Skip to content
by Ben Fried
“Day After Fare Hike, Manhattan Institute Comes Out With a Study on MTA Salaries”
So the Straphangers and straphangers will look at this as a reason that they have been ripped off by New York City Transit, and the suburbs will say agree.
Meanwhile, the fine print shows that the real ripoff is the LIRR, and the MTA police force, which only patrols the commuter railroads, bridges and tunnels (the NYPD handles the subway, and the former transit police that was merged into it was never that overpaid.”
So who was bailed out by avoiding armageddon? The places that benefit the most are demanding retailiation against New York City.
IF it’s Tuesday, there must be another grouchy, anticycling story presented to us by the New York Times. Do their writers actually ever ride bicycles, or even own them?
People at my job (right on “the new Broadway” (in the 50s) are all puzzled, and say they hear passersby who are all puzzled, at what the different non-car parts of the street are supposed to be. They specifically talk about how it’s confusing that from 59 to about 57 the bike lane is green, and then below that, the pedestrian space is green and the bike lane is not.
I’m very grateful for the experiment, but pedestrians sure are confused so far.
I fail to see how that’s an anticycling story.
The NY1 article about the fare hike is just more of the same. “Riders are now shelling out more for both single-fare rides and unlimited-ride MetroCards, to help fill the MTA’s massive budget gap.” … because the government lacks the willpower to make drivers chip in.
So out of 8,200 a few hundred of the folks making over 100,00 are rank and file workers. That means it is almost entirely management. Nice little attack on labor. A nice class attack. Also they make less then 150,000 the few that did make some decent pay. Is that a bad thing?
Josh, every week there’s an article about why people aren’t cycling. This week: “People don’t cycle because they’re female.” Last week: “People don’t cycle because they’re afraid of injury.” The week before, “People don’t cycle because they don’t have a place to keep their bike.” The week before that, “People don’t cycle because they don’t want to risk bike theft.” And earlier, “People don’t cycle because they don’t know how.”
Only a masochist would assume that five (or more) weeks in a row of articles about obstacles to biking could be construed as some kind of encouragement to novice city cyclists.
Here for anyone who wants them are 10 positive story ideas (link here:
1. “I hear the birds chirping on my bike ride to work.”
2. “I find it easy to meet women/men at social events that I bike to.”
3. “Biking relaxes me and makes it easier to cope with city life.”
4. “I save money cycling to work, so I can splurge on things I want.”
5. “I started biking to work and within a year I’d lost x pounds.”
6. “Cycling in the city is a great cheap date.”
7. “I see the craziest, only-in-NY things while cycling.”
8. “Doing my marketing on two wheels helps me save $$$ by curbing impulses.”
9. “If I flat, I fix it myself and keep on going.”
10. “I love riding in the summer because of all the cool places to stop.”
I didn’t think that NY Times story was grouchy or anti-cycling either (although I agree that the Times has run more than a few anti-biking screeds). If there is a gender gap, it needs to be addressed — and installing the necessary infrastructure so that biking need not be a life & death proposition is probably going to help eliminate the gap.
Maybe not grouchy but the Times certainly does give the impression that cycling is a gender neutral activity, and the only thing preventing women from becoming A riders the their willingness to sweat.
It might be interesting to survey members of Transportation Alternatives which puts much less emphasis on speed than NYCC and instead focuses more on commuting, or simply riding your bike.
“If there is to be a length of time after the installation of new asphalt and before the permanent markings are installed, I would have to think that there are requirements for temporary markings to be installed by the contractor.”
In response to "DOT: Seaman Avenue Bike Lanes Won't Return This Year"