Forty years ago today the cost of a subway ride jumped, literally overnight, from 30 cents to 35, as the New-York Historical Society reminded us via Twitter. At the time, the MTA had just gotten approval from Albany and D.C. to raise the fares, and so barely 13 hours after voting for a fare hike, the new price went into effect. That five-cent jump, as Matt’ Johnson pointed out, is the equivalent of an increase from $1.62 to $1.89 in 2011 dollars. All of these figures got me thinking about the fare structure.
Today, with all of Transit’s various per-ride discounts and unlimited-ride cards, the average subway fare is $1.64. That essentially corresponds to the pre-Jan. 5, 1972 fare of $0.30 in 1972 dollars. Without the average fare from 1972, it’s tougher to draw a comparison, but the only discounts then were for seniors. Many New Yorkers were subject to a two-fare zone as well. So essentially, after the Jan. 5 fare hike, New Yorkers paid more for worse subway and bus service in 1972 than they do in 2012.
What then does all of this math mean for our current fare structure? Is it too low? Is it too complicated? Over the past few years, the MTA has been aggressively trying to tie its fares in with inflation, and as they point out every month, the current average fare still trails the pre-Unlimited Ride average fare by 27 inflation-adjusted cents. It seems to me as though we don’t pay enough for our subway rides, but who really wants to make that argument anyway?
14 comments
“What do they want for 35 cents, to live forever?”
-Subway Dispatcher to TA Police Lieutenant Walter Matthau in 1974’s “The Taking of Pelhmam One-Two-Three.”
Sounds better than “What do they want for $1.62 (less with MetroCard discounts and transfers), to live forever?”
Of course, that should read “Pelham” not Pelhmam.
If subway fares were more expensive, riders would want more in return. Go back to Larry Littlefield’s posts to find out which groups benefit from artifically low fares and minimal levels of service.
I don’t. I see value in encouraging transit use, and a subsidy is a reasonable way to do it. I see a system where riders are mostly bearing the costs of at least the operating side of the system. The subsidy for transit is still far and away lower than the subsidy for driving. I’m not averse to fair fare increases, but I think they should come after the MTA’s house gets in order (can of labor worms, anyone?).
And there are other real problems with the fare structure that nobody talks about. The biggest is that the richer you are, the easier it is to pay less. Many of the poorest users scrape together $2.25 to ride, while the people who can afford unlimited MCs are the ones dragging the average down to $1.62. Come up with a clever way to reverse that and you might actually do the poor a favor and increase fare revenue.
The real cheap rides were between the introduction of the Metrocard in 1996 and the fare increase of 2002. No matter what is paid now, that revenue is not coming back. The system will be harmed to pay for it, with interests.
The only point is that Generation Greed transit riders did what Generation Greed taxpayers, union leaders and retirees, and contractors did: pillage the transit system’s future for their own game.
It was a big game of chicken — if you don’t grab it some other interest will, but if you do some other interest might have to pay for it. In the end the winners are older generations who are retiring, moving away or dying off. The losers are everyone who will live here in the future.
And the MTA is one small piece of this trend. Read it and understand.
http://www.r8ny.com/blog/larry.....cians.html
Older generations should have stood up for their children. They perfer to pretend. The pillaging will continue until younger generations force them to face what they have done and at least stop making things worse.
To me, low fares imply a need for state subsidy and the consequent political dependency on Albany. Simply put, organizations serve their customers, i.e. the ones who provide the revenue that pays the bills.
If you want the MTA to serve its riders, fund it with fares. If you want the MTA to serve Albany politicians – or increasingly for many MTA expenses, Washington politicians – keep fares low so that the MTA stays starved for cash.
This isn’t about us not being able to afford our own transit system. We do that already. Rather, Albany and Washington take our money and give some of it back in the form of transit subsidies and other services we need – the rest goes elsewhere.
Albany especially, but Washington too, are also responsible for many of the regulatory hurdles that make non-subsidized transit impractical, of course.
I understand the point you’re making about the city vs. the rest of the state, and these regional dynamics matter for a lot of issues, but the city itself causes a lot of problems as far as the MTA goes. e.g. city politicians are basically why we have the payroll tax (where city money sloshes around in Albany, and state legislators can take their sip, before heading to the MTA) instead of fare hikes (where money is kept out of Albany’s hands). Why? Because city politicians would rather have you pay more, invisibly, than less, very visibly.
The reality is that local politicians are just as invested in the system where the MTA serves political, rather than user, ends. If you’re a marginal voter or a large campaign donor (especially the latter), this is great for you; if you’re anyone else, it’s bad news.
I’d like to say the only thing you can really blame the city for is shirking its own responsibility. But even that’s been whittled back so far the city can’t fix problems with the MTA if it wants to. Like it or not (I don’t), Albany took control over the matter as far back as the 1960s.
The payroll tax, which hit the city harder than anyone, was entirely the fault of weak-kneed Demokrats in the Senate who didn’t want to attack the problems with union workrules and corruption, and didn’t want to piss off suburbanites with a toll. I don’t know if this is what you’re hinting at, but the notion that the payroll tax represented suburbanites subsidizing the city is probably far from truthful too, much as demagogues in the Republikan Party liked to claim otherwise – probably for the most part, it represented the city and suburbs alike subsidizing suburban commuters.
I agree with your comment
I just think it applies to politicians at all levels of government, at least about transportation.
Think about it another way – what percent of operating costs are covered today, versus 2002 or 1996 or 1972? U bet the percentage is higher now, but I don’t know for sure.
I’m not sure about the other dates, but it’s been holding pretty steady since 2002 I think. I’m afraid I can’t check right now because I’m on the painfully slow Acela wifi connection, but you can probably find the numbers here. Search “New York City Transit” as the agency and the numbers go back to 1996 and you may need to do some arithmetic.
You may be right, but I suspect labor costs have been going up even as other costs dropped.
First of all, NYC has the highest farebox recovery ratio for its local bus and subway system in the whole country.
Second of all, a lot of the decrease in the fare can be attributed to the fact that it costs less to process the fare with a MetroCard than with a token, and also the Unlimited MetroCards bring the fare down, but you have to consider that a lot of the riders are making short off-peak trips that they might not have paid full price for, so it counts as a ride, but it’s not the same as the length of a PPR user’s ride.
The only real discount is the fact that we have bus-subway transfers.
Yes, exactly. The fare per ride, rather than per swipe, is not nearly as low as the MTA reports.
[…] A Subway Ride Should Be $12.00 Each Way by Vincent Ferrari Posted on January 8, 2012 What then does all of this math mean for our current fare structure? Is it too low? Is it too complicated? Over the past few years, the MTA has been aggressively trying to tie its fares in with inflation, and as they point out every month, the current average fare still trails the pre-Unlimited Ride average fare by 27 inflation-adjusted cents. It seems to me as though we don’t pay enough for our subway rides, but who really wants to make that argument anyway? via secondavenuesagas.com […]