Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All of the old subway systems like Boston and Chicago have the same costs and needs..salaries,pensions,old infrastructure, etc yet they manage keep up with maintenance of infrastructure and equipment and provide much cleaner, more reliable service.
Makes you think the real problem is probably poor management and waste due to various types of corruption rather than a lack of income.
The way things seem go in NY I wouldn't be surprised if they raised fares substantially and nothing changed...that the added income would just disappear with no benefit to riders.
Yes, massive delays every day. I think the NYC daily newspapers, including the New York Times, and other media, have been doing a great job of covering this mess. The monthly delays have tripled since 2012, and now stand at more than 70,000 delays per month. One of the biggest culprits is the antiquated signal system, which dates to 1930s. Also, we need bigger doors to let people in and out faster, as well as "open" cars, to create more space. There are several excellent and recent NYTimes articles about the mess, for those who want to learn more.
Your'e comparing a a pair of peas to a watermelon.
80 years ? You are clueless.What are you talking about ? Boston subway began in 1897. When do you think NY's began ? Do you think it had a subway in 1817?
"The section of the Tremont Street Subway between Park Street and Boylston Street stations on the Green Line opened in 1897, making it the oldest transit subway in the United States still in use."
Related question -- would you support a distance-based fare system like in DC? For example, would you like it if a ride between Union Square and 42nd St. cost only $1 and a ride from Union Square to Park Slope cost $4?
I myself am relatively satisfied with the subway system, despite the filth and delays. (Caveat -- I do not commute at regular hours and if I did, I might actually quit and move out of the city -- can't stand the crowds at those hours). I appreciate that it can get me to so many locations in a massive city somewhat easily. One thing I don't like about Boston subways is that there is too much distance between stations. When you're out and about in Boston and environs, the closest subway station may be quite a distance away. In NY it seems there's a station around every corner.
Related question -- would you support a distance-based fare system like in DC? For example, would you like it if a ride between Union Square and 42nd St. cost only $1 and a ride from Union Square to Park Slope cost $4?
I myself am relatively satisfied with the subway system, despite the filth and delays. (Caveat -- I do not commute at regular hours and if I did, I might actually quit and move out of the city -- can't stand the crowds at those hours). I appreciate that it can get me to so many locations in a massive city somewhat easily. One thing I don't like about Boston subways is that there is too much distance between stations. When you're out and about in Boston and environs, the closest subway station may be quite a distance away. In NY it seems there's a station around every corner.
I would definitely but again only if it were designed to increase revenue AND demonstrably improve service. Sounds like what you have proposed might only share the costs of ridership more fairly but do nothing to improve the situation?
And if a ride from Union Sq to Park Slope would be $4 how much would it be from Riverdale or Pelham Bay to Coney Island
Understand your comment about distances between stops but the "station around every corner" in NY really only applies to a relatively small( compared to the whole city)geographic area. Most of The Bronx,much of Queens and Brooklyn and almost all of Staten Island are most definitely not even within 10 blocks of a subway. Many people spend 30 minutes or more on a bus just to get to the subway.Up until this year even the hike from lets's say 90th and York or East End to a subway station was quite hideous, especially in Summer or Winter. I did it once for a while and really hated it.... and that's Manhattan !
Also,when you think of it all in size comparisons NYC doesn't compare very favorably. NYC has a population of 8.5 million and a geographic size of 300 sq miles. Boston has a population of 700,000 and is 89 sq miles.
One could probably argue that the "service" provided to people in Boston is much more adequate( in addition to being much nicer) than what is provided in NY despite's the massiveness of NY's system.
Actually, that Boston has any subway system at all is pretty amazing. It is so much smaller than NYC,Phil,DC,Chicago or any of them.
But you know all about it's smallness
The London tube is worse. No air-conditioning. Even their new cars look old. Slightest bit of inclement weather and it shuts down. Packed all the time. But they do have fare zones which is a plus.
I would definitely but again only if it were designed to increase revenue AND demonstrably improve service. Sounds like what you have proposed might only share the costs of ridership more fairly but do nothing to improve the situation?
And if a ride from Union Sq to Park Slope would be $4 how much would it be from Riverdale or Pelham Bay to Coney Island
Understand your comment about distances between stops but the "station around every corner" in NY really only applies to a relatively small( compared to the whole city)geographic area. Most of The Bronx,much of Queens and Brooklyn and almost all of Staten Island are most definitely not even within 10 blocks of a subway. Many people spend 30 minutes or more on a bus just to get to the subway.Up until this year even the hike from lets's say 90th and York or East End to a subway station was quite hideous, especially in Summer or Winter. I did it once for a while and really hated it.... and that's Manhattan !
Also,when you think of it all in size comparisons NYC doesn't compare very favorably. NYC has a population of 8.5 million and a geographic size of 300 sq miles. Boston has a population of 700,000 and is 89 sq miles.
One could probably argue that the "service" provided to people in Boston is much more adequate( in addition to being much nicer) than what is provided in NY despite's the massiveness of NY's system.
Actually, that Boston has any subway system at all is pretty amazing. It is so much smaller than NYC,Phil,DC,Chicago or any of them.
But you know all about it's smallness
Your arguments are all good ones. I think I'm biased in favor of NY's system because it allows me to get so many interesting places. Boston...not so much
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
