Quote:
Originally posted by George Bush
Ummm... no, WE subsidize YOU--who provides Metro with the bulk of its fares? Suburbanites. Would there even *be* a Metro system without the traffic demands of suburbanites? Not no, but Hell, no. The system was built and maintains itself fare-wise not for the week-end quality-of-life for the Columbian, but for the rush-hour usage by suburban Virginians and Marylanders. Of course, a flat $2 fee would definitely lessen the amount by which we subsidize your off-peak use of our commuting system.
What's this "Judiciary Square to Dupont Circle in rush hour--an extra fifteen cents over non-peak, vs. Judiciary Square to White Flint, an extra two bucks over non-peak" nonsense from our incompetent monopolists? Lady, your handrail-holding ass is taking a space from someone who is paying an extra $1.85 for the same right to imitate a sardine.
It all goes back to the keg-floating jokers who laid out this system in the days of polyester and disco, the same Einsteins that gave us escalators that go directly outside: aaahh, the contraction and expansion of freezing effects, the corrosive capabilities of salt *AND* precipitation to ensure that the salt gets distributed throughout the machine, the narrower flow-area of escalators vs. stairs, and... the piece de resistance... moving parts. Fabulous.
Similarly intelligent is the track layout that requires 85-90% of ALL riders to go through Metro Center or Chinatown, which guarantees that anything remotely approaching an efficient use of the system at the periphery will *necessarily* be guaranteed overload the core, and leading our discussion to...
A bowl (instead of dome) shaped surcharge for rush-hour use.
The peak fare structure is bowl-shaped: it penalizes Virginians and Marylanders. While I have no love for Maryland, the system exists primarily to divert surface traffic away from cars and the surface. There is no logical reason to penalize the people who live on the periphery: the crunch is in the center. It is in Metro Center that trains are so full that passengers cannot get on, no in Vienna. It is in Metro Center that the system is filled well beyond capacity, and it is in Metro Center that the rush-hour surcharge should be levied. Thus, a fair fare might be an extra $1 to ride in the center during rush hour, period the end.
|
An entertaining diatribe that's completely wrong:
1) It costs more to transport someone from Vienna to Metro Center than from Dupont Circle to Metro Center. THis is true both with respect to marginal costs (fuel/energy to move your flabby suburban ass many more miles) and fixed costs (Metro had to build a lot more miles of rail to reach your flabby suburban ass). Given these costs, there is no reason not to charge more for longer distances travelled.
2) Suburbanites benefit even more from metro than downtowners. Downtowners can either drive or walk/bike. Suburbanites don't have that choice. Moreover, the traffic problems of the area are not limited to downtown DC. They're even worse on highways during rush hour. Finally, whatever delays more traffic will cause will have a greater impact on anyone who has a longer-distance commute. Again, it's appropriate to charge suburbanites more for coming all the way downtown.
3) Anyone from the suburbs is able to get a seat well away from paigow's ass. I think, although I can't be sure, that most would be willing to pay for that privilege.
4) The design of the system has nothing to do with suburban/downtown pricing. If you add a surcharge, then the surcharge should be applied to everyone.
