|
|
| Daily News hammers fare hike (537189) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (537189) | |
Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007 Link hereYouknew this was coming.Hey, it's a POV. I sympathize to a point. |
|
|
| (537200) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:05:43 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. Yeah i sensed it coming as well..What's done is done though... |
|
|
| (537202) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:07:55 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. The Daily News has turned into a blog. It's doing the same thing with Isiah Thomas. Someone should remind them that it's their job to report the news, not shape public opinion on it. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (537203) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 11:08:21 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:07:55 2007. You've just noticed... 8-) |
|
|
| (537210) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:07:55 2007. You know what?People just dont know how lucky they got it in New York Im serious.. 24 hr a day service,you dont pay 2 bucks to get in and more as you ride further out.. Dont pay for transfers,you can go from one county in the city to another outside of the city with one card.. I can understand service disruptions and weather problems and road problems happen which leads to late trains and buses but come on now still the best deal in the country.. |
|
|
| (537211) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Dec 20 11:13:45 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007. agree 100% |
|
|
| (537230) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by straphanger9 on Thu Dec 20 11:44:53 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007. Absolutely agree...going to school in Providence the last few years where there is no subway, limited commuter rail service, Amtrak service, very sparse bus service that only runs during certain hours (and is EXTREMELY cut back on weekends - so much so that to catch a 8:20 AM train last year in order to get back to NYC so I could go to the Giants game, I had to sprint 1.5 miles in 20 minutes while carrying a backpack and laptop bag, because a cab would have taken more than 20 minutes to get to me and I would've missed my train and the game....)Service disruptions are normal, and I find, not a huge problem. If you plan accordingly you can get almost anywhere in the city by train in an hour or less. Outside of the city, you'll be waiting an hour for a train (if it exists), or bus. Plus as much as people complain about the service, they also complain about cleanliness. In a city with millions of people, and the priority on moving people, do we really care that much about rats on the tracks??? Plus Boston charges $2 for subway service ($1.70 if you get the EZpass-esque Charlie Card), and they don't run all night or frequently. In fact, their most crowded line is a trolley, but they haven't found a way to improve service to these branches yet. They also maintain much less equipment, but charge the same (or a very similar, if you get the Charlie Card) fare. |
|
|
| (537240) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:56:09 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007. You know what?People just dont know how lucky they got it in New York Im serious.. I do. |
|
|
| (537241) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:57:14 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007. I have ridden several transit systems all over the country, Denver, Houston,Dallas,Washington DC,Honolulu,San Fransico,San Deigo,Philadelphia,Miami,Fort Lauderdale,Orlando,Tampa/St Petersburg,Las Vegas and Minniapolis and none of them compare to New York None of them..Fare wise or Schedule wise.. You have to "do your homeowrk" when planning a trip in those cities and you cant stay out too late or you are out of luck sometimes with no cabs anywhere around you.. |
|
|
| (537245) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 12:02:06 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:56:09 2007. Oh yeah i know you do..All we are going to hear is people bitchin and moaning on "how they cant afford this" They should be lucky they dont RAISE fares and CUT service... |
|
|
| (537284) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Thu Dec 20 12:46:58 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. Ah, nothing like demagogic journalism devoid of facts! Send Pete Donohue his Pulitzer.The most intriguing part of the piece, was (naturally) the last paragraph: "Sander said one reason he didn't ask Spitzer for more money to halt the fare hike was because the authority will be asking the state for billions of dollars for capital construction." That's a pretty good reason. My guess is that if the subways were run like this for the last 50 years, there would probably be a much larger subway system than what we have now. |
|
|
| (537297) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 12:59:25 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Thu Dec 20 12:46:58 2007. I'm putting on my kook mask and writing them a letter. |
|
|
| (537299) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Thu Dec 20 13:00:42 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 12:59:25 2007. Cool! I'd like read what you write. |
|
|
| (537359) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by straphanger9 on Thu Dec 20 13:56:12 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Thu Dec 20 12:46:58 2007. yup...and then once Phase I of the SAS is complete, i bet people and especially writers will be complaining about how "inadequate" the Q service is, despite the fact that construction is FAR from finished.also gotta love how they completely ignore that far fewer trains get taken OoS these days and MDBF's are MUCH improved since even the early 90's... "service hasn't improved"...WTF is that? |
|
|
| (537370) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Thu Dec 20 14:08:58 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. They can "hammer" it all they want.They just want be as outspoken and negative about the fare hike as possible, so the public will think the News sympathizes and sides with them, and so they'll sell more papers. |
|
|
| (537375) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by 5301 Fishbowl on Thu Dec 20 14:19:41 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. For the last 48 years (since I've been alive), it's always the same crap over and over and over again when there is a fare hike proposal. The newspapers and television stations interview the public, and get the same reactions over and over and over again. The people who cry that the service hasn't gotten any better while the fares go up. And there is always at least one moron they quote as saying that they will stop riding transit and start driving their car to work. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 25 cent fare hike is worth paying over $3 a gallon for gas and $20 for parking and the aggrivation of traffic? Not to mention the cost of the wear and tear on the car.Good luck, folks! :-) |
|
|
| (537443) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 20 16:36:13 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by 5301 Fishbowl on Thu Dec 20 14:19:41 2007. And there is always at least one moron they quote as saying that they will stop riding transit and start driving their car to work. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. A 25 cent fare hike is worth paying over $3 a gallon for gas and $20 for parking and the aggrivation (sic) of traffic? Not to mention the cost of the wear and tear on the car.I disagree that traffic is aggravating. For one thing, perhaps this person doesn't work in Manhattan. Thus by driving he could save time and do so more comfortably but doesn't want to expend the cost. Perhaps the cost difference (including the "price" of convenience) is 25¢ so now it is better to drive. Personally I don't see how 25¢ can make a difference so if I were riding the subway before a hike, I'd continue riding after as well. So yes, that one guy who says he's going to drive is a moron. If driving were better he'd be doing it already. |
|
|
| (537480) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 20 17:42:01 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 20 11:07:55 2007. However, there is a potential real casualty of this...something very dear to Mayor Mike called congestion pricing (or East River Tolls), that he has basically put all of his eggs behind. |
|
|
| (537481) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 20 17:43:56 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. Now, there was a way to save the fare...but it would have required the MTA to have brains and make MAJOR cuts in the Department of Buses (and MTA Bus).In short, all express buses would end up parked, and the worst 5 percent of local bus lines would be cut or merged...a move that could cut a significant chunk out of the budget. (Retiring operators would NOT be replaced.) |
|
|
| (537673) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:46:28 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Thu Dec 20 11:12:58 2007. And, we are paying for a higher percentage of operating costs out of the farebox than most if not all transit systems in the US. We have the higher transit commuting rates in the US, and we deserve better than we get in both fares and service. Sure, it's better than 20 years ago, but it could be a lot better. |
|
|
| (537674) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:53:46 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Thu Dec 20 12:46:58 2007. No, it's not a good reason. It's a political excuse. The State and the City have undersubsidized both the capital and operating budgets at the MTA over the past 14 years.If the subways had been run like this over the past 50 years, with capital spending from farebox-backed debt, we'd have a great system and $8.00 fares to cover $6 billion? $10 billion? a year in debt service. If the whole state is paying for building Interstate 86 and for maintenance and reconstruction on the LIE and the Gowanus, then the whole state should pay for more of the MTA's operating and capital expenses. End rant. |
|
|
| (537676) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 21 00:03:40 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 20 17:43:56 2007. There is a strong political constituency behind the express bus system that would prevent it from ever being shut down. |
|
|
| (537677) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 21 00:04:33 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:46:28 2007. I think I get pretty good subway service. And the fare is ridiculously low for what you get. It's a great value. Sure there is room for improvement in a lot of places, but overall, it's not that bad.Now as for the buses...let's not go there. |
|
|
| (537678) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 21 00:07:38 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 21 00:04:33 2007. Good bus service is an oxymoron. |
|
|
| (537680) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 21 00:13:07 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 21 00:07:38 2007. Almost, but not really. Adding the real-time bus locating info would be a HUGE, HUGE, HUGE improvement. And putting that info online would just be so amazing that I really can't yet fully grasp the magnitude of the change it would have on my life and others like me. |
|
|
| (537682) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Fri Dec 21 00:14:56 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:46:28 2007. Sure, it's better than 20 years ago, but it could be a lot better.How much better you want it to be suggestions? Solutions?? Still the best deal in the country.. |
|
|
| (537683) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Fri Dec 21 00:15:23 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 21 00:07:38 2007. Bus Service??Whats that?? |
|
|
| (537689) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 21 00:22:04 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Railman718 on Fri Dec 21 00:15:23 2007. it's a good thing we're talking about this here because on buschat they'd be all over us. |
|
|
| (537692) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Fri Dec 21 00:28:56 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 21 00:22:04 2007. Oh yeah i know... |
|
|
| (537701) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 00:52:09 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:46:28 2007. Heck..they ran more service 20 years ago. |
|
|
| (537735) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by 5301 Fishbowl on Fri Dec 21 03:53:41 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 20 16:36:13 2007. >>I disagree that traffic is aggravating.<<While I know some people prefer the "privacy of their own car", most people agree that sitting in bumper to bumper traffic is not one of their favorite things. And the ones who usually love the "privacy of their own car" never or rarely ride public transit to begin with. |
|
|
| (537788) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 07:01:40 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Marc A. Rivlin on Thu Dec 20 23:53:46 2007. No, it's not a good reason. It's a political excuse. The State and the City have undersubsidized both the capital and operating budgets at the MTA over the past 14 years.This is not a 14 year old issue. Ever since the "save the nickel fare" popped up, financing for the subway has been based on crude populism rather than rational projections. What did that get us? A dramatic slow down in expansion and deferred maintenance. Paying for ops out of the farebox is not a "political excuse." It is sound management, and it is long overdue. If the subways had been run like this over the past 50 years, with capital spending from farebox-backed debt, we'd have a great system and $8.00 fares to cover $6 billion? $10 billion? a year in debt service. Did you read what was written? I've never advocated that capital spending be backed by fares, only operational spending. Also, that is the direction that Mr. Sander is going. Here's the quote again. "Sander said one reason he didn't ask Spitzer for more money to halt the fare hike was because the authority will be asking the state for billions of dollars for capital construction." If the riders were paying for all of the operational costs, but the capital costs were subsidized, fares would not be $8.00. They would not be $5.00. They would not be $3.00. Probably more like $2.50, which is not far from the $2.25 that was initially proposed. If the whole state is paying for building Interstate 86 and for maintenance and reconstruction on the LIE and the Gowanus, then the whole state should pay for more of the MTA's operating and capital expenses. End rant. You may want to research what the source for this funding is. I've got a strange feeling that Interstate 86 may receive funding from the Federal Government. Which brings us to dedicated funding sources. Roads have it. Rail needs it. This comparison is built on faulty logic, but it does illustrate why the fare increase is needed. The State of New York, which so many opposed to the fare increase want the MTA to get to fill the budget gap, is facing a $4 billion budget gap itself this coming year. Delay a fare increase until July? With projected budget deficits rising over the coming years, this is a terrible idea. |
|
|
| (537870) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 10:02:02 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 07:01:40 2007. Perhaps...but you might want to ask THIS question...Why is the MTA in the RED..when they claim to have a SURPLUS of 500 MILLION..? Where did the 200 MILLION come from that the "used" to cover the $2 dollar base fare? Let me tell you..the STATE..UNDER PATURKEY SILVER and BRUNO shortchanged the MTA for years...EVEN went as far as TAKING BACK FUNDING from the Authority.. We need NEW TALENT.. |
|
|
| (537873) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 10:09:15 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 10:02:02 2007. Perhaps...but you might want to ask THIS question...Why is the MTA in the RED..when they claim to have a SURPLUS of 500 MILLION..? Where did the 200 MILLION come from that the "used" to cover the $2 dollar base fare? In 2007, the MTA has a surplus. They are projecting massive deficits in coming years. NO ONE IS DISPUTING THESE COMING DEFICITS. That means that their projections are probably very realistic. If you spend this years surplus, instead of saving it, covering the future deficits will be far more difficult. That will mean a cut back on services, defferred maintenance, reduction in capital projects, and/or layoffs. Only looking at 2007 numbers is intellectually dishonest. |
|
|
| (537875) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:18:44 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 07:01:40 2007. Please stop making sense. It will get you banished from here. |
|
|
| (537876) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:19:33 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 10:02:02 2007. Why is the MTA in the RED..when they claim to have a SURPLUS of 500 MILLION..? Creative accounting. Nothing new. |
|
|
| (537877) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:21:03 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by 5301 Fishbowl on Thu Dec 20 14:19:41 2007. I agree, but a newspaper has never actually joined the shrill, uneducated masses so openly as the Daily News has here. |
|
|
| (537883) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 10:30:56 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by italianstallion on Fri Dec 21 00:03:40 2007. But is it enough to FLIP an election? That is very questionnable. |
|
|
| (537889) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:40:54 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 10:30:56 2007. Most politicians would not like to risk finding out. |
|
|
| (537890) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 10:42:58 2007, in response to Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 20 10:55:56 2007. My only problem is a lack of creativity...such as not hitting MTA (and Westchester DOT BxM4C) express bus riders harder, increasing their fare to $6. I would say the local bus fare should have gone up to $2.25...and then the MTA would introduce PEAK fare pricing for the bridges and tunnels, with EZPass discounts ELIMINATED for all vehicles during the peak period, except for FRANCHISED buses (in addition to toll hikes for the bridges).Another revenue stream could come if the NYS Thruway could afford it and transfer the New England Thruway to the MTA. |
|
|
| (537892) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:45:28 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 10:42:58 2007. All suburban express bus fares should be MORE than the cost of travel by rail. |
|
|
| (537898) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 11:04:21 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Dec 21 10:45:28 2007. And you have seen the light. :-) |
|
|
| (537927) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 11:29:07 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 10:42:58 2007. As I see it, the differential between what EZ Pass and cash users pay should not be eliminated. Those who pay with cash are more expensive to support, and create more polution and congestion. Allowing all to pay the same price removes the incentive to use EZ pass. |
|
|
| (537954) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 12:03:05 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 11:29:07 2007. The Port Authority of NY and NJ, however is poised to do exactly what I said the MTA should do, however...virtually to a T. |
|
|
| (537956) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 12:05:05 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 10:09:15 2007. Oh ..are we to disregard the so called "projected" surplus of 200 million for 08?Let me tell you about "projections"... Its MTA SPEAK for what MIGHT HAPPEN..not for what IS.. Point is..they should have been adding those "SURPLUS" to debt and Labor.. No one is being "intellectually dishonest"..rather just the opposite..A Brute REALISTIC FACT that we are going to see some hard days ahead. |
|
|
| (537963) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 12:10:29 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 12:05:05 2007. However, the MTA has been using that surplus for other things it sees as more important...such as hedging against fuel prices by signing longer-term fuel contracts now. Even though transit agencies pay wholesale rates usually when fueled at a garage, they are not totally insulated from rising energy prices. |
|
|
| (538001) | |
Re: Daily News hammers fare hike |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 12:49:10 2007, in response to Re: Daily News hammers fare hike, posted by AMoreira81 on Fri Dec 21 12:03:05 2007. Not a smart move by them if they do that. |
|
|
| (538028) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 13:09:26 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Edwards! on Fri Dec 21 12:05:05 2007. Oh ..are we to disregard the so called "projected" surplus of 200 million for 08?Actually, it might be as high as a $377 million surplus in 2008. That gets followed - if there is no fare hike - by a $1.4 Billion deficit in 2009. Waiting until the last minute to raise fares will require steeper fare hikes and/or budget cuts that will hurt riders. Let me tell you about "projections"... Its MTA SPEAK for what MIGHT HAPPEN..not for what IS.. Do you actually have anything substantive to counter their projections? Point is..they should have been adding those "SURPLUS" to debt and Labor.. That's the last thing that they should do, unless we want to go back to the days of deferred maintenance. A surplus, as well as a deficit is what happens in a single year. Debts are paid from debt service that is in a budget. Using operational surpluses to pay back capital debt is one of the most fiscally irresponsible things possible. What will the MTA do when it needs to cover an operational budget gap, issue bonds? Good luck with that. And adding surpluses to labor? The MTA needs to reduce labor costs, not increase it. No one is being "intellectually dishonest"..rather just the opposite.. Advocating to not allow the fare to keep up with inflation, without any dedicated revenue source to fund this, is intellectually dishonest. A Brute REALISTIC FACT that we are going to see some hard days ahead. If we know that hard days are ahead, then we should take advance measures to ensure that the MTA remains fiscally stable. |
|
|
| (538033) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Fri Dec 21 13:12:13 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 13:09:26 2007. Using surpluses to pay down debt isn't a bad idea if the debt MTA is retiring can be replaced with debt that has a lower interest rate but the new bonds aren't issued right away. |
|
|
| (538046) | |
Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Fri Dec 21 13:21:40 2007, in response to Re: Daily News Demagogic Fare Hike Piece, posted by RonInBayside on Fri Dec 21 13:12:13 2007. That's true, but that's not what is being proposed. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
