You must log in or register to comment.

FinalIntern8888 t1_jbr0s8w wrote

Most people don’t even do that.

What’s more clutch is when I catch a bus transfer using the same ticket within the 30 minute window


NJ_Bus_Nut t1_jbrmp8n wrote

Did something similar once.

Brought a 3-Zone Interstate off the app, activated it (valid for one hour).

Boarded a bus from Weehawken to NYC, went to an Arby's nearby, and still had plenty of time to catch the 119 home.

Worth the $4.50


joeyirv t1_jbszy26 wrote

you took a trip to the city to go to arby’s?


NJ_Bus_Nut t1_jbt15pd wrote

Was going from the upper part of Weehawken to Bayonne, and decided to go via NYC because the interstate tickets are valid for a longer period of time.

The Arby's was an unintentional pit stop, but I still had time


kraghis OP t1_jbr0ua7 wrote

Is this possible??


FinalIntern8888 t1_jbr0yi9 wrote

Sure. I do it when I’m taking the 10 to JSQ and then I’ll hop on the 33 if it’s there to take me down Bergen


reputationStan t1_jbr7gsu wrote

yooo I do that occasionally too but now they might want us to start using the validation thingy on some of these buses 😭


FinalIntern8888 t1_jbs2c1n wrote

Has this actually started? I’ve been taking buses in this state for 5 years, they only ever glance at the ticket on my phone.


reputationStan t1_jbw1tly wrote

I started to get a monthly pass, but I've seen some drivers on the #1 ask people to start using it. I've noticed people having a hard time using it though


FinalIntern8888 t1_jbz7ulx wrote

I never would’ve thought NJ Transit would actually invest in its infrastructure. I’ve seen what look like ticket scanners for quite a while, I’ve never been asked to scan my ticket though.


LootFroop t1_jbrn38t wrote

I'm guilty of just buying one zone bus tickets


go4it7arh t1_jbueopn wrote

I’ve done this to meet a friend at the airport and get back on the bus with the same ticket on my phone


Tacquitowithhummus t1_jbrh82b wrote

If you have the NJ Transit app, just have a ticket already purchased in your account and not activated & whenever you see the conductor/checker checking for tickets (this has happened to me probably 4 out of 100 times I’ve taken the Light Rail), activate the ticket that’s already in your account. I’ve had the countdown timer at over 1 minute and the conductor/checker accepted it and moved on to the next passenger. I think their mindset is “they have some sort of ticket at least, there’s a lot more passengers to check”. Safe travels!


Ambitious-Energy-334 t1_jbucuce wrote

I’ve been on the light rail alot and no one has ever checked my ticket?? I have seen cops stop and ask to see your ticket when you get off in Hoboken.


nycnola t1_jbt1u5v wrote

Trigger alert This is stealing.


JCwhatimsayin t1_jbqxgvc wrote

I read this as an endorsement of the light rail for quick trips! Bravo! Can you share an example or two of a trip you took that you did within an hour round trip?


kraghis OP t1_jbr0ss5 wrote

Get off at Essex. Get gummies at the smoke shop. Go back home. (Some information withheld due to confidentiality)

Edit: Also including the optional Krispy Pizza or Bob White Counter stop


JCwhatimsayin t1_jbrs9v3 wrote

You can do all that PLUS Bob White Counter in under an hour? Surely only if you've called ahead...


Jctexan t1_jbre7i3 wrote

Hot take: all public transit should be publicly subsidized aka free (charge personal cars in order to subsidize frequent, safe, and reliable transit and no one will want to drive).


JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jbruidp wrote

World class public transit systems aren't free anywhere in the world

You need fares to fund high service levels

Pushes for fare free transit are good in theory but in reality, the charge cars part will fail to pass and the end result will be lower service


Chico75013 t1_jbufjcm wrote

Not necessarily, it's just a choice of how the system is paid for. A big advantage of free service is that it removes all of the costs associated with fare controls.


JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jbvqihk wrote

The problem is the cost of fare controls is not in the same universe as the revenue generated by fares

If such a fare free scheme were passed, it would have to be passed as a package deal with the revenue - if it's not, the revenue drop will just make them cut service


GreenTunicKirk t1_jbv6tu4 wrote

In Berlin they have subsidized transit across the city. Hop on/off rail lines, trams, buses. All for the price of one ticket.

No it’s not free like you say, but for the cost of one light rail ticket you can go everywhere in Berlin with ease and efficiency.


JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jbvqug7 wrote

That's a different story, allowing one fare to be used across multiple systems is a very good thing as it generates additional trips that wouldn't be done otherwise due to high cost. Since the fare is still existent, those extra trips add revenue which otherwise wouldn't have been there.


Jctexan t1_jc08tc9 wrote

  1. Just because something hasn’t been done, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done. How would things ever be improved upon if we never allowed change? That being said…see point 2.



JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc0a4r8 wrote

> The money will come from surplus tax revenue.

What happens when there is no longer surplus tax revenue? Service cuts. They certainly won't bring fares back to maintain service levels.


Jctexan t1_jc1sgxo wrote

Welp, as long as you're sure, I guess I have no choice but to accept the terrible way we've been doing things thus far.

Sigh. The constant negativity is just so dull. It's so easy to say why something won't work - anyone can find a bunch of reason why something won't work. If we put half as much energy into figuring out solutions, maybe we wouln't be in this mess. We certainly can't progress as a society with that attitude!


JeromePowellAdmirer t1_jc24rdr wrote

There are plenty of solutions, fare free transit isn't one of them until service levels are high enough that risking a cut wouldn't devastate the system. Every single transit system in America has too low service and reducing revenue can't increase it.


SadMaverick t1_jbrhta1 wrote

Just one teeny tiny problem. They already have money. Like lots. And yet charge the riders. And yet have terrible service.


Jctexan t1_jbri0j8 wrote

That’s why removing the pretend budgetary constraints will help.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbry2sd wrote

Hot take: If you live within 1 mile of light rail/rapid transit or 10 miles of heavy rail you should be taxed 1.5% of your income + capital gains.

Yea, richer you are, the more you should pay.

And 50% of that money should be dedicated towards transit outside of metro areas.


rapmasternicky_z t1_jbu58sj wrote

Imagine thinking eco-friendly urban areas need to subsidize planet-killing suburban areas even MORE than they already do


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbu5mx2 wrote

Imagine one of the wealthiest parts of the wealthiest states needs to hoard money rather than expand public transit to change that.

Take one less planet killing flight a year and help add a bus line to someplace in the state without one.


nycnola t1_jbt21gu wrote

I can’t get behind Vehicles registered at residences within a certain distance of transit should be taxed higher.


PostPostMinimalist t1_jbumhbf wrote

So you’re incentivizing people not to live in the more economically, environmentally sustainable areas?


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbupznv wrote

No. We’re using the rich to improve public transit in the region.

You’re not going to move over 1.5%. You’ll just cut a vacation down a few days. No big deal.


PostPostMinimalist t1_jburczi wrote

You can do both at the same time. You should incentivize living near transit and tax the rich to build more. Taxing based on making the responsible choice to live near transit is crazy.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbuynv0 wrote

It’s not based on where you live. It’s based on you already have access to the system funded by others and now need to contribute your share not only for usage but expansion.

Reality is you’re mostly subsidized by those who fly, drive and purchase stuff that came in through the ports.

It’s not like you’re paying your own way. By living here you’re heavily subsidized, you just chose not to count it that way.

I’m merely suggesting a small reduction in that subsidy based on income. While you’re suggesting continuing to subsist on the backs of others.


PostPostMinimalist t1_jbv57fs wrote


>By living here you’re heavily subsidized, you just chose not to count it that way.

But that's exactly the way it should be. Governments should subsidize things that are better for their citizens (and economies and environments etc.).


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbv5kob wrote

Right.., and the way they make good things is by taxing those with advantage and using it to expand those borders to incorporate more people. Not by letting the top couple percent hoard wealth and be exclusionary as you propose we continue.

Just admit it: you’re cheap and like benefitting off others even to the detriment of others.


PostPostMinimalist t1_jbv7krg wrote

>Right.., and the way they make good things is by taxing those with advantage

But what kind of advantage???

Not "lives near transit" that's just dumb and disincentivizing the exact behavior you want to encourage. We've already covered this.

>as you propose

I literally said "tax the rich to build more." Come on now have an honest discussion.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbv7v6g wrote

Taxes don’t disincentivize. That’s conservative fear mongering. It’s been shown again and again taxes don’t do that. There’s decades of data on this.

The whole premise of your argument is a flawed attempt to mask being cheap.


PostPostMinimalist t1_jbvabss wrote

Don't disincentivize what?

For example, taxes on cigarettes do in fact discourage smoking. "Most studies found that raising cigarette prices through increased taxes is a highly effective measure for reducing smoking among youth, young adults, and persons of low socioeconomic status." You're equating different kinds of incentives. Or I guess the NIH is just conservative propaganda.

By your logic non-smokers are just "cheap" and should probably pay that money too since that all smoker tax money is subsidizing health programs that might just benefit them or society.


jman457 t1_jbrdyn9 wrote

What’s the fine for fare evasion. Bc it honestly seems like it’s worth the risk considering how rarely they check


BeMadTV t1_jbrqn3h wrote

$70 Two or three years ago. My friend had gone five years before she got caught.


ReeseCommaBill t1_jcah7tj wrote

I think it's up to $100 now. But at $2.75 a ride, that's 36 rides. I can easily ride the HBLR 36 times without seeing a ticket collector, so even if you get caught, it's still less in the end.


Nuplex t1_jbrxg12 wrote

I don't even activate them until asked.


CWNBTL t1_jbv1cn3 wrote

waiting for the day when they cut the service a little bit and all of you non-payers bitch about how ”the light rail SUCKS! I would use it more if they had better service.”


PICHICONCACA t1_jbqv7bn wrote

No because if you read the fine print, it only for one directions. But whatever I don’t care what you do.


kraghis OP t1_jbqvg95 wrote

Ya that’s why it’s a confession and not a pro tip


scubastefon t1_jbr7zsk wrote

technically they could probably work out that you did this. if you're going in the return direction, then your ticket would show it was validated at a station that the train in that direction would not have arrived at yet.


Technical-Monk-2146 t1_jbrdpvl wrote

I buy (and in theory activate) my tickets in the NJT app, so only a countdown timer with no indication of starting station.


scubastefon t1_jbrdyw7 wrote

Oh right, I’ve never used the app for light rail, I get it though.


kcondojc t1_jbtaeuj wrote

This is theft & morally unethical.

This part of our transit network relies on the HONOR SYSTEM. This is YOUR transportation network and your neighbor’s transportation network. Over time, cheating the honor system pushes up fares or forces schedule cuts, which ultimately decreases mobility & quality of life and increases community fractures & isolation.

Think about the role you play in your community. We all have a part to play to increase economic opportunity, keep our neighborhoods running smoothly & improve our quality of life. Be honorable & civil & just pay the fare. gif

Also, imagine if nearly 100% riders paid the fare?! If this was the case, there’s a much better case for investment in expanding light rail lines & increasing capacity.


Stevenlive3005 t1_jbuhe3l wrote

The sweeper passing 5 times a week on central and on west side should be considered theft and unethical, but they still do it. All while still leaving the streets dirty. Welcome to JC.


kcondojc t1_jbunrse wrote

Do you disagree? Are you saying that since the city isn’t doing what they’ve promised to do when it comes to maintaining the cleanliness of the street, you shouldn’t need to pay for transportation? (This is fair! If there’s basic services that people aren’t getting, then there’s obviously going to be lower inclination for residents to pay for other services, such as public transit). How can we get to the root of the problem ?