[sustran] Re: Chicago Transit Fare Hike

Christopher Kost chriskost at gmail.com
Sun Sep 2 00:19:59 JST 2007


Brendan,

You raise good points, but the assumption that the transit-dependent  
can pay more than cheap is problematic.

At least in the U.S., many public transport users are very poor. In  
Los Angeles, the median household income for bus riders is $12,000.  
(The median household income in the city as a whole is $43,000.) A  
family with that income buying, say, two adult monthly passes and two  
student passes will end up spending a similar proportion of its  
income on transportation to that spent by those who own cars. So even  
the current "low" fares aren't giving poor people much of a break.

I agree that the first-best solution would be to use welfare  
channels, but that's difficult in the current political climate in  
the U.S., so in the meantime I think it makes sense to keep fares low.


Regards,
chris



On Sep 1, 2007, at 8:41 AM, Brendan Finn wrote:

> Dear Eric, Sujit,
>
> I have argued many times against cheap fare policies (i.e.  
> deliberate under-pricing) and that transit should be as close to  
> self-financing as it can achieve. I have argued three main points :
>
> 1) All choice users and many non-choice users have the  
> affordability to pay more than "cheap", and most would be willing  
> to do so for better quality. Under-priced transit uses up the  
> available funds for wealth-transfer, leaving little for quality  
> improvements or reinvestment. Public funds should be spent on  
> service, quality and infrastructure, not on low fares.
>
> 2) The vulnerable within society can be supported by subsidising  
> transit passes for them (rather than for all users) and this should  
> be done through welfare funding channels rather than transit  
> funding channels. This better protects the funding source since  
> politicians and administrators would have to overtly remove welfare  
> from those who need it, at risk of heavy political backlash.
>
> 3) Cheap fares require heavy subsidies, and these inevitably tend  
> to keep growing. The transit is then totally at the mercy of the  
> funder. Sooner or later, an administration will come in who decides  
> to cut the subsidy program. They can dress it up in many ways -  
> national austerity measures, correct 'inefficiency and  
> profligacy' (as Eric quotes), moving to a user-pays principle,  
> etc., etc. - we are all familiar with these dreaded sea-changes.  
> Tariffs increase dramatically, services are thinned out and quieter  
> routes closed, customer support programs are slashed, investment is  
> put on hold, quality programs are shelved, important management  
> functions are shut down, and confrontation arises with labour as  
> hard measures are forced through. Patronage is lost, good working  
> relationships are lost, the development effort of a few decades  
> goes down the drain, and the innovators and developers in the  
> management team are pushed aside for the bean-counters. Instability  
> and down-sizing kil
>  l user confidence in a way that takes decades to recover.
>
> Chicago seems to be yet another example of the vulnerability of  
> transit once subsidy becomes a significant part of its income  
> stream. I have no moral or economic argument against subsidy for  
> transit - the more public funds the better, if used wisely.  
> However, it is a Faustian Pact, and a day of reckoning eventually  
> comes. Transit planners and managers should think long and hard  
> about the bargains they enter - they owe it to their customers,  
> their city and their workers.
>
> With best wishes,
>
>
> Brendan.
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> _______________
>> From Brendan Finn, ETTS Ltd.   e-mail : etts at indigo.ie   tel :  
>> +353.87.2530286
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: eric.britton at free.fr
>   To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
>   Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 10:10 AM
>   Subject: [sustran] Chicago Transit Fare Hike
>
>
>   Dear Sujit and Sustran friends,
>
>   Don't think that our Chicago CTA friends have made these moves  
> with joy in their hearts.  The fact is that they have been trapped  
> by state legislators (many of whom have their power base in rural  
> and small town areas) who have decided to, in a phrase, "punish the  
> CTA for their inefficiency and profligacy". Typically "old  
> mobility" and terribly wrong headed, but if this were only the only  
> city and agency that this kind of thing were to take place this  
> would be a happier planet.
>
>   In point of fact I have just come back from a lively week on  
> brainstorming session with a group of more than forty experts and  
> agencies around the table, where we gave our full attention to the  
> possibility of "Reinventing Transport in Chicago".  You can see  
> more of that if interested in our New Mobility/Climate Emergency  
> Project at www.climate.newmobility.org <http:// 
> www.climate.newmobility.org/> , where I hope shortly to post some  
> useful information on these sessions.
>
>   In the meantime, you may fond some us in the "Workpad" that you  
> will find on the bottom left menu of this site in process.
>
>   Eric Britton
>
>   1 September 2007
>
>   While we feel encouraged by the excellent proposals initiated by  
> the Mayor of New York, here is what I got from a friend about  
> Chicago. I was under the
>   impression that Chicago was one of the better cities in the US in  
> providing transit facilities.
>   --
>
>   Sujit
>
>   Here is the news:-
>
>   To make up for poor revenues in recent years, the Chicago Transit  
> Authority's board has approved *fare hikes *and changes to services- 
> to include the shutting down of 39 bus routes. Bus and off-peak  
> train fares paid in cash will rise from $2 to $2.50. During peak  
> hours, train fares will become $3. The price of the one-day travel  
> pass will increase from $5 to $6; the seven-day pass from $20 to  
> $23; and the 30-day pass from $75 to $84. The changes go into  
> effect on September 16th.
>   --------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------
> IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via  
> YAHOOGROUPS.
>
> Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran- 
> discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership  
> rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members'  
> there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the  
> yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the  
> confusing arrangement.
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,  
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing  
> countries (the 'Global South').



More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list