stopped taking the subway entirely on weekends because it’s such a disaster, many work late in the evenings and take cars home, and some even use cab “car-pools” on their way *to* work in order to avoid annoying transfers.

I mean, do you have any proof to back this up?

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:11:08 +0000

Thus, I’m frankly not sure why anyone buys the unlimited card at all. The average month has 21 working days, so that’s 42 rides.

Yes, but the average person using a monthly unlimited rides the subway 56 times a month.

By: Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 03:06:52 +0000

While you do all the union back and forth I think for the record it should be noted that the only no vote on the board came from the voting labor representative Norman Seabrook. He doesn’t represent transit workers. He represents Correction Officers. They just got a 4% a year contract from Mayor Bloomberg. If the TWU or the UAW got that much the anti-labor jihadists out there would cry bloody murder. So the no vote against a budget the “makes no sense” should really be taken with a grain of salt. If NYC wanted to save some money it could turn some of those mariajuana smokers loose that his people are soaking up the tax dollars protecting. Then Bloomberg could invest that money in the people who move the city.

By: Julia

Julia — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 21:09:46 +0000

You might try reading the post again. The “doomsday” plan isn’t something the MTA came up with just for kicks. It represents what the MTA will be forced to do to continue operating if it doesn’t secure funding from another source.

(I also suspect that the percentage of transit users who are bar-hopping Manhattanites is smaller than you think it is. You’d be surprised how many normal-looking people are on the subway at 1 a.m.)

By: Beth

Beth — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:58:41 +0000

The new unlimited 30-day would pay for itself after a whopping 49 rides, in light of the 15% discount for multi-ride cards, and the current price structure is only one ride better. Thus, I’m frankly not sure why anyone buys the unlimited card at all. The average month has 21 working days, so that’s 42 rides. So, to merely break even on the unlimited card would require seven weekend rides every month. And we all know that the subway on the weekends is completely busted. With the service cutbacks, it will only get worse. Even if you went out every Saturday night, and took the subway both *to and from* your destination—which for some would mean having the discipline to wait on a desolate subway platform at 3:30 a.m. for a train that runs, if you’re lucky, every 45 minutes, rather than springing for a $10 cab—you would just barely *break even.*

What the MTA doesn’t seem to understand is that if they make the subway any more expensive, or any worse than it already is, many people will simply stop riding it. I remember when I was in school on the UWS, for a short time the subway fare increased while the cab fare remained the same. My friends and I took cabs everywhere. It felt luxurious, but the truth was that with four to a cab it was often cheaper than the subway, and certainly faster and more pleasant. Those halcyon days ended when the cab fares went up, but my point is this: The MTA needs to realize that their doomsday scenario will drastically alter people’s cost/benefit analysis when deciding whether to pay for the MTA’s services at all. Many middle-class and upper-middle-class folks have already stopped taking the subway entirely on weekends because it’s such a disaster, many work late in the evenings and take cars home, and some even use cab “car-pools” on their way *to* work in order to avoid annoying transfers. The MTA is the only entity I know that thinks making a *worse* product and charging people *more* for it will be a successful business model for boosting revenues. The end result will be that more rich people will opt out entirely, and poor people will just get poorer and angrier.