NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/tor-ttc060524.html

Toronto bus drivers now can't dispute with customers over cheated fares in order to protect their safety. So that mean pretty much anyone can get a free ride. But if that happens, the TTC will lose a lot of money, and they're already in budget shortfall.

I say all levels of government should fund public transit right across the country, and run them like businesses so that fares are cheap (say $1.50 Cdn.) and that everyone has access to it and that the bus drivers safety isn't put into jeopardy for expensive fares. I think I heard about students in Texas, USA not having to pay at all for their public transit systems.

What do you guys think?

I've a simple solution: make public transport free (tax paid). That would reduce pollution, reduce traffic jams, save a lot of money currently spent on printing/controlling tickets and all that comes with it. And it would more fair, because people who have to travel daily to go to work/school/hospital/... shouldn't have to pay because they don't have the luck to live close enough to their workplace.

make faregates that you cant jump ober. duh!

I've a simple solution: make public transport free (tax paid). That would reduce pollution, reduce traffic jams, save a lot of money currently spent on printing/controlling tickets and all that comes with it. And it would more fair, because people who have to travel daily to go to work/school/hospital/... shouldn't have to pay because they don't have the luck to live close enough to their workplace.

taht sounds like a mighty solution. but how much $$$ should be taxed from citizens and who gets taxed the most... just a thought.

make faregates that you cant jump ober. duh!

hmm... but taht would cost a lot just to install them into every bus. and theres also an issue of congestion by having a gate blocking the front of the bus, doesnt sound like a viable solution.

This is the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/tor-ttc060524.html

Toronto bus drivers now can't dispute with customers over cheated fares in order to protect their safety. So that mean pretty much anyone can get a free ride. But if that happens, the TTC will lose a lot of money, and they're already in budget shortfall.

I say all levels of government should fund public transit right across the country, and run them like businesses so that fares are cheap (say $1.50 Cdn.) and that everyone has access to it and that the bus drivers safety isn't put into jeopardy for expensive fares. I think I heard about students in Texas, USA not having to pay at all for their public transit systems.

What do you guys think?

That's idiotic.

First, the users should pay for the system. I don't derive any benefit from public transit (I walk to work), so why should I fund it? Second, the bus drivers are pretty well paid (being a public union and all). Why can't they enforce payment on the buses? It's too dangerous? That sounds like a crime problem, not a public transit problem. Put cameras on the buses and impose obscene sentences on these thieves.

Chop their hands off!

That's idiotic.

First, the users should pay for the system. I don't derive any benefit from public transit (I walk to work), so why should I fund it? Second, the bus drivers are pretty well paid (being a public union and all). Why can't they enforce payment on the buses? It's too dangerous? That sounds like a crime problem, not a public transit problem. Put cameras on the buses and impose obscene sentences on these thieves.

Good points made, however...
Sure, not everyone uses the public transit system, but it should still be a vital service to citizens courtesy of the government, it should just be there to be used by anyone and everyone. In urban centres especially when traffic is horrendous and pretty much the majority of people have to rely on the system.

And public transit has major benefits. Sure, you walk to work, thats awesome, thats good for you, really. However there are people that do need to use the public transit system to get to far distances. And from public I mean not just busses/subways, but also regional trains and what not. People don't seem to understand or even care about how bad cars are for the environment, and how unhealthy it is. The governments should be funding public transit to be used as an incentive so that more people use them and so that people rely less on their personal vehicles and contribute less to a global epidemic. Its the duty of the government to keep their citizens productive and healthy, and in this case providing an essential service which is both healthy for the individual and healthy for the environment.

Think about it, less reliance on cars, less reliance on oil, less contribution to a global monopoly of attaining petroleum.

And you may install cameras on the bus, but that still won't stop people from assaulting bus drivers, its an idea, but not part of the full solution of keeping bus drivers AND the people riding them, safe.

Anyway, I sorta went off on a tangent there, but yeah... public transit funded by the government(s). :D

I believe that public transport should be free & tax payer funded. Currently the government provides almost all road infrastructure. Why should private motorists be subsidised by the government, but not public transport users? The more we improve our public transport systems, the more we reduce our use of private vehicles, the benefits of which would include; lowering greenhouse emissions, reducing traffic congestion, reducing our dependence on oil, etc.

Just put a tax on the retail price of gasoline and add a surcharge on to car registration; I'm sure you could raise enough revenue to fund both the maintenance and expansion of free public transportation in the area. Making it free solves the fare problem once and for all...it might even save money in the long run.

Also, you make driving a car less attractive by increasing the cost to do so; however, designers would have to make sure the system was well designed to ensure higher taxes would encourage use of public transportation, and not just forcing consumers to pay more for nothing.

I don't derive any benefit from public transit (I walk to work), so why should I fund it?
I don't derive any benefit from special school classes for autistic children (I'm not autistic), so why should I fund them?

This is the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/tor-ttc060524.html

Toronto bus drivers now can't dispute with customers over cheated fares in order to protect their safety. So that mean pretty much anyone can get a free ride. But if that happens, the TTC will lose a lot of money, and they're already in budget shortfall.

I say all levels of government should fund public transit right across the country, and run them like businesses so that fares are cheap (say $1.50 Cdn.) and that everyone has access to it and that the bus drivers safety isn't put into jeopardy for expensive fares. I think I heard about students in Texas, USA not having to pay at all for their public transit systems.

What do you guys think?actually, for us, we support our bus drivers. we being the passengers. anyone trying to sneak onboard will either be forced off the bus by the driver and the passengers, or some of the passengers will chip in to help pay the unfortunate person who didn't have enough.

also, our drivers tend to know who the regulars are, so allowing a slip here or there is ok. and I've seen some passengers pay double to repay for a time they didn't have the fare.

Free TTC? What a lark. Wealth redistribution issues notwithstanding, the TTC collects almost 450M fares per year. Assuming that they're $2 each (Adult fares are $2.60, student/senior $1.85, child $0.70, less for passes, tickets and tokens), that's $900M in new taxes for the 2.5 million men, women and children of the city.

As to the OP, they were already pretty powerless, in theory. They weren't allowed to hold the bus, I'm pretty sure they weren't allowed to leave their seat, and they already had the right to avoid confrontations if they felt threatened. This is just the usual union posturing, and won't have any effect beyond the headlines, and maybe spawning a few more petty thugs for a few weeks.

Also, I don't think that $2.60 fares are expensive- 99% of fare cheaters are simply petty thieves, not poor starving people, and deserve to be greeted with handcuffs at their stop.

Free TTC? What a lark. Wealth redistribution issues notwithstanding, the TTC collects almost 450M fares per year. Assuming that they're $2 each (Adult fares are $2.60, student/senior $1.85, child $0.70, less for passes, tickets and tokens), that's $900M in new taxes for the 2.5 million men, women and children of the city.

A $1/barrel federal tax on Canadian oil sands production alone would totally cover the cost of public transportation in Toronto; given the massive amount of money coming in to Alberta from its oil production it would be a hard sell not to justify sharing a small share of that with other parts of the country.

Canada consumes 2.1 million BPD. A small consumption tax would further increase revenue; using oil revenues to foster public transportation and alternatives is one of the most responsible uses of that windfall possible besides increased social services, and it's a shame if it is frittered away on tax cuts or pork spending as it would undoubtedly be in the US.

I'm a believer in the idea that if you're going to have fares, you need to enforce the fares, even if that means putting a beat cop at every bus stop to snatch cheaters off the busses as they try to slip on the back doors. It's the same idea that New York used to clean their city up in the 90's--if you let the small stuff slide, then the big stuff starts to slide as well. I know--it sounds practically fascist, but it's a matter of societal breakdown. Malcolm Gladwell has a long discussion of it in The Tipping Point.

I'm a believer in the idea that if you're going to have fares, you need to enforce the fares, even if that means putting a beat cop at every bus stop to snatch cheaters off the busses as they try to slip on the back doors. It's the same idea that New York used to clean their city up in the 90's--if you let the small stuff slide, then the big stuff starts to slide as well. I know--it sounds practically fascist, but it's a matter of societal breakdown. Malcolm Gladwell has a long discussion of it in The Tipping Point.
can't believe I'm saying this... but
Nazz, I agree.

perhaps not beat cops, but making sure each bus is equipted with a phone to call in any trouble might also help.

can't believe I'm saying this... but
Nazz, I agree.

perhaps not beat cops, but making sure each bus is equipted with a phone to call in any trouble might also help.
See, give me a shot and I can blow away all the stereotypes people have about liberals. :D

The best solution, to my mind, is to make the system free of charge, and fund it with whatever means you deem necessary, and to make it difficult to drive cars in cities and easy to walk and use public transit. Then you don't have to worry about fare cheaters because there are no fares to cheat, and you can focus on other small things like stopping graffiti--another thing Gladwell talks about in the section on the changes in New York in the 90s. Perception goes a a long way in creating societal change.

There are some places where bus drivers are not allowed to fight back against customers who assault them, but I really think bus drivers should have the right to do so. Bus drivers may not get respect from everyone, but they should at least have some dignity by defending themselves.

I support free transit all the way, however thats not always the case. If you're gunna have fares, the bus operator has to enforce the fares, and if the customer gets into a dispute or gets assaulted by the customer, the driver has the right to act in self-defence and/or kick the customer off the bus for the sake of not only the drivers safety but the passengers as wlel.

Think about it, less reliance on cars, less reliance on oil, less contribution to a global monopoly of attaining petroleum.

You live in a petroleum exporting country. Why would you oppose the oil industry?

And you may install cameras on the bus, but that still won't stop people from assaulting bus drivers, its an idea, but not part of the full solution of keeping bus drivers AND the people riding them, safe.

There's an optimal level of crime, and it's not zero.

This is a crime problem, not a public transit problem. If people are assaulting bus drivers, deal with them as criminals.

I believe that public transport should be free & tax payer funded. Currently the government provides almost all road infrastructure. Why should private motorists be subsidised by the government, but not public transport users? The more we improve our public transport systems, the more we reduce our use of private vehicles, the benefits of which would include; lowering greenhouse emissions, reducing traffic congestion, reducing our dependence on oil, etc.

Gasoline taxes pay for road maintenance. That's an intelligent application of a user-pay system.

I don't derive any benefit from special school classes for autistic children (I'm not autistic), so why should I fund them?

I actually oppose public schools, but you've also made a poor analogy.

Education could be argued to benefit everyone by promoting the creation of wealth by educating future producers.

A $1/barrel federal tax on Canadian oil sands production alone would totally cover the cost of public transportation in Toronto; given the massive amount of money coming in to Alberta from its oil production it would be a hard sell not to justify sharing a small share of that with other parts of the country.

Canada consumes 2.1 million BPD. A small consumption tax would further increase revenue; using oil revenues to foster public transportation and alternatives is one of the most responsible uses of that windfall possible besides increased social services, and it's a shame if it is frittered away on tax cuts or pork spending as it would undoubtedly be in the US.

Because a region-specific tax like that is so wonderfully fair. If the feds try something like that again we're going to blow up Manitoba just to keep them away from us.

First of all, Canadian provinces have exclusive rights to their natural resources, so nothing in Ontario is ever funded by the resources from outside Ontario. If Ontario wants to manage itself badly, that's its own fault, and it needs to pay for it itself.

And tax cuts aren't frittering the money away. Tax cuts allow the people to save the money, or to invest it in businesses that diversify the economy.

Here's my solution for that:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Bus.jpg

It would even decrease pollution in the inner city :D

Because a region-specific tax like that is so wonderfully fair. If the feds try something like that again we're going to blow up Manitoba just to keep them away from us.

In the US, the government has a Constitutional right to regulate interstate commerce; oil/gas production is one of the most interstate forms of commerce there is, so why not use the tax revenue to the benefit of the whole nation rather than the local area?.

However, things are different in Canada, constituionally speaking, so it's not accurate to justify one system with the laws of another nation.

First of all, Canadian provinces have exclusive rights to their natural resources, so nothing in Ontario is ever funded by the resources from outside Ontario. If Ontario wants to manage itself badly, that's its own fault, and it needs to pay for it itself.

That could lead to serious problems and a lot of wasted money. But, then again, it's your system and it seems to work alright...if it works, don't change it.

And tax cuts aren't frittering the money away. Tax cuts allow the people to save the money, or to invest it in businesses that diversify the economy.

They can also cause unwanted inflation when used at the wrong time and ultimately might not help anyone. Simply cutting taxes for the sake of cutting them does not help anyone; if you do it at the peak of an expansion, it just causes inflation and that is what Alberta is currently in.

You live in a petroleum exporting country. Why would you oppose the oil industry?


Do you even have any idea why our world has so much conflict and turmoil right now? Its because of OIL. Its because our world is dependent on the exporting, the trading, and the acquiring of fossil fuels. Canada exporting petroleum just fuels this problem, we're just screwing up the world because we are blind with vanity, we are blinded by the massive income that this country would generate but have we stopped to look at the negative consequences?

Its the rich corporations versus the middle-lower income citizens of the world. And sure, this country has oil, but its eventually going to run isn't it? So why not invest into a better transportation solution for the future right now?

Do you even have any idea why our world has so much conflict and turmoil right now? Its because of OIL. Its because our world is dependent on the exporting, the trading, and the acquiring of fossil fuels. Canada exporting petroleum just fuels this problem, we're just screwing up the world because we are blind with vanity, we are blinded by the massive income that this country would generate but have we stopped to look at the negative consequences?

Its the rich corporations versus the middle-lower income citizens of the world. And sure, this country has oil, but its eventually going to run isn't it? So why not invest into a better transportation solution for the future right now?

They're still going to fight, regardless of what we do. If we stopped selling them our oil, they would invade us to get it. Let's make money while we can.

They're still going to fight, regardless of what we do. If we stopped selling them our oil, they would invade us to get it. Let's make money while we can.

And who exactly is "them"?

They're still going to fight, regardless of what we do. If we stopped selling them our oil, they would invade us to get it. Let's make money while we can.

But when you can't sell it anymore, what happens? The best thing to do is to hedge against that inevitable reality and then make your money without having to worry about any problems.

The most responsible thing for an oil producing nation to do is to wean itself off of oil...then, once that investment is complete virtually everything else related to oil can be exported by that country for pure profit because they no longer have a domestic sector to supply. Even better, when oil production declines you are no longer dependent on it economically so the loss is much more manageable than it would be.

And who exactly is "them"?

The people who are fighting over it now.

Do you have any ide awhat would happen to the world oil price if we stopped selling ours? It would jump up, costing oil importing countries (like the United States) billions of dollars a year. It would drag down their economy. You think they'd just sit by and let that happen?

I'm not saying we'd see tanks roll into Saskatchewan, but I'm certain we'd suddently have one less friend on our southern border. Our energy (both oil and electricity) is the only leverage we have south of the border. And 84% of Canadian exports go to the US. Without the very friendly relations we currently enjoy, we'd have a one-way ticket to poverty.

But when you can't sell it anymore, what happens? The best thing to do is to hedge against that inevitable reality and then make your money without having to worry about any problems.

The most responsible thing for an oil producing nation to do is to wean itself off of oil...then, once that investment is complete virtually everything else related to oil can be exported by that country for pure profit because they no longer have a domestic sector to supply. Even better, when oil production declines you are no longer dependent on it economically so the loss is much more manageable than it would be.

Agreed my friend, agreed.

This is Sweden's plan: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4694152.stm
Sweden is le awesome! :)

Agreed my friend, agreed.

This is Sweden's plan: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4694152.stm
Sweden is le awesome! :)
Haha, great. They are saying that but not how?

I've a simple solution: make public transport free (tax paid). That would reduce pollution, reduce traffic jams, save a lot of money currently spent on printing/controlling tickets and all that comes with it. And it would more fair, because people who have to travel daily to go to work/school/hospital/... shouldn't have to pay because they don't have the luck to live close enough to their workplace.

It's luck that determines proximity to workplace now?

And I should pay even more taxes because some people are unlucky?

*cries for humanity's bad luck*

I believe that public transport should be free & tax payer funded. Currently the government provides almost all road infrastructure. Why should private motorists be subsidised by the government, but not public transport users?

So public transport is charged to use the same roads as private motorists now? Or are public transport systems already equally subsidised?

Luck doesn't govern people's proximity to their workplace. It certainly doesn't govern mine.

I moved because I didn't like commuting. It was expensive and time-consuming, so I decided to live within walking distance.

If you can't live close to where you work, work closer to where you live. It's not like people don't have transferrable skills.

I think that public transport should be cheap. Easily available, quality public transport discourages clustering and ghettoisation, because it gives people the freedom to live further from their workplace.

actually, for us, we support our bus drivers. we being the passengers. anyone trying to sneak onboard will either be forced off the bus by the driver and the passengers, or some of the passengers will chip in to help pay the unfortunate person who didn't have enough.

also, our drivers tend to know who the regulars are, so allowing a slip here or there is ok. and I've seen some passengers pay double to repay for a time they didn't have the fare.
Hear hear! It's terrible that nowadays some people are just too scared or too apathetic to stick it to the trouble makers.

I actually oppose public schools, but you've also made a poor analogy.

Education could be argued to benefit everyone by promoting the creation of wealth by educating future producers.
You oppose public schools? That's just foolish. Even most right-wing politicians can see that would be another such ticket to poverty. This isn't the 19th century any more. Workers need education, especially if the nation is to remain competitive in the world economy.

You live in a petroleum exporting country. Why would you oppose the oil industry?
Even if that's true, oil won't last forever. If we don't wean ourselves off it soon we'll have to pay much more for it in the future.

hmm... but taht would cost a lot just to install them into every bus. and theres also an issue of congestion by having a gate blocking the front of the bus, doesnt sound like a viable solution.
I thought you were talking about the metro. when i think fare cheater i usually think of somebody jumping over the metro faregates.

You oppose public schools? That's just foolish. Even most right-wing politicians can see that would be another such ticket to poverty. This isn't the 19th century any more. Workers need education, especially if the nation is to remain competitive in the world economy.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be educated. I'm saying I don't think the government should be the one to provide that education. Private schools can serve that demand. I'll even let teh govenment pay parents to send their kids to school. But public schools, protected from competition, have no incentive to provide good education.

Even if that's true, oil won't last forever. If we don't wean ourselves off it soon we'll have to pay much more for it in the future.

What's with all this "soon" crap? When is "soon"? There's plenty of oil left in many parts of the world. Canada's certainly one of them.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be educated. I'm saying I don't think the government should be the one to provide that education. Private schools can serve that demand. I'll even let teh govenment pay parents to send their kids to school. But public schools, protected from competition, have no incentive to provide good education.
You say that, yet public education works all around the world.

What's with all this "soon" crap? When is "soon"? There's plenty of oil left in many parts of the world. Canada's certainly one of them.
About 40 years. (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/) Yes, there is plenty of oil. But if you want to bury your head in the sand and pretend that it will last forever, and that prices will never go up, please do not vote.

You say that, yet public education works all around the world.

But does it work as well as it could? Does it work as well as private education? Just because somethings good enough doesn't mean it couldn't be better.

About 40 years. (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/) Yes, there is plenty of oil. But if you want to bury your head in the sand and pretend that it will last forever, and that prices will never go up, please do not vote.

And for oil importing nations, that will really suck. I'm in an oil exporting nation. I want prices to go up. High oil prices are great for our economy.

Shotguns.




But does it work as well as it could? Does it work as well as private education? Just because somethings good enough doesn't mean it couldn't be better.

A local school in my area (charter) kicks the ass of all of the private schools in the area, and provides the education for much much less. It's getting crazy, private school tuition costs nearly as much as a year of out of state college tuition!

I support a free public transportation system, but Boston does have an interesting hybrid on its green line.

In boston, there are four subway lines...the green, red, orange, and blue. The blue, red and orange lines are standard high speed, high traffic lines like most subways. The green line, however, goes above ground and runs trolley cars. The four lines meet up in downtown boston in four stations, set up in a square. Anything going to those four stations are labled "inbound", anything going away is "outbound".

With the green line, it is free to go outbound once the lines are above ground. The majority of this line is therefore free. To go inbound works on an elevating scale. If you are near the hubs, it is $1.25. If you are in the farthest station out, it is $3.00. In theory, those using the trains from that far out will be riding the longest, as they are mostly going into work.

It is a nice blend of free transport, as I can get out into Allston/Brighton/Brookline (three of the suburbs) for free, and can walk back if I choose to, or I can shell out the 1.25.

I still support a full free system, but the hybrid is nice. It is also interesting to note that once the line becomes free, ridership skyrockets, reducing both how many people walk and how many people drive (boston is notorious for bad drivers...even when I have my car, I'd rather take the T than drive)

But does it work as well as it could? Does it work as well as private education? Just because somethings good enough doesn't mean it couldn't be better.

it is very easy to have great results when you can kick out the failures. Not to mention having parents who are dedicated to their childs education. Private education and public education aren't comprable in their current states.

And I could easily argue that the public schools of Japan, Korea (s), Norway, Sweden, and China all do more than "good enough"

A local school in my area (charter) kicks the ass of all of the private schools in the area, and provides the education for much much less. It's getting crazy, private school tuition costs nearly as much as a year of out of state college tuition!

It's a charter school, so it's not actually run by the government, is it?

Charter schools are basically what I want. I want to scrap all of the traditional public schools and have them replaced by privately operated charter schools.

Private schools are so expensive these days simply because the market for lower-priced education has been cornered by the public schools. As such, the only unserved market is the premium education service that most people can't afford.

It's a charter school, so it's not actually run by the government, is it?

Charter schools are basically what I want. I want to scrap all of the traditional public schools and have them replaced by privately operated charter schools.

Private schools are so expensive these days simply because the market for lower-priced education has been cornered by the public schools. As such, the only unserved market is the premium education service that most people can't afford.

Never gunna happen buddy. You know why? Because private schools are for people who got the money, and they're for people who are insecure about the public education system. There is no such thing as having a better school system, both systems have their flaws. Its up to the student themselves to determine how they take in their education and what they do with it because in the end, they all have to go into this world to try to succeed in what they do. If you want a successful nation, you provide them with the necessary tools to succeed, and in this case, a public education, which is provided free for all students of all incomes.

And the world's oil supplies are coming to an end, it can't last forever, so why not get a head start in finding alternative solutions for the problems of tomorrow. Let's not be arrogant of the here and now, cause it aint all happy-happy joy-joy in this unexpecting world.

Over here, the ticket inspectors are allowed to beat you up if you don't obey them. Well, maybe not on paper, but i've seen them throw people to the ground before.

I support a free public transportation system, but Boston does have an interesting hybrid on its green line.

In boston, there are four subway lines...the green, red, orange, and blue. The blue, red and orange lines are standard high speed, high traffic lines like most subways. The green line, however, goes above ground and runs trolley cars. The four lines meet up in downtown boston in four stations, set up in a square. Anything going to those four stations are labled "inbound", anything going away is "outbound".

With the green line, it is free to go outbound once the lines are above ground. The majority of this line is therefore free. To go inbound works on an elevating scale. If you are near the hubs, it is $1.25. If you are in the farthest station out, it is $3.00. In theory, those using the trains from that far out will be riding the longest, as they are mostly going into work.

It is a nice blend of free transport, as I can get out into Allston/Brighton/Brookline (three of the suburbs) for free, and can walk back if I choose to, or I can shell out the 1.25.

I still support a full free system, but the hybrid is nice. It is also interesting to note that once the line becomes free, ridership skyrockets, reducing both how many people walk and how many people drive (boston is notorious for bad drivers...even when I have my car, I'd rather take the T than drive)That's a decent compromise. I like that idea.

Anyone who tries to embezzle the public out of its rightful public transportation fees should be summarily executed and their property given to the government.

Now where have I heard that before....?

Allow citizens to arrest violators. Punish violators Starship troopers style with 25 lashes to the bare back.

So painful who'd ever consider stealing 1.50 to get 25 lashes?

That's a decent compromise. I like that idea.
the biggest problem is that the T shuts down at 12:30 every night, largely because the green line runs above ground in the suburbs. I think it is also secretly to cash in on drunk college students...you get the 12:15 chug and run to the nearest T stop, all the while asking innocent bystanders for a dollar 25. It is truly a sight to behold.


what I would like to see is a total free direction, and a total pay direction...as it is, I often meet my family at Kenmore Square, near Fenway Park. This is an underground station, and therefore costs. I can use that station, or, I can suck it up and walk out one more station, where it moves above ground, and I can ride free. It seems largely pointless to have a 1.25 price difference for maybe a quarter of a mile distance.

I also find it a bit wrong to have the farthest out stations costing $3, when those people might only be riding into one of the other suburbs.

A system that would be interesting is something like the "fastlane" system used on some highways, and a "toll" system almost. On a toll road, you are charged for how far you drive on it...use this concept on subways. the way I see it is this...you put cash on a card, much like NYC's metrocard. Swipe it when you get on the train/into the station. That already registers with a computer as is. Now, once you get to your final station, swipe again (this could also be done with a scan system rather than swipe to make things faster). You are charged based on how far you rode. Maybe if you only went one or two stops, you ride free, but if you went from one end to the other, then you pay a high fare.
The technology already exists in some form, but might be difficult to rig into some subways...however, it could work like the fastlane, where participation is voluntary, money is drawn directly from a bank account, and users get benefits (lower fares). This would encourage people to use the system, and therefore, use the subway system more, which, despite lower fares, would increase revenue

I've a simple solution: make public transport free (tax paid). That would reduce pollution, reduce traffic jams, save a lot of money currently spent on printing/controlling tickets and all that comes with it. And it would more fair, because people who have to travel daily to go to work/school/hospital/... shouldn't have to pay because they don't have the luck to live close enough to their workplace.

So I have to pay more money (taxes) in order to make everyone feel life is fair? I work extremely hard for the little I have, so why shouldn't everyone else have to as well? Instead of trying to drag down hard working people to slackers levels, why not try to raise the "lazy" or apathetic up to ours? Life sucks, get a helmet. I have never once relied on government or the charity of other to get through life.

taht sounds like a mighty solution. but how much $$$ should be taxed from citizens and who gets taxed the most... just a thought.

Check the facts. Those who pay the most % of taxes are the rich. I hope to be one of them one day. The American way, Hard work and determination.

I also find it a bit wrong to have the farthest out stations costing $3, when those people might only be riding into one of the other suburbs.

....mmm, well, OK, our system is comprised of three zones. Inner (zone 1), middle (2) and Outer (3). To travel through all three, you need to buy a ticket that covers all three zones.

I get half price tickets, 'cause i'm a student, but even a zone 3 on its own is $2.

A daily pass to the city without a student concession from where I live is something like $11.

I'm not going to cry you guys a river. :p

So I have to pay more money (taxes) in order to make everyone feel life is fair? I work extremely hard for the little I have, so why shouldn't everyone else have to as well? Instead of trying to drag down hard working people to slackers levels, why not try to raise the "lazy" or apathetic up to ours? Life sucks, get a helmet. I have never once relied on government or the charity of other to get through life.
this has nothing to do with welfare, or social equality, or any such topics,so most of your arguments fall flat. People don't drive or use public transportation because they are lazy or apathetic. They use it because they have to. Welcome to a modern society.
making public transportation free through taxes makes very good sense. Note that WHAT taxes was not dictated. They didn't say a federal tax, which would be quite pointless (why should someone in the middle of the woods pay for a subway system they will never see). It could easily come from state or local taxes paid into an organization such as the NY/NJ port authority no MBTA, a group that has powers that transcend the boarders.

It is interesting that a public transportation system is beyond vital for any major city. Without its subway system, NYC, London, Paris, and Tokyo (the four "great cities" so to speak), among countless other cities, would shut down.

....mmm, well, OK, our system is comprised of three zones. Inner (zone 1), middle (2) and Outer (3). To travel through all three, you need to buy a ticket that covers all three zones.

I get half price tickets, 'cause i'm a student, but even a zone 3 on its own is $2.

A daily pass to the city without a student concession from where I live is something like $11.

I'm not going to cry you guys a river. :p
haha...well, there has gotta be some kinda conversion credit in here that I could go for, but I won't.

Boston has no true "student" discount for its university students, despite the huge number of us. Several of the larger universities have arranged for discounted monthly T passes, which get unlimited rides on either the bus, subway, or both. To make it cost effective, even at our discounted price, I would have to ride the T atleast twice daily which just doesn't happen often as a student.

Sadly, the biggest shortfall of Boston is that there are no day passes or anything like that. If you do not have a monthly pass, then you are still on a token system. And damn are those irritating when you have a group of friends who would spend them somewhere without noticing. idiots. haha

this has nothing to do with welfare, or social equality, or any such topics,so most of your arguments fall flat. People don't drive or use public transportation because they are lazy or apathetic. They use it because they have to. Welcome to a modern society.
making public transportation free through taxes makes very good sense. Note that WHAT taxes was not dictated. They didn't say a federal tax, which would be quite pointless (why should someone in the middle of the woods pay for a subway system they will never see). It could easily come from state or local taxes paid into an organization such as the NY/NJ port authority no MBTA, a group that has powers that transcend the boarders.

It is interesting that a public transportation system is beyond vital for any major city. Without its subway system, NYC, London, Paris, and Tokyo (the four "great cities" so to speak), among countless other cities, would shut down.


I pay state and local taxes too. I'm saying that alot of people in our society are making minimum wage not because the are forced to, they do so because they are lazy or apathetic. They dont want to educate themselves and move up in life, the want government to take care of them. I speak only of personal responsibility. I will give a hand up, but never a hand out.

haha...well, there has gotta be some kinda conversion credit in here that I could go for, but I won't.

It's about .75 cents to your dollar. Not a massive difference, really. I'm not sure how you'd compare it with actual purchasing power, though, but I earn less than $10,000 a year. Making it pretty expensive - costs me around $700 a year in tickets. Assuming I work in the city centre or thereabouts next year, it'll cost me $2500 or so (I'd get a discount for a monthly pass, but i'm not sure how much.) Still cheaper than a car, though.

But yeah...free transport would be cool. :p

I pay state and local taxes too. I'm saying that alot of people in our society are making minimum wage not because the are forced to, they do so because they are lazy or apathetic. They dont want to educate themselves and move up in life, the want government to take care of them. I speak only of personal responsibility. I will give a hand up, but never a hand out.
And that has pretty much nothing to do with public transportation....

and I'm sure you do pay state and local taxes...however, if you don't live in New York state, none of your taxes would go to funding New Yorks public transport systems. Those who would pay the most are those who would benefit the most from it, those who would pay the least, or nothing, are those who would see little, or no, benefit from the system.

It also seems fairly clear that you do not live in a big city. Even people who own cars don't drive everywhere. These aren't handouts. Its how a city works.

It's about .75 cents to your dollar. Not a massive difference, really. I'm not sure how you'd compare it with actual purchasing power, though, but I earn less than $10,000 a year. Making it pretty expensive - costs me around $700 a year in tickets. Assuming I work in the city centre or thereabouts next year, it'll cost me $2500 or so (I'd get a discount for a monthly pass, but i'm not sure how much.) Still cheaper than a car, though.

But yeah...free transport would be cool. :p
haha...I almost just bitched about having a car in Boston, and caught myself. All you non-Americans would have a club to my head in a heartbeat

yeah, we're probably very equal in living style at this point of our lives, and I'd actually say we're very equal in how much we spend on our given transport systems, and in future prospects.

Free transport would...well, for lack of better phrase, r0x0rz my s0x0rz.

So, to get back to the original post the best way to deal with those people who wont pay fares on public transport is to tax everyone so nobody needs to pay fares. Lets go the same route for shoplifters too. And bamk robbers. And burglars.

the biggest problem is that the T shuts down at 12:30 every night, largely because the green line runs above ground in the suburbs. I think it is also secretly to cash in on drunk college students...you get the 12:15 chug and run to the nearest T stop, all the while asking innocent bystanders for a dollar 25. It is truly a sight to behold.


what I would like to see is a total free direction, and a total pay direction...as it is, I often meet my family at Kenmore Square, near Fenway Park. This is an underground station, and therefore costs. I can use that station, or, I can suck it up and walk out one more station, where it moves above ground, and I can ride free. It seems largely pointless to have a 1.25 price difference for maybe a quarter of a mile distance.

I also find it a bit wrong to have the farthest out stations costing $3, when those people might only be riding into one of the other suburbs.

A system that would be interesting is something like the "fastlane" system used on some highways, and a "toll" system almost. On a toll road, you are charged for how far you drive on it...use this concept on subways. the way I see it is this...you put cash on a card, much like NYC's metrocard. Swipe it when you get on the train/into the station. That already registers with a computer as is. Now, once you get to your final station, swipe again (this could also be done with a scan system rather than swipe to make things faster). You are charged based on how far you rode. Maybe if you only went one or two stops, you ride free, but if you went from one end to the other, then you pay a high fare.
The technology already exists in some form, but might be difficult to rig into some subways...however, it could work like the fastlane, where participation is voluntary, money is drawn directly from a bank account, and users get benefits (lower fares). This would encourage people to use the system, and therefore, use the subway system more, which, despite lower fares, would increase revenue
San Francisco's BART has a similar system--anything in the City, from the Balboa St. Station to the Embarcadero is the same price. It's $1.25, no matter if it's one stop or all of them--inside the city, same fare. same with Muni--you can ride any bus for $1.25 and get a transfer good for 90 minutes, which will get you anywhere in the City, and gets the homeless quite a bit longer in most cases. BART gets more expensive if you cross the bay or go south to the peninsula, but I think you can go end to end for just over five bucks, and the tickets are based on the stations you enter and leave, so you could ride the line end to end and come out one station away from where you got on and it's still $1.25.

The only real weak spot in the SF public transportation sytem is on the way to the north bay out near the Golden Gate bridge--service out there is pretty crappy, but that's also the hyper expensive part of the City as well.

So, to get back to the original post the best way to deal with those people who wont pay fares on public transport is to tax everyone so nobody needs to pay fares. Lets go the same route for shoplifters too. And bamk robbers. And burglars.
hardly the same. Public transport...well, says it in the name. It is public, as in, owned by the government, meant for the people. Someone who steals from a school or library or other public building is, in fact, stealing from everyone who pays taxes. Someone who steals from CVS is only stealing from CVS

San Francisco's BART has a similar system--anything in the City, from the Balboa St. Station to the Embarcadero is the same price. It's $1.25, no matter if it's one stop or all of them--inside the city, same fare. same with Muni--you can ride any bus for $1.25 and get a transfer good for 90 minutes, which will get you anywhere in the City, and gets the homeless quite a bit longer in most cases. BART gets more expensive if you cross the bay or go south to the peninsula, but I think you can go end to end for just over five bucks, and the tickets are based on the stations you enter and leave, so you could ride the line end to end and come out one station away from where you got on and it's still $1.25.

The only real weak spot in the SF public transportation sytem is on the way to the north bay out near the Golden Gate bridge--service out there is pretty crappy, but that's also the hyper expensive part of the City as well.
you're right...that sounds pretty similar.

I did forget one interesting little tidbit about the T. On the farthest out stops on the red line, there is actually an exit fare. My friends come in via Quincy Adams, the second to last stop. To come in, they need two tokens (so 2.50) and in order to leave the station when going home, they need to pay to get on the T (an initial 1.25) and pay another token to leave the station. It can really be a pain sometimes if you forget about the exit fare and you are in a hurry

Bostons biggest weakness is the age. Because it is the oldest subway in such a weird city, all of the lines are single track. there is no express, and when a train breaks down, the whole line shuts down untill it is cleared.

hardly the same. Public transport...well, says it in the name. It is public, as in, owned by the government, meant for the people. Someone who steals from a school or library or other public building is, in fact, stealing from everyone who pays taxes. Someone who steals from CVS is only stealing from CVS

What is CVS? And why is it better to steal from everyone than it is to steal from fewer people? If you steal from enough people does it become acceptable? If an insurance company is large enough is it acceptable to make false claims against an insurance policy? Is it OK to not pay taxes because that is public and meant for everybody like public transport? I say no it is not.
Viewpoints may differ.

What is CVS? And why is it better to steal from everyone than it is to steal from fewer people? If you steal from enough people does it become acceptable? If an insurance company is large enough is it acceptable to make false claims against an insurance policy? Is it OK to not pay taxes because that is public and meant for everybody like public transport? I say no it is not.
Viewpoints may differ.
haha...oops...culture specific reference. My bad.
CVS is a private pharmacy company here in the US.
I'm not arguing for stealing. That is a complete different issue.
the major difference with public transportation is that you pay for nothing (in the very strict sense of the word). When I pay to use the subway, I don't walk away with something. I pay for its service. As such, there is no limited quantity (trains and busses run hundreds of times daily, in contrast to even their private counterparts that only run a few times a day). Me having a free ride in no way stops someone else from having a ride, be it free or paid for. Me stealing a book, on the other hand, makes it impossible for someone else to own that book.
Because it is not a tangible, and because it is intended for the publics use and for the public benefit, I believe that it should be free. Making it free does not make it okay to steal, and moreover, does not make it stealing. Public transport exists to enable a cities population to freely move unrestricted around their local area. To best serve its purpose, public transportation should be free. It is a public service, and should be open to everyone.


the tax example is, again, invalid. The money paid in taxes is not money that everyone can use as a grab bag when they want. It is used to pay for the services that everyone will use. Public transport is one of those services. Fairly large difference.

I pay state and local taxes too. I'm saying that alot of people in our society are making minimum wage not because the are forced to, they do so because they are lazy or apathetic. They dont want to educate themselves and move up in life, the want government to take care of them. I speak only of personal responsibility. I will give a hand up, but never a hand out.

Oh... my... gawd... that is such an arrogant thing to say. People work minimum wage because they are employed by a company/institution that is giving them minimum wage. You don't think people want to work for higher wages? Of course they do, but obviously you have people that need to work lower wages in one part of society.

And what is it do you mean by "education"? Do you mean post-secondary education as in college/university? Obviously not everyone can afford it, and to claim that just because they don't "educate" themselves does NOT mean they are lazy or apathetic. How dare you. There are many, decent hard-working people in society who work minimum wage or low income. They are contributing to society, and they are making a difference one way or another. Listen, if it was that easy to "move up in life" wouldn't you think more people would do so?

Are there individuals who wish to get help from the government? Of course there are. But to claim that a majority of people who work minimum wage as being lazy or apathetic is wrong. That is such a repulsive way of thinking.

Tie them to a pillar inside a subway tunnel and leave them there for a couple of hours.
Over here, the trains run through on average once every 2 minutes. So they'd have 60 high-speed, feeling-of-near-death, incredbily-loud-to-the-point-of painful experiences to help them overcome their dislike of paying.

In other words, make them pay for the fare in fear!

This is the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/tor-ttc060524.html

Toronto bus drivers now can't dispute with customers over cheated fares in order to protect their safety. So that mean pretty much anyone can get a free ride. But if that happens, the TTC will lose a lot of money, and they're already in budget shortfall.

I say all levels of government should fund public transit right across the country, and run them like businesses so that fares are cheap (say $1.50 Cdn.) and that everyone has access to it and that the bus drivers safety isn't put into jeopardy for expensive fares. I think I heard about students in Texas, USA not having to pay at all for their public transit systems.

What do you guys think?

Give the bus driver a 9MM gun and tell him/her to shoot the cheaters. Do that once or twice and you won't have any more problem. :D

I live in Australia, so it's commonly accepted 90% of commuters aren't paying. The sight of three entire carrages emptying as ticket inspectors board a train is not unusual. Given my bias, I'm all for free public transport, charging us through tax is the only way the government will get us to pay anyway -given most people throw away fines for traveling without a ticket.

Give the bus driver a 9MM gun and tell him/her to shoot the cheaters. Do that once or twice and you won't have any more problem. :D
Nearly the same thing I was thinking. My choice would have been a .40 S&W, or larger caliber.

On the other hand, user fees don't pay much of the cost of public transportation. The government is already subsidizing a large portion of the service. If it could be run efficiently as a private enterprise, it probably should be done that way, but in Canada, it should be "free". They expect that.

Nearly the same thing I was thinking. My choice would have been a .40 S&W, or larger caliber.

On the other hand, user fees don't pay much of the cost of public transportation. The government is already subsidizing a large portion of the service. If it could be run efficiently as a private enterprise, it probably should be done that way, but in Canada, it should be "free". They expect that.
It's not even a matter of expectation--it's just a fact public transportation systems are extremely expensive to run, and so will therefore be subsidized (if they exist). It's one of those things where the free market just can't compete with the government when it comes to providing a service. Any private company that tried it would be so expensive that the people most likely to use the system wouldn't be able to afford it.

Give the bus driver a 9MM gun and tell him/her to shoot the cheaters. Do that once or twice and you won't have any more problem. :D

No, we need to make an example of them.

I say that fare-dodgers should be crucified to the front of the bus/train. Talk about deterrent.

I agree that bus drivers should not have to confront fare-cheaters. AFAIK, the way it works here in Portland, OR, if there's such a situation, the driver shuts down the bus and calls either a supervisor or the cops. Most of the major bus routes have 15 minute service, so this would not represent a significant delay in service for other passengers.

Now, as far as inspections go, that's mostly related to the MAX light rail system. There doesn't seem to be a schedule for these things, but I typically see fare inspectors 2-3 times a month. They travel in packs of 4, with two going in through each door, which does not allow for the car just to empty out. Depending on the severity of infractions, penalties range from a warning (you still have to get off the train when they stop you), 75-250 dollar fines, or exclusion up to a year (I think).

It's a charter school, so it's not actually run by the government, is it?

Charter schools are basically what I want. I want to scrap all of the traditional public schools and have them replaced by privately operated charter schools.

Private schools are so expensive these days simply because the market for lower-priced education has been cornered by the public schools. As such, the only unserved market is the premium education service that most people can't afford.
Government owned and responsible to.

But does it work as well as it could? Does it work as well as private education? Just because somethings good enough doesn't mean it couldn't be better.
Those countries which come at the top of the education ranks have public systems. Namely, Norway, Finland and Korea. On the other hand, the American system of public education is atrocious.

And for oil importing nations, that will really suck. I'm in an oil exporting nation. I want prices to go up. High oil prices are great for our economy.
For a short time, but prices will still rise at the pump for you, no matter where you live. And when the oil runs out, what will you do?

Instead of trying to drag down hard working people to slackers levels, why not try to raise the "lazy" or apathetic up to ours? Life sucks, get a helmet. I have never once relied on government or the charity of other to get through life.
Using public transport doesn't make anyone a slacker. It is good for the economy because it allows business to flourish in a greater number of places, and allows their employees to travel from further locations.

Check the facts. Those who pay the most % of taxes are the rich. I hope to be one of them one day. The American way, Hard work and determination.
And yet most people who are born poor, die poor, ditto for the rich.

Class mobility in America is less than in other countries. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060427/us_nm/economy_mobility_dc_3)

I pay state and local taxes too. I'm saying that alot of people in our society are making minimum wage not because the are forced to, they do so because they are lazy or apathetic. They dont want to educate themselves and move up in life, the want government to take care of them. I speak only of personal responsibility. I will give a hand up, but never a hand out.
What has this got to do with public transport? How can you say that people who are earning their own money, even at minimum wage, are dependent on government handouts?

What has this got to do with public transport? How can you say that people who are earning their own money, even at minimum wage, are dependent on government handouts?

Exactly, that's such a broad statement that Specoz is making. You have your hard-working individuals and you have your lazy asses coming from all incomes. Who's to say that a rich person can't be lazy? Success is something you can't measure. Let's not be blinded by how much money we make, but concentrate on the difference you make for your society and this world.

It's not even a matter of expectation--it's just a fact public transportation systems are extremely expensive to run, and so will therefore be subsidized (if they exist). It's one of those things where the free market just can't compete with the government when it comes to providing a service. Any private company that tried it would be so expensive that the people most likely to use the system wouldn't be able to afford it.
Have any idea how much of the user fees contribute to the overall budget, typically? A dollar and a quarter seems like a "token" payment for a service like Boston's MTA, but when you multiply that by the number of riders, it might be more significant than it appears.

If this were to go commercial, it could use the USPS as a model. Subsidize it until it becomes self-sufficient.

But I think public transportation is one of the areas that governments can do, and have done reasonably well.

Have any idea how much of the user fees contribute to the overall budget, typically? A dollar and a quarter seems like a "token" payment for a service like Boston's MTA, but when you multiply that by the number of riders, it might be more significant than it appears.

If this were to go commercial, it could use the USPS as a model. Subsidize it until it becomes self-sufficient.

But I think public transportation is one of the areas that governments can do, and have done reasonably well.
We hate the 1.25, because then we have to deal with quarters. In Boston, quarters are worth about 10x their normal value because of the damned T;)

while user fees do contribute a decent ammount to the cost of running, I still think a free system would be better.

Personally, I see no reason why public transport should go private, nor do I ever see it being profitable.

But public schools, protected from competition, have no incentive to provide good education.

Education, like health care, is not a commodity, but a right. And one of the purposes behind public education is to lessen the effects of the wacky, extremist notions that loony parents often inflict upon their children, and make them better citizens. Private schools, especially of the religious kind, should be abolished for that reason (also because they produce arrogant, elitist snobs with an overweening sense of their own entitlement), and home-schooling is even worse -- a dangerous, abhorrent concept that should never have been allowed.

We hate the 1.25, because then we have to deal with quarters. In Boston, quarters are worth about 10x their normal value because of the damned T;)

while user fees do contribute a decent ammount to the cost of running, I still think a free system would be better.

Personally, I see no reason why public transport should go private, nor do I ever see it being profitable.
But the Charlie card will solve all those problems,right? What a great name for a fare card, you can put money on the card, but you can never use it after you leave the airport.

But the Charlie card will solve all those problems,right? What a great name for a fare card, you can put money on the card, but you can never use it after you leave the airport.
haha...I have never seen an actual Charlie card in use...only the monthly passes.

I'll usually just give in and get $20 worth of tokens at a time and use those slowly over a period of time. But those tokens are a pain...all they do is take up room and get lost. There is no reason Boston can't convert to only Charlie cards, like NYC uses the metrocard...all of the T's have card swipes.

haha...I have never seen an actual Charlie card in use...only the monthly passes.

I'll usually just give in and get $20 worth of tokens at a time and use those slowly over a period of time. But those tokens are a pain...all they do is take up room and get lost. There is no reason Boston can't convert to only Charlie cards, like NYC uses the metrocard...all of the T's have card swipes.
They'll do okay, but the only places that I've been where the cards are accepted are at the airport and at Lechmere. There are probably a few more, including Goverment center, but when you want to board above ground on Comm Ave and head back inbound, you need that dollar and a quarter. The drivers don't even make change anymore.
I've still got something left on the one and only card I bought. Paid $5 for it and used it once. Damned expensive T ride.

Have any idea how much of the user fees contribute to the overall budget, typically? A dollar and a quarter seems like a "token" payment for a service like Boston's MTA, but when you multiply that by the number of riders, it might be more significant than it appears.

If this were to go commercial, it could use the USPS as a model. Subsidize it until it becomes self-sufficient.

But I think public transportation is one of the areas that governments can do, and have done reasonably well.
It's been a long time since I read the article about this subject, but I seem to recall that NYC passengers cover the largest percentage of their transit system's operating budget, and they only cover something like 70%. Most cities with extensive transit systems covered less than half the budget with fares.

The thing I would worry most about would be that, as is usual, a system wholy paid for by the government would favor the wealthiest--the best busses and trains and the best service would be in the wealthiest parts of the cities, which is precisely where they aren't needed, and the poorer sections would be stuck with substandard service.

They'll do okay, but the only places that I've been where the cards are accepted are at the airport and at Lechmere. There are probably a few more, including Goverment center, but when you want to board above ground on Comm Ave and head back inbound, you need that dollar and a quarter. The drivers don't even make change anymore.
I've still got something left on the one and only card I bought. Paid $5 for it and used it once. Damned expensive T ride.
oh believe me, I totally understand. I live up on Comm Ave...I've learned that as long as you get a different driver each time, you can tell them that you only have two singles on you, and they'll let you on for a buck.

It looks as if the Charlieticket they currently use is out the door in '07, when the actual charliecard will go in, which can be used like a debit system, or for a certain amount of time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Card

This is the story:
http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/tor-ttc060524.html

Toronto bus drivers now can't dispute with customers over cheated fares in order to protect their safety. So that mean pretty much anyone can get a free ride. But if that happens, the TTC will lose a lot of money, and they're already in budget shortfall.

I say all levels of government should fund public transit right across the country, and run them like businesses so that fares are cheap (say $1.50 Cdn.) and that everyone has access to it and that the bus drivers safety isn't put into jeopardy for expensive fares. I think I heard about students in Texas, USA not having to pay at all for their public transit systems.

What do you guys think? Give the drivers guns. If the cheaters give them any trouble in the form of endangerment...http://smilies.vidahost.com/otn/violent/badass.gif

In Singapore, the cheaters may be charged in court.

In China, there is no such problems since there are bus contractors and the there is only flat fare on bus journerys.

It's been a long time since I read the article about this subject, but I seem to recall that NYC passengers cover the largest percentage of their transit system's operating budget, and they only cover something like 70%. Most cities with extensive transit systems covered less than half the budget with fares.

The thing I would worry most about would be that, as is usual, a system wholy paid for by the government would favor the wealthiest--the best busses and trains and the best service would be in the wealthiest parts of the cities, which is precisely where they aren't needed, and the poorer sections would be stuck with substandard service.
Utilities like gas and garbage are managed by private enterprise in the Atlanta area. They haven't shut off service to South Fulton county yet. Phones are also run as a commercial business. Everyone can still buy long distance service, as far as I remember.

But, I'm still not ready to commit the large amount of capital equipment to private hands, just like I'm not quite ready to privatize police and fire services . I guess I'm a poor example of a Libertarian party member.