What cheers me up is riding a bicycle. I’ll ride it to the arena too, if it is ever built.

Now if only I could find a similar substitute for public education, the police, parks, libraries, Social Security, Medicare, etc. I’d be fine. But I’m not sure about anyone else.

Frankly I don’t understand why service cuts are more palatable than fare hikes. I’d rather see the fare go up and maintain the same level of service (or, better yet, improve it).

Now for the life of me I cannot figure out why we don’t go back to the form of privatization we used when the subway was at its finest? It is clear that the MTA as a supposedly politically independent entity is not capable of controlling its labor cost or any retaining any efficiencies. Also it is evidenced by our own history that privatizing the operations of the MTA would be the best option.

Ongoing operations of every form of transit should not be subsidized, capital costs sure, but operations should be covered by fare. I would gladly apply that philosophy to road users as well. By getting rid of the gas tax and making all limited access highways toll roads, with a toll based on (distance traveled) x (vehicle class) x (special infrastructure used).

This is why so many of the road pricing schemes make me uneasy – all the plans involve bonding the money to simply borrrow more.

Lets dig the hole deeper!

Congestion pricing or bridge tolls (at the rates discussed…) alone can not balance the MTA’s abysmal balance sheet. The legacy costs are too insurmountable, and the public (along with a complicit media…) is too stupid to understand any funding issues beyond “TEH MTA SUX!!!”

The system is being run into the ground. It’s over. It’ll be death by a thousand (service) cuts.

For upstaters? Sure. We want it all, but don’t want to pay for it. This is very sad.

Among the items that won’t be considered — taxing pension benefits, which is what I proposed in combination of congestion pricing. Some are discussing it in Michigan, one of the few states where (like New York) there are similar exemptions.

http://www.freep.com/article/20091206/NEWS06/912060446/1318/Should-Michigan-tax-pensions

But even with 16.0% unemployment, the average age heading for 65 as younger residents flee, no one opening new businesses, soaring tax rates as those who actually pay depart, collapsing services, and the gutting of aid to the needy even as their numbers soar, this is considered unlikely there.

Which is why I’ve come to believe an institutional collapse followed (perhaps) by a gradual rehabilitation after many difficult years is more likely than reform. They’ll keep grabbing until there is nothing left.