MBTA in a state of disrepair. (Boston, Springfield: landlords, taxis, income tax)

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

That's the argument outsiders such as those from New York or San Francisco have given me in the past. Fares in Boston are still too cheap they argue. It does not work that way. I am now paying nearly triple the fare I paid back in 1997 to ride the subway and yet I am still riding the same old Red Line vehicles, only that they're even older and more dilapidated now. The T can raise the subway fare to $5.00 tomorrow and it still will not make a difference. I am not one of those individuals clamoring for free fares, I don't mind charging fares because fares act as a stopgap between who can and cannot ride lest we get buses crammed full of undesirable riders. Fares have got to be reasonably priced however.

If you want the system to be even close to operating on its revenues, yes the fares are way too cheap. You won't find any *business* that will cart your butt around for anywhere near these fares, so I believe it's structured to operate at a significant loss and therefore to require heavy taxpayer subsidies - even if it were run very efficiently.

Using the UberFareFinder website, they estimated the Uber fare to go from Alewife to Braintree would be $64, and I believe on the T that would cost $2.40? Yes, I realize Uber is different than the T, but we're talking about an astonishing 27x price difference. No way the T can ever make it on that paltry fare. That's the price of a coffee at a shop, and not a particularly fancy one.

I am not saying that the MBTA doesn't have problems, but I can't believe you're complaining about paying $2.40. Of course it's a lot more than it was 25 years ago - so is everything else too! And it was nearly free then and it's nearly free now.

[Urban Peasant]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

If you want the system to be even close to operating on its revenues, yes the fares are way too cheap. You won't find any *business* that will cart your butt around for anywhere near these fares, so I believe it's structured to operate at a significant loss and therefore to require heavy taxpayer subsidies - even if it were run very efficiently.

Using the UberFareFinder website, they estimated the Uber fare to go from Alewife to Braintree would be $64, and I believe on the T that would cost $2.40? Yes, I realize Uber is different than the T, but we're talking about an astonishing 27x price difference. No way the T can ever make it on that paltry fare. That's the price of a coffee at a shop, and not a particularly fancy one.

I am not saying that the MBTA doesn't have problems, but I can't believe you're complaining about paying $2.40. Of course it's a lot more than it was 25 years ago - so is everything else too! And it was nearly free then and it's nearly free now.

No public transit system in North America or even the world makes a profit and they're not supposed to. Over a decade ago when I was in grad school getting my planning degree, I found out that Germany's Ubahn came closest to breaking even and even that highly efficient system could not do it. Comparing public transit to Uber or even taxicabs is comparing apples to oranges. The ridership demand for Uber and taxis is different than the ridership demand for buses and subways. How much do you think the T should charge for a one way ride? $10? $20? Who's going to pay that to ride the T? What if some individuals simply cannot afford those prices but dearly need transportation? That will never fly here, especially if such an idea runs afoul of the 14th Amendment in that denying transportation to certain individuals is denying them equal representation. You might as well seek to abolish public transportation in its current form and replace it with strictly private unsubsidized transportation.

[Boston Shudra]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

Using the UberFareFinder website, they estimated the Uber fare to go from Alewife to Braintree would be $64, and I believe on the T that would cost $2.40? Yes, I realize Uber is different than the T, but we're talking about an astonishing 27x price difference. No way the T can ever make it on that paltry fare. That's the price of a coffee at a shop, and not a particularly fancy one.

All you need is 27 people splitting the cost of that "uber" to make the prices match. And I wager that most trips from Alewife to Braintree carry at least 27 people over the course except during very off hours.

[lrfox]

The Orange Line is up and running again. And according to NewTrains.today, there are no old OL trains running on the line - only 10 new ones. The downside (apart from the temporary speed restrictions) is that only running 10 trains makes for poor headways (like 10-15 minutes apart in some cases). Not great.

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

No public transit system in North America or even the world makes a profit and they're not supposed to. Over a decade ago when I was in grad school getting my planning degree, I found out that Germany's Ubahn came closest to breaking even and even that highly efficient system could not do it. Comparing public transit to Uber or even taxicabs is comparing apples to oranges. The ridership demand for Uber and taxis is different than the ridership demand for buses and subways. How much do you think the T should charge for a one way ride? $10? $20? Who's going to pay that to ride the T? What if some individuals simply cannot afford those prices but dearly need transportation? That will never fly here, especially if such an idea runs afoul of the 14th Amendment in that denying transportation to certain individuals is denying them equal representation. You might as well seek to abolish public transportation in its current form and replace it with strictly private unsubsidized transportation.

So, you were complaining about paying $2.40 being a ripoff because it was cheaper 25 years ago and the trains are old. I suggested a price increase of 50%, which would make it $3.60, not $10-$20.

These systems do cost money, lots of it. It's fine to say we need to keep them virtually free because of low income people - that sounds nice. But then you have issues with keeping the system funded, because the reality is that taxpayers do have a limited appetite for funding the T. You can wave your hand and say we should have a gleaming modern system that costs riders nearly nothing - but how are you - or the powers that be - actually going to make that happen? In the real world, you need to think of a feasible mechanism of paying for services. What is *your* solution?

[Urban Peasant]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

So, you were complaining about paying $2.40 being a ripoff because it was cheaper 25 years ago and the trains are old. I suggested a price increase of 50%, which would make it $3.60, not $10-$20.

These systems do cost money, lots of it. It's fine to say we need to keep them virtually free because of low income people - that sounds nice. But then you have issues with keeping the system funded, because the reality is that taxpayers do have a limited appetite for funding the T. You can wave your hand and say we should have a gleaming modern system that costs riders nearly nothing - but how are you - or the powers that be - actually going to make that happen? In the real world, you need to think of a feasible mechanism of paying for services. What is *your* solution?

Levy an additional 15% residential tax to all market rate rental units in the 101 communities that make up the MAPC Region would be a start. Prorate the percentage for any residential landlord based on the number of affordable housing units h/she is willing to offer. To make up for lost revenue, developers will simply have to build denser and higher for more units. Prorate the percentage for any community outside the MAPC Region that still receives MBTA Service to 5-10% based on distance from Boston and Cambridge. Earmark all of that money strictly for MBTA operations. In the end, paying for T operations going to be like a college meal plan, you're paying for it already so why not take advantage and ride it frequently. Fare revenue will go up. There you go. More housing, more revenue for operations, and more opportunity to keep fares low but at little to no cost for anyone who does not live in Greater Boston or who otherwise cannot use the T. 2-3 birds killed with one stone.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

Levy an additional 15% residential tax to all market rate rental units in the 101 communities that make up the MAPC Region would be a start. Prorate the percentage for any residential landlord based on the number of affordable housing units h/she is willing to offer. To make up for lost revenue, developers will simply have to build denser and higher for more units. Prorate the percentage for any community outside the MAPC Region that still receives MBTA Service to 5-10% based on distance from Boston and Cambridge. Earmark all of that money strictly for MBTA operations. In the end, paying for T operations going to be like a college meal plan, you're paying for it already so why not take advantage and ride it frequently. Fare revenue will go up. There you go. More housing, more revenue for operations, and more opportunity to keep fares low but at little to no cost for anyone who does not live in Greater Boston or who otherwise cannot use the T. 2-3 birds killed with one stone.

A 15% increase in rents, just what the area needs...

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

Levy an additional 15% residential tax to all market rate rental units in the 101 communities that make up the MAPC Region would be a start. Prorate the percentage for any residential landlord based on the number of affordable housing units h/she is willing to offer. To make up for lost revenue, developers will simply have to build denser and higher for more units. Prorate the percentage for any community outside the MAPC Region that still receives MBTA Service to 5-10% based on distance from Boston and Cambridge. Earmark all of that money strictly for MBTA operations. In the end, paying for T operations going to be like a college meal plan, you're paying for it already so why not take advantage and ride it frequently. Fare revenue will go up. There you go. More housing, more revenue for operations, and more opportunity to keep fares low but at little to no cost for anyone who does not live in Greater Boston or who otherwise cannot use the T. 2-3 birds killed with one stone.

I don't know if it's that simple... this sounds like it would be a tax on area landlords? What if they decide to get out of the rental business and sell their units as condos if it's not appealing anymore? It's not a small matter for people with existing buildings to "build denser and higher" - they're pretty much stuck with increased costs... knocking down your triple decker or low rise multi-unit apartment building and then building a taller one would be a brutal financial hit if the building is in good shape. I think most would either pass their increased costs on to their tenants, or, turn their apartments into condos and sell them - neither of those paths would be good for people who currently rent.

P.S. At least you're thinking about ways to improve things rather than just complaining, thanks for that.

[bostongymjunkie]

It was getting too boring on the Orange Line....something needed to be done.


https://www.boston.com/news/local-ne...ut-of-service/

[msRB311]

https://www.boston.com/news/crime/20...NWaJyxB2GcTYX4

Playing music on the train without headphones is obnoxious