Submitted by Maxcactus t3_yfjklc in washingtondc
ahmc84 t1_iu3vk9i wrote
Reply to comment by CassowaryCommander in Metro Exploring Short-Term Fare Hikes And Long-Term Fare Overhauls by Maxcactus
The question here is, if fare enforcement were drastically increased, that comes at a cost. How many fare-jumpers are going to switch to paying vs. just not riding? It's conceivable that fare enforcement might actually be more of a money drain than fare-jumping (note that I am not aware of any analysis on this one way or another).
Of course, then there are the variables of safety, and perceived safety, along with overcrowding and the related assessed need for greater frequency, that also affect a paying customer's choice to ride or not. So it's not exactly a simple problem to really solve.
DC kind of shot itself in the foot by proudly announcing the decriminalization of fare evasion, which was basically tacit permission for fare-jumpers to go wild.
LeoMarius t1_iu48dvr wrote
What does Metro lose if free riders don’t ride? Some annoying people who take up space.
EHsE t1_iu4s5mp wrote
why would i care if fare evaders stop riding? either revenue collected goes up because they start paying, or the platforms and trains are less congested because they stop riding.
ahmc84 t1_iu4t5r7 wrote
Because the cost of real enforcement to stop fare evaders (meaning, vigilant enforcement at the faregate, ensuring that fines get paid, etc.) is not zero. The balance has to be that that cost is outweighed by the additional revenue from those who decide to pay instead of jumping the gate, plus the revenue from drawing additional riders to a system they perceive to be safer because the "criminals" are being kept out. I don't know where the inflection point is for that.
WMATA says they are about to start cracking down by issuing tickets to evaders, but that's only a deterrent if there is a will to pursue people to make sure those fines get paid.
EHsE t1_iu4tuw9 wrote
that’s only true if you’re looking at MWATA as an entity that exists to turn a profit, which is the wrong way to look at public transport. it’s a public service that is partially offset by collections - to my knowledge, the metro has literally never been solvent without needing additional funding.
increasing enforcement for a few years, even at a loss, would at least put a dent in the “fare optional” culture of the metro
CassowaryCommander t1_iu41b8e wrote
Oh, I absolutely get that and that's a well-spoken point. It's a problem everywhere, and not just in the US. I live part time in Barcelona and while the metro there has slightly less jumpable fare gates, it's still done with some frequency. What's comical is that WMATA has the audacity to act as if they care, when they clearly don't nor does the city. So the anti-gate-jumpers media is so frustratingly stupid and the complete lack of give-a-shit from Metro PD when they literally have nothing else to do is all just so laughable. It truly makes me wonder what kind of trained geese are running WMATA.
DcDonkey t1_iu44rzb wrote
There is very high risk to the police officer's career if they try to stop any citizen for doing anything. What happens if the citizen resists, fights back, or runs away? There is a chance something could go wrong, somebody could get hurt, and then the police officer's career is at risk. If they do nothing there is a 100% chance that nothing will happen to them and their won't be any complaints.
Worldcitizen1905 t1_iu85a2u wrote
They will let kids, homeless & crack heads do any crime they feel like.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments