A good friend of mine who deals with these sort of issues told me that there can never be enough class resentment to make good policy. I’m more worried that culturally the first thing a poor family wants to buy when they move into the middle class is a car.

And the objections are similar in quality to the class-based objections to congestion pricing.

Sorry I got so testy, but these kind of nonsense is beginning to weigh on my nerves. No wonder low- and moderate-income households are becoming much worse of public policy wise, with all this nonsense going around.

i also dont understand why a monthly user who is committing to public transit is being penalized with the heftiest price increase?

the goals should be to make public transit as cheap as possible and driving as expensive as possible

But the off peak relief this proposal offers serves two purposes. First it meshes with congestion pricing. Second, it keeps the question in front of the public more directly as Congestionn Pricing versus Fare Increase in a sort of steel-cage death match.

Also, the off-peak discounts are also a program to reduce standing room by spreading out capacity utilization. Sort of congestion pricing for mass transit.

It’s amazing the sort of idiocy you read. Prove it! Not likely because the opposite is true.

Many affluent people have cars, yet use transit to get to work. Most less well off people do not have cars, and use transit all the time, thus benefitting by the discount.

In Los Angeles advocates for the poor sued when the monthly pass was raised more than the pay per ride for this very reason.

And yes the working stiffs have less flexibility, but they are more likely to travel off peak. The guy who provides your morning coffee in the deli was there before the start of rush hour.

Peter Gibson, the head of public affairs at Boots, said that the WPL was unfair because none of the planned public transport improvements would provide a door-to-door service for employees. One of the new tram lines would come close but staff would still be left with a long walk.

He said: “There is no real alternative to the car for many people. They would have to take a bus or tram into the city centre and then another one back out to our site.”

Hm, I wonder why that is, Mr. Gibson. Sounds like Boots chose to locate their facilities in a transit-inaccessible area. Who’s the unfair one here?