# Andy Byfords plan for the MTA on 60 Minutes 10/21



## VentureForth (Oct 19, 2018)

Here's a short preview for a segment of 60 Minutes this coming Sunday. Looks interesting!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-the-great-depression-era-pieces-of-the-new-york-city-subway-60-minutes/


----------



## Caesar La Rock (Oct 19, 2018)

I hope the MTA gets the funding needed to implement the modernization of the system.


----------



## VentureForth (Oct 22, 2018)

$40 Billion is not really easy to come by - even over 10 years. That's 4x Amtrak's annual operating subsidy for the entire national network. Granted, MTA carries 6x as many people in a day that Amtrak carries in a year, but it's still a LOT of money.

My quick math shows that if they raise the fare to $5/trip, and keep ridership, they can afford it.


----------



## cpotisch (Oct 22, 2018)

VentureForth said:


> $40 Billion is not really easy to come by - even over 10 years. That's 4x Amtrak's annual operating subsidy for the entire national network.


Amtrak gets a $10 billion subsidy? Didn't they get like $1.8 billion this year and it was a record amount?


----------



## VentureForth (Oct 22, 2018)

cpotisch said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > $40 Billion is not really easy to come by - even over 10 years. That's 4x Amtrak's annual operating subsidy for the entire national network.
> ...


$40 Bil over 10 years is $4 B/yr, which is 4x $1B which is the typical subsidy.
Yes, this year's 1.8B is an anomaly that seems to not be enough to keep food on the table [in the diner on the LSL & CL].


----------



## cpotisch (Oct 22, 2018)

VentureForth said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


Ah, I see. Was confused by the (in retrospective very obvious) phrasing.


----------



## daybeers (Oct 23, 2018)

VentureForth said:


> My quick math shows that if they raise the fare to $5/trip, and keep ridership, they can afford it.


And who's gonna go for that?


----------



## Palmetto (Oct 23, 2018)

daybeers said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > My quick math shows that if they raise the fare to $5/trip, and keep ridership, they can afford it.
> ...


I would. And I'd pay a tax on a ticket, too, just like I do to fly. Or drive on a toll road.


----------



## daybeers (Oct 23, 2018)

Palmetto said:


> daybeers said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


Do you know how many barriers that would raise? Many people can barely afford to pay for one trip on the subway or the bus. Plus, the system will undoubtedly lose ridership, so I'd venture to say the net change would be a loss. I don't see this happening anytime in the near future.


----------



## cpotisch (Oct 23, 2018)

VentureForth said:


> My quick math shows that if they raise the fare to $5/trip, and keep ridership, they can afford it.


I personally think that that would be a really bad move. In fact, the current $2.75 is too high for a lot of people. Let's say you are a four person family taking the subway round-trip somewhere. At $2.75 per ride, you'll be spending $22 for that round-trip. If you have a limited income, that can really add up. If you hiked it to $5, that four person round-trip now costs $40. For public transit which many people need to take at least twice per day, every day, I think that that's just way too high.


----------



## VentureForth (Oct 26, 2018)

I said that tongue in cheek, hence the "and keep ridership". But to Cpotisch's point, you're absolutely right. $5 to go one stop is ridiculous. They would need to (and railfans will hate this) make the price distance based like everything in Japan and the D.C. Metro. It's the fairest fare, which sadly those who can afford it the least live the furthest away from the city.


----------



## daybeers (Oct 26, 2018)

I think part of the beauty of the NYC subway, and the fact that they have such high ridership, is the fact that you can go anywhere for $2.75.


----------



## cpotisch (Oct 26, 2018)

daybeers said:


> I think part of the beauty of the NYC subway, and the fact that they have such high ridership, is the fact that you can go anywhere for $2.75.


Agreed. You don't need to plan in advance and figure out where you're going and how much it will cost. You don't have to pay extra if you miss your stop or have to change your route because of a service disruption or anything like that. You are "free", knowing that it's always $2.75.


----------



## cpotisch (Oct 27, 2018)

I took a brief look at it and I am glad to say that it seems like they did an uncharacteristically good job for a mainstream outlet doing a report on rail service. I usually end up cringing a lot more.


----------



## VentureForth (Nov 12, 2018)

cpotisch said:


> Agreed. You don't need to plan in advance and figure out where you're going and how much it will cost. You don't have to pay extra if you miss your stop or have to change your route because of a service disruption or anything like that. You are "free", knowing that it's always $2.75.


I appreciate the fact that there is simplicity. But I think we're at a time where fair pricing to increase revenue to preserve and maintain The Beast is vastly necessary.

I'm try to drum up some comparisons in a bit about how it could save short haulers money.  IE: $1.50 to stay on Manhattan, incrementing as you go further out. I think the gating and ticket system is ready for it.


----------

