BART to Increase Fares (Again) (San Francisco, Oakland: how much, unemployment, subsidized)

[bayarea-girl]

Why do we have to suffer for BART'S inability to balance their budget? Shouldn't they eat their costs if they have a deficit? Why do we have to pay more?

According to SFgate traffic is less congested in the bay because there are less commuters due to the high unemployment.
'Good' news: Crummy economy means less traffic (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/27/BAJV17S52B.DTL&tsp=1 - broken link)

So again, why can't BART eat the costs themselves?

[hoffdano]

The first think I'd want to know is if ridership is up/down or holding steady. If people are unemployed and staying home, perhaps revenues are down. It costs the same to run a BART train empty or full.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Why do we have to suffer for BART'S inability to balance their budget? Shouldn't they eat their costs if they have a deficit? Why do we have to pay more?

According to SFgate traffic is less congested in the bay because there are less commuters due to the high unemployment.
'Good' news: Crummy economy means less traffic (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/27/BAJV17S52B.DTL&tsp=1 - broken link)

So again, why can't BART eat the costs themselves?

You forget "They" are us...

That's the problem with all public agencies...

[phillyzoo]

Just curious, how much does it cost to use the Bart and how much will it cost after the price hike?

[bayarea-girl]

There would be a $2-4 dollar increase depending where you are traveling from. The ridership remains steady they are just overbudget and that is not our fault? With these increases I think it is more likely that people will be carpooling more and more.

[mdwstrnkid]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Why do we have to suffer for BART'S inability to balance their budget? Shouldn't they eat their costs if they have a deficit? Why do we have to pay more?

So again, why can't BART eat the costs themselves?

Most people don't know this, but there are very few public transportation systems in the world where fares alone are enough to pay off the operating costs. None of the major US public transit systems even come close. BART actually has a reasonably good farebox recovery ratio as compared with other systems in the US. Only systems in Asia (Hong Kong, Tokyo, etc.) and the London Underground even come close to breaking even solely on fares.

Farebox recovery: how 14 systems compare | Railway Age | Find Articles at BNET

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Mass transit in the US is indeed heavily subsidized and in and of itself, other than in a few places back East, and a few small pockets of cities further West, is not economically feasible market wise. Just another inconvenient truth for all the car haters.

[City Boy]

It's cheaper to drive to SF from Oakland than BART. I would only bart there to avoid the traffic or if I worked downtown, other than that. Bart is expensive.

[bayarea-girl]

If it were cheaper I think more people would ride and there would be no need for fare increases.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

There would be a $2-4 dollar increase depending where you are traveling from. The ridership remains steady they are just overbudget and that is not our fault? With these increases I think it is more likely that people will be carpooling more and more.

Don't forget the proposal is on the table to charge bridge tolls to carpools

I ride BART once a year to the city... Day after Thanksgiving I take my nieces and nephew to the San Francisco Car Show at Moscone Center... part of the fun for them is riding BART... and of course spending the day with their Uncle