Comments on: No matter what, a fare hike is coming

By: Boris

Boris — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 08:06:35 +0000

I’ve almost given up on trying to explain to people the benefits of tolling the East River bridges. The arguments in favor are many, but they all seem to be too hard for most people to understand. Now I just explain it as a matter of fairness. Staten Islanders have been subsidizing the Metro-North and LIRR for decades. Long Islanders go through Manhattan to New Jersey for free but return to help pay for our airports (Port Authority crossings). New Yorkers avoid New Jersey toll roads and pollute distant New York City neighborhoods so that they can get upstate. It’s about time that those who live in Brooklyn and Queens pay their fare share for polluting and making others miserable. That’s all. It doesn’t even matter where that money goes, as long as it doesn’t go towards building new roads. The fact that it will provide us with better subway and bus service is a bonus.

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

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:20:16 +0000

[...] of numbers concerning the so-called Doomsday scenario that might come to pass. The agency unveiled four different fare hike proposals and outlined the various service cuts that could go into effect as early as June. It’s scary [...]

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 08:13:51 +0000

I don’t understand your preference for Ravitch 2 over Ravitch 1. The unlimiteds cost a buck more each, which works out to 4% for the 7-day and 1% for the 30-day, but the pay-per-ride costs 12 cents less, which works out to 6%.

By: Ellie

Ellie — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:11:00 +0000

A subway ride is a valuable resource to me because I do not want to drive or have the expenses related to driving.

However, it is not fair to ask subway riders to pay for bridges and tunnels that we more than likely do not use.

A fare hike is going to happen – and I would pay up to $150/month for an unlimited card. That’s how valuable it is to me today.

By: Cap'n Transit

Cap'n Transit — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:07:21 +0000

The Ravitch plan isn’t about making drivers pay for some imaginary MTA screw-ups. It’s about the fact that it costs money to maintain the bridges, and that money’s been paid for out of general revenue (income and sales tax). It’s not fair to ask non-drivers to pay for a resource that’s largely used by drivers.

By: Kris Datta

Kris Datta — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 22:26:25 +0000

In my opinion, the second proposal is the best. The Ravitch proposals aren’tvery favorablebecause they put tolls on the free bridges, and the drivers in this city shouldn’t pay for the MTA’s screw-ups in a completely different sector (NYCT vs. B&T). Also, under proposal two, bonuses are eliminated so you aren’t really paying more, just you’re getting what you pay for.

If the MTA wants to think out of the box, they can cut the rides offered on Student Metrocards (like the one I use) from three to two. I don’t know if it’ll save money, but if it does then it won’t really affect many people since they only use their metrocard twice a day. Not to mention that if some people need the three rides, the MTA can offer three-ride student metrocards to these students like they do today with four-ride metrocards.

By: Dear Investor, Please Don’t Put a Price on My Soul - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com

Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:38:09 +0000

[...] with the old and in with the new M.T.A. fares: A breakdown of various fare hike proposals for 2009. Cheers! [2nd Ave [...]