NYC MTA Question

[trinityvixen]

Browsing the MTA's website, I've managed to find the news about the fare increases. The MTA are a bunch of bastards, this was never in doubt, but man, they must be shitheads not to bother advertising these fare increases better. If you have to look for an impending increase (impending as in less than a month until it hits), they're not bothering to tell you. Instead, they're just hoping the schmucks go to the Metrocard machines without paying attention, so that, when the commuters buy their monthly unlimiteds, six more dollars in the hole goes unnoticed.

That rant aside, the MTA is so generously giving people who have bought unlimited cards at the lower price until April 3rd to use them. So, here's my question: is that you have to use up all 30 days worth on travel by the third or is it that you have to use it the first day before the third and the thirty days goes on from there. Is it "you have 30 days if they end on April 3rd or else you have whatever you have until the 3rd"? Or is it "you have 30 days from whenever you use it, but if you try to use a $70 unlimited after April 3rd for the first time, you're screwed"?

God, I HATE THE FUCKING MTA. The NYC transit system is the best there is on the planet--runs all night, runs more or less on schedule, covers a huge fucking area, I mean, this is the best system there could be. It's just managed by jerks and idiots who see the huge monies we throw into it as their personal spending accounts. It's wastefully managed, sinfully so. The fare increases every year are getting out of hand, big time, and you know it would be okay if they were, say, making sure things ran on time better, or paid their workers more, but I'll be goddamned if that's what's happening. And stupid fucking Bloomberg wants to bring the Olympics here. Right. When the fans can't travel for less than $5 a ride (one way!), I'm sure it'll be a magical fucking Olympic experience.

Comments

[arcane-the-sage.livejournal.com]

Metro's
True
Assholes

need I say more?

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Ugh. This is getting out of hand. I'm not even sure if it's worth getting a monthly unlimited anymore... it's only worth it assuming that in a 30-Day period I use my card a minumum of three times on weekdays and twice on Saturdays and Sundays. Some days there would be more usage and some days there might be none. Maybe it all balances out, but there sure aren't any savings in there anymore--just the ease of not having to worry about running out of fare. But then there's the free rides for the pay-per-ride card...

Shouldn't a fair increase rate a special link on the main page instead of burying it on a graphic link that alternates between "Fare and Toll Information" and crap about their "If You See Something Say Something" ad campaign? What a bunch of criminals.

As for their April 3rd deadline, there's this notice at the bottom of the fare increase page:
"Refunds
For Unlimited Ride cards purchased prior to February 27, 2005, refunds will be made on a pro-rated basis. Ask for a postage-paid envelope at your station booth to return your card."

So, since my card will likely run out on February 20th or so, I'll have to pay regular fares until their deadline--of which no one was notified--passes to avoid losing a lot of money.

I hate you, MTA.

[bigscary.livejournal.com]

Howzat? 76/30 = 2.53 a day.
In a 28 day period, 20 are weekdays, 8 are weekends. A commute on each of those days is $80, alone. Even using the 20% bonus, that's 67$. And I KNOW you don't just sit at home all weekend. I also KNOW that your daily route is not home-work-home. It's still very much worth it -- I used to buy weeklies at 21$, and THOSE were significantly worth it, to the tune of 10+ dollars a week.

And this was well notified, it's been in the news for months and months.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

It's not that it wasn't, it's that they made the announcement about a month ago and stopped mentioning it. I'm sorry, but we have to remind people 24/7 that Christmas is the fucking 25th of December, so why would they assume everyone's going to magically remember that Feb 27th is the cut off date? Fucking MTA.

That said, the unlimiteds are still worth it, and the reason they're being targeted is *because* they're still worth it. That's the MTA's real problem. These assholes cook up the Metrocard and think nothing of the bonuses they give until, a few years later, they realize that people are paying less with the unlimiteds and the bonuses than they were before the fares were raised--apparently, people spent on average anywhere from 1.25 to almost 1.50 when they used the monthlies. So, since the MTA didn't realize people will rape anything they can, they got thrown in a hole where they weren't bilking customers the $2-a-ride they planned on. Hell, I'm not sure they ever even collected the buck-fifty when it cost that much. I know we raped out unlimited dailies often enough to pay less than a dollar a ride.

I still want to know what the shit to do about this card problem. I think I might just have to call the bastards because it's not sufficiently explained.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Seems like you KNOW a lot about me... Some fair percentage of my commutes are to and from work, with no stops in-between, and on occasion my weekends are spent in, or stuck in Yonkers where a Metrocard does me no good. At the very least, I expect to be spending less time out, esp. in the winter. So. :P

And while it has been in the news for months and months, the exact specifics of the implementation dates and deadlines have not been heavily advertised, let alone the penalties one might incur for purchasing an unlimited card close to the deadline.

Regardless of my habits, I'm sure many others lead a less active lifestyle and they are surely being screwed on this one. Commuters to the city likely come in only on weekdays and will probably lose out. Besides, the real point is we just had a fare hike, and there's really no reason for another one except for greed and irresponsible spending.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

I'll point out also that all MTA services are affected, not just NYCT's MetroCard. Commuter railroad fares and bridge & tunnel tolls are being raised as well.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Yes, that also sucks.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Although it does seem my math was way off, seeing as I was only calculating for the cost of one-way!!!

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I forgot about this. However, they're only being raised 10% was it? This isn't a bad hike. A few years ago, they raised the cost of a ticket from zone 4 to 1 from $5 to $6, and that was what I'd say was a fair fare hike (ha ha), seeing as it had been $5 off peak for years and years. Raising it to $6.60 isn't that bad. Raising the unlimited fares higher by that much wouldn't be that bad either if, as Eugene saud, they hadn't JUST raised the NYCT prices. They're pissing away NYCT money, but the Metro North stuff has been pretty reliable. Funny.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

No, they knew the unlimiteds would be a deal. That was publicized in the commentary about the plan -- that "hey, it's not so bad, if you're getting an unlimited you're paying basically the same as your old rate."

The real problem here is that we have vastly insufficient subsidies for the MTA. Yes, yes, subsidies are socialist blah blah fscking blah. (I know you don't really think that.) But think about it -- some jerk from New Jersey gets to drive his car on our roads all he likes, nearly running me off my bike and probably someday hitting a pedestrian on the sidewalk, and doesn't pay a dime to NY taxes. We're subsidizing the roadways, merely by the fact that you don't have to pay to use them. Why shouldn't the MTA get just as much money?

One of my anarchist friends makes it a point to hop the turnstile whenever he won't get caught, for precisely this reason... and hey, it'll be all the easier to do with the booth closures! ...bastards.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

Again, gotta ask what services are being funded and maintained with the tax money when the MTA isn't...... do they have anything to do with American oil addiction and overdependence on the single-occupant automobile? Hmm?

(ok, fine, fine, I'll shut up and take a shower this month...)

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure MetroNorth fares and tolls have both gone up every time the NYCT fare has gone up since it moved from $1 not too long ago. Round-trip peak from Crestwood is going to be $15 under the new fare. $15 to go about 15 miles. I just don't think MASS transit should be prohibitively expensive; if you don't think this is, ask Michelle.

I think all the rates are insane. I wasn't trying to belittle the NYCT increase, just note that it's even worse than that. Although I will point out that usage studies indicate that, with the single-ride fare staying the same, at least the lowest-income riders (who can't afford to buy unlimited-ride, or often even enough to get the 20% bonus) won't get gouged.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

Subsidies would make sense, but I'm not sure where the rant about NJ drivers comes from. I mean, I could go on all day about NJ drivers, but that has to do with their lack of driving skill, not with them failing to pay for the roads. It isn't their fault that the exorbitant tolls they pay are to the port authority rather than the MTA, and I tend to think that the commuter tax was unfair, even now that I don't work in the city. (I wouldn't want to pay CT state income tax in addition to NY, either.)

Basically, I agree with your point, though not with your argument.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I did a poor job of expressing the relevance of the argument. The point was meant to be: there's a massive subsidy imbalance between the roads (which we pay for, use them or not, and which anyone can use, pay or not), and the subway/MTA. If our taxes are going to pay for 100% of a public good for which we aren't even the prime beneficiaries*, shouldn't they also pay for at least some of a public good that we're actually using? Rather than consistently increasing the fees on the users of that system? it's like giving away money in foreign aid when American children/seniors are starving. You ought to take care of your own, too. I'm not blaming NJ drivers for not paying for things, just saying that something's wrong with the allocations when we're more generous to visitors than to ourselves.

*And I'll admit, sure, it's more complicated than that, because the MTA receives its subsidy from the state rather than the city. So, state taxes are paying for it, not just local ones. I'd just argue that the state doesn't apportion enough subsidy, relative to the income the city brings to the state coffers. Also, another flaw here is that even an urban resident gets benefit from the roads. Goods are brought in from truck, we have taxis, I can ride my bike on them (if the NJ drivers don't kill me first... heh). But relatively speaking, the average NYC resident gets less out of them than visitors. Certainly on a dollar basis, doubly so when you cross state lines.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

And of course you may still totally disagree with that. :)

[viridian.livejournal.com]

Whoa, so it's a definite fare increase? Here I was thinking that it was still in the planning stages and might not actually happen. Fuck.

[negativeq.livejournal.com]

Well, this means I won't be coming into the city as often as I used to. I already can't afford it, and the service our here is horrible as is. With the additional hike, I'll be forced to use the fist-fucking LIRR as infrequently as possible.

And with the cost of the subway, sheesh, soon we are going to be better off cabbing it.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

What about the cab fare hikes?? There's a total of about four hours in the day when you won't pay extra for a cab. There's the night fare increase, the peak-hours increase, the "You're using the cab and you need it, so we're charging you extra for it" increase.

[wellgull.livejournal.com]

More misguided economics, as I understand it. The argument I've seen for the cab fare hike was to improve congestion. (Now, cabbies make a ridiculously poor take-home, so they could use the extra money. I don't begrudge them that.) But anyway, the argument put forth was that there's too much congestion, demand way exceeds the supply and the capacity the roads are capable of.

So the obvious answer is, start limiting the use of single-person automobiles in the city. (hslayer probably wouldn't have liked this back when he worked in town, and I understand that it would suck for his situation. Sympathy for that, but it's an intractable situation.) Charge a considerable fee to single-passenger drivers at the bridges and tunnels. This is the most mass-transit-friendly city in America, we could do this (and Giuliani did, for downtown Manhattan, shortly after 9/11 due to traffic constraints from the new security measures). Use the funds for something socially beneficial, ideally -- hey maybe even a subway subsidy -- but the point is, collect them.

Having reduced the congestion from wasteful commuters (I'm not even talking about gas, single-occupant cars take up a disproportionate amount of available roadspace), you can go on to increase cab capacity. Meaning rather than trying to choke demand by charging a higher price, you can increase supply; = more people able to take cabs when drunk, moving stuff, or it's freezing, etc.

What about the cabbie incomes? The reason those are so low is because of high costs: to drive a yellow cab, you need a medallion. You can rent one, along with the car -- but that's hugely expensive, costing perhaps half of a driver's daily income (for their 12-hour shifts). Because people use these medallions as an investment, renting them out at profit. If the city isntead held them (and it's a darn *city license* anyway), you wouldn't have the same profiteering aspect. Or if you don't reclaim a legally mandated public good as the property of the public, you could just increase medallion supply, then daily medallion rental rates go down, cab driver net income rises nevertheless, cab fare stays low, good for cabbies, good for the NYC residents, in fact good for pretty much everybody except the medallion profiteers. Note that these are people who are exploiting immigrant labor by taking a large cut of an artificially scarce -- in fact a completely fictional -- resource, and also driving down the quality of NYC cab service while necessitating a higher price to the consumer -- so how bad can you really feel that their investment suddenly becomes worthless...

One answer might be to deregulate the cabs, but basically a much better one is smarter regulation that isn't as corrupt/open to profiteering.

Refs, on cab driver life, and a nice long exposition on the medallion system.

[viridian.livejournal.com]

(hslayer probably wouldn't have liked this back when he worked in town, and I understand that it would suck for his situation.

Especially considering the fact that even when I could catch a ride in with him, I didn't, because his car + slow-moving traffic makes me carsick. It was also often a waste of my time, because taking the train into Grand Central was a whole lot faster than getting out at Columbia, taking the subway down to Times Square, and then taking the S. I didn't even need a Metrocard while I was commuting directly into Grand Central, because I worked very close.

At any rate, with the Metro North fare increasing as well, I'm only going to be able to make it into the city once I have a job there. Blehhh. So much for any delusions of a social life!

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

Ah, I see. With that, I agree (although I think city taxes might make more sense, if the analogy is roads). I'd have no problem with more (progressive) taxes and lower (very much regressive) mass-transit fares, with the one paying for the other.

Also, the MTA isn't completely autonomous. The city can veto a fare hike. And yet, the MTA's fare increase (which, especially on unlimited-rides, affects commuters [inter- and intra-city] more than anyone else) coincides with a huge ad blitz to get businesses to move back into lower Manhattan, and some major tax breaks in various industrial-promoting zones around town. Is that supposed to be a sick form of synergy?

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

Remember they were actually looking at a fee for driving into midtown, like what's implemented in London. It's true the fact that Manhattan is an island makes the bridges and tunnels a more convenient place to collect such a fee, but it makes less sense. When I drove into Columbia, the traffic problem wasn't on Broadway. That plan would also pretty much require doing away with EZ-Pass, which is the only thing keeping the bridge and tunnel crossings manageable. I'll note, though, that I think anyone attempting to drive into midtown is a moron, and will always take the MetroNorth or pull off some form of park-and-ride when I'm headed there.

And at least I don't drive an SUV. Whether driving or walking in Manhattan, there's nothing I love more than seeing a Hummer rumbling down a narrow cross-street or trying to parallel park. >_