November 12, 2009

Are fare hikes inevitable?

ARTICLE TOOLS

RSS Email Print

Send an e-mail to a colleague Please fill out the form below to send a link to this story to your colleague.
Your Name:	Your E-mail:
Colleague's Name:	Colleague's E-mail:
Message: (Max. 500 chars.)
Enter the verification code as it is shown below without spaces. (Case-insensitive) Enter Code: What's this? Image Code Verification Automated programs can't "read" the code you see in the box: only humans can. When you enter this code, it ensures that your order is going to a real person. If you don't see an image, make sure your browser is set to display images and try again. If you're not sure what the code is, make your best guess. If you're incorrect, you'll get another chance to enter a different code on the next screen. Close

By  Alex Roman

• Makes You Wonder[ November 13th, 2009 @ 5:24am ]

  Read the first paragraph and think about it. It is a perfect example of financial loser mentality. Continue to live and operate at the same level.............on borrowed money..........and do not even consider that someone (the taxpayers) will eventually have to sort out the financial failure. CTA and many other governmental agencies badly need leadership with business sense and integrity.

• Jan van Eck[ November 13th, 2009 @ 7:19am ]

  Yet "fare hikes" are not inevitable. Look at the air-carrier industry to see how fares have continued to dramatically drop over the years. Their secret is two-fold: better utilization of the equipment, and adjusting the service to meet their customers' requirements. Do transit units run near capacity? Are units sized to their loads? Or are six-car trains running with 130 passengers? Do you have enough frequency of service? Are you marketing your product to attract both new and repeat riders? All that factors in to whether or not you can run without subsidies, or with lessened subsidies.

• john killian[ November 13th, 2009 @ 7:35am ]

  The segment of the transit public that fare hikes hurt most are those transit dependent riders on paratransit whose fares are usually twice the single fare. A rider often is faced with $6 to $8 a day to make one round trip. ADA being a non-funded mandate the federal government doesn't assist in the agency's subsidy for performing this service.

• Bus Planner[ November 13th, 2009 @ 2:09pm ]

  Unfortunately, in America, transit is not popular and has for many decades now been undermined by subsidies and favoritism toward automobiles. However, shifting the burden of transit to riders instead of all taxpayers is counter-productive. We should both cut costs and do a better job of promoting transit and getting tax funding. Transit truly is density-dependent, and too often US transit agencies spread themselves too wide increasing costs while encouraging sprawl. Most agencies in America could cut 20% of their least productive routes and operate more efficiently. Raising fares higher than transportation costs simply makes riders pay for inefficient sprawling service and luxury amenities minimum wage earners simply don't need.

Receive the latest Metro E-Newsletters in your inbox!

Join the Metro E-Newsletters and receive the latest news in your e-mail inbox once a week. SIGN UP NOW!

View the latest eNews
Express Tuesday | Express Thursday | University Transit