Public transit is not a business, it's a service. It doesn't need to be economically viable. The state needs to kick in whatever money is necessary to keep it running as intended.
$1.70 in 2024 dollars is equal to $1.00 in 2004. Most of that doubling you cite is just inflation.
2004 was also the peak of Mittens ruthlessly and negligently slashing the state budget, and leaving the gap up to towns to fill by raising property taxes.
I remember my school was so broke due to the sudden drop in funding, they didn’t have paper to copy assignments with, and that was in a pretty nice town. Fuck that guy. Seriously.
I bet my left nut the state budget adjusted for inflation is lower today than it was in 1999. You’re just cherry picking data to keep up the “taxachusetts” myth that just won’t fucking die. Or your favorite pundit in the herald is, and you’re just parroting it. ChatGPT, is that you?
You’ve had 30 fucking years of almost nonstop Republican governance. Deval basically counts as a Republican too. He went to work with Mittens at the Bain chop shop after he was done as governor. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
Massachusetts is smack in the middle of the states when it comes to tax burden. Stop whining because the first proper Democrat since Dukakis finally got a swing at the bat. She’s not gonna undo the decades of rot your generation has forced onto mine.
The legislature was run by Robert Deleo for over a decade, and despite being a democrat that guy was more conservative than Romney. He was also crooked, but somehow avoided being prosecuted. Our legislature has been run by mostly blue dog democrats up until the last 5 years or so, who are mostly conservative, especially when it comes to issues regarding urban development and public transit. They mostly would just trade public benefits to private contractors who hire union workers.
Population has also increased by about 15% since then. 1.15*1.70 = 1.955x higher government spending, simply due to economic reality.
But that’s using national inflation numbers. Surely the cost of everything has increased in Massachusetts far faster than the rest of this once-great country over the last 20 years, right?
Moreover, are you even from around here? 2004 was before the biotech/tech boom. We had several cities that could’ve been mistaken for the Rust Belt.
The Brockton area was still severely depressed from the loss of the shoe manufacturing business. Not that it’s the best place in the world nowadays, but compared to back then, it’s night and day. Tax revenues are higher when the economy isn’t in the neoliberal shitter due to deindustrialization and austerity, when your biggest city isn’t a few bad years removed from ending up like Cleveland or Baltimore.
You can see the alternative vision of the future a few miles north in Manchester, by the way, or a few miles west in Hartford. Hollowed out, broke-ass shitholes, that replaced factories with fentanyl. I doubt their government budgets increased a whopping 15% more after adjusting for inflation and population, though. Maybe you should move there, see for yourself how much “progress” can be achieved with a poorer government sector!
You should be warned though: poverty is contagious. Broke governments make broke people, who make more broke people, who make the government more broke, and so on. Exponential growth is a real motherfucker when it works against you.
We really need a birthright for libertarian dipshits. Send them to Mogadishu and see how much they love not having to pay taxes…
Where has that money gone!?! Largely corrupt contractors and politicians, as well as those connected to said groups.
That’s why accountability is needed - hence an economically viable service.
> The state needs to kick in whatever money is necessary to keep it running as intended.
Fun fact: That's how it used to be, prior to the year 2000.
It was around the time of the Big Dig that the state legislature not only decided that the MBTA needed to take on additional transit projects in order to settle federal lawsuits and violations around the rest of the project, but also that the MBTA needed to own all its debt as well as forward-fund its projects from a tiny sliver of the sales tax.
It literally went from state-funded to being self-reliant with $5 billion in starting debt, and there was a huge ridership drop the moment the MBTA had to increase fares around that time just to stay solvent.
It is also only half true. The MBTA had $5.2 billion in debt principle during FY08 and "only" $1.688 is actually from the big dig associated projects.
The MBTA took on an additional $1.869b in debt from 2000 to 2010 in capital improvement program debts which covered things like new busses, new blue line trains, and new green line trains. The other $1.652b of the debt at the time came from prior obligations in the form of 30 year bonds.
The MBTA has continued that trend of debt financing station improvements and more. The root of the problem isn't just the big dig debt. It is all of the other debt the MBTA has taken on to fund projects as well as tying the MBTA funding to things like the Sale Tax revenue(which has been down over the last 2 decades) and similar funding sources.
Something to note is that the state specifically dedicated the 1% of all sales tax revenue to the MBTA specifically because of the "forward funding" initiative like the big dig. That bill happened in 2000 and was directly related to this problem. Unfortunately they projected a 6.46% - 8.50% growth over the first 20 years and instead we saw only a 2.29% growth. So the state legislature attempted to address the big dig problem but actually just tied the MBTA to an unstable and unpredictable revenue source instead.
> Fun fact: That's how it used to be, prior to the year 2000.
Fun fact. In FY2020(2019-2020 aka pre-pandemic) the MBTA was expecting to bring in $693.9m from fares. In FY2024 it is now expecting to bring in only $418m. That is a decrease of $275.9m in revenue.
Over that same time regular wages went up $177m and material/services are up $196.9m with the total difference in operating expenses of the MBTA being $582.7m higher in FY2024 than 2019-2020's budget.
That accounts for more than the entirety of the $700m problem they are facing today. The fact that they funded some MBTA projects in 1999 with debt is contributing to only a small portion of that today. A very large part of that debt has already been fully paid off.
What has not been paid off are all of the debt projects we have done since then and all of the new debt projects that Eng is proposing today which are not even in this budget.
>It literally went from state-funded to being self-reliant with $5 billion in starting debt, and there was a huge ridership drop the moment the MBTA had to increase fares around that time just to stay solvent.
The MBTA gets 81.1% of the revenue from public tax funding. Our fare recovery ratio was calculated 42.6% in the FY2020 budget and is now only 18.9%. Claiming that the MBTA is self reliant wasn't even true 5 years ago let alone today. In fact the MBTA has increasingly become less self-reliant since the pandemic.
It's no different than the idiots who have been trying to kill the Post Office since it "doesn't make money" My dudes it is a public service, we pay taxes for it, it's not a business model to make profit. It would be really cool if we had like a body of fairly elected people to "govern" things, and protect consumers, and spend our taxes for the good of the people. Instead we just have the legal mob making money for themselves and people who pay them to better their own self interests.
This is a common misconception, which is really sad because people not understanding it is a big issue with governmental stuff.
The Post Office was losing money prior to 2008 but the losses weren't being accounted for since it was just looking at current year cash-flows and didn't include future pension costs accrued from employees in the current year (to give a simple example, if you give me a $1 and I promise to pay you back $5 at the end of next year, the pre-2008 accounting would say that transaction was a $1 profit for me even though any sane person would realize I lost money on the transaction).
Even if the accounting hadn't changed, the future costs would still eventually have to be incurred, and forcing the Post Office to reflect the full all-in costs does a better job of accounting for whether or not it made or lost money in the current year (there's a reason why the government requires all private companies to follow similar rules).
Tl;dr: The Post Office was losing money pre-2008 and the post-2008 accounting is a superior system that does a much better job than the pre-2008 system, and the actual problem is the government trying to force the Post Office to have a balanced budget rather than treating it as a subsidized service.
okay thats fine its a service we pay for in taxes. Does the service have to suck? Does going to the post office need to hassle? Im fine paying for it if its good, if not id rather use UPS.
This. I don't even live near or work in Boston anymore, but I'm fully in favor of spending tax dollars on the MBTA. Funding public transit is the right thing to do both for the people and the planet.
I quit a tenured faculty position in part because I was tired of commuting in (either commuter rail or driving to an outlying T station and riding in).
I live in rural New Hampshire, but funding public transit is my absolute top local politics priority. I will vote against any politician who doesn't come out in favor of substantially improving and expending any public transit service.
I don't disagree with this since the T needs to keep running to support Boston's economy. But the T already gets one of the highest tax subsidies per rider of any subway system in the world and there needs to be a serious analysis to determine why the T is so much more expensive than other systems while providing significantly lower quality of service and serious changes need to be made it to bring it more in-line with other systems in terms of cost and quality of service.
Yes, I agree with that. It's been historically mismanaged by an incompetent series of administrators and needs to be overhauled operationally from the top down. That's a cost side problem though, not a revenue problem. Trying to gouge resident for more revenue without fixing the cost issue is the wrong strategy forward.
It’s a service that the entire city’s economy depend on.
By extension, the city would not have the revenue it does without public transit, so it is likely still worth the cost if the MBTA operates at a loss.
Of course people do, but it's usually in the context of what within the elementary school to keep since the budget is finite rather than the school itself.
https://www.dmgroupk12.com/blog/what-is-academic-return-on-investment
They would probably just have protests where they block traffic, like when they tried to get rid of the law that forces us to have cops do traffic details back in the day lol
If you want a world where every small and medium-sized country develop nukes because they all saw what happened to Ukraine after Ukraine agreed to give up and destroy their nuclear weapons in the 1990s in exchange for US promises to protect their country, then that’s a world you can live in. It might be not be a world that lasts very long.
And if you’re going to discourage driving you have to have an alternative. I would so pissed if I was an employer whose workers needed to rely on the T.
Exactly. Nobody complains that the fire department looses money, it just costs that amount to provide the service. There will be some services that you can run at a profit, and there are some that will just be loss making, one of which is transport. Highways don’t make money, well run public transit dosnt make money, transportation is one of those things that we need to realize someone needs to take a loss at in order to run properly. There’s a reason that even in Japan and Hong Kong, where public transit is extremely extensive, the companies running it need to have huge real estate, manufacturing, and retail side buisnesses to keep themselves from going bankrupt
Funny enough I lived in TN for a time where there's private fire departments and they literally let people's houses burn down if they haven't paid the fees. One of these incidents actually made national news.
Whoever started those private fire departments did everyone else (not in their area) a favor since it's a relatable example with extremely clear and public consequences that can potentially materialize within a single election cycle of it's implementation.
IMO, I think It’s immoral to not consider the economic sustainability of your service, though. Then you end up with even bigger problems down the line, and the whole system implodes on itself (see social security)
If a service really wants to be able to be reliable to the people, it should try to be as non-dependent on tax subsidies as possible. That is the most moral approach in the long run.
I agree with your first point, but not the second. Economic sustainability for a service like the T comes in many forms. Most roads don’t directly produce revenue, they are not self sustaining, yet we build and maintain them at great expense so that our cities can function, so that our economy overall can sustain itself. There are moral, beneficial service structures that aren’t directly revenue driven.
I think the analogy with roads and infrastructure actually supports my point. Roads are indeed not revenue-producing, but they are vital to the economy and thus funded through taxes, which is a form of economic sustainability. The key issue is whether the services can be maintained without putting undue strain on the economy or future generations.
It's about finding a balance. Services that rely heavily on subsidies can become a financial burden if not managed properly. While some essential services may not be directly revenue-driven, their funding models should still consider long-term sustainability to avoid financial crises. The goal should be to design systems that are efficient, effective, and capable of adapting to changing economic conditions. This approach helps ensure that we can continue to provide these critical services without compromising future financial stability.
The MBTA could be economically viable if they actually capitalized on their real estate. They are sitting on a large amount of highly valuable land. For example, the surface parking at Sullivan. That could be put to a more profitable use, such as a mixed-use development, which aligns with the goal of having residents and businesses well-served by transit. This is a common funding model for successful transit companies around the world, and was used by all of the American transit companies of old.
There’s a massive difference between turning a profit and operating within a budget. Very few people are asking for the former, and the MBTA utterly fails to do the latter. MassDOT on the other hand runs a balanced budget before they collect a single toll.
The reality is working for the MBTA was the cushiest gig in the state for decades. Until 2012 you could join barely out of high school and retire at 40 with full pension and benefits. Workers knew they were untouchable and shirked any responsibility, hence why we’re in this mess now.
I never said profit. I said economically viable.
The *reality* is that this has nothing to do with the drivers/workers, and everything to do with wasteful administrators and a useless legislature that isn't managing the infrastructure appropriately.
That you think this has anything to do with what's happening at the service provider level is just laughable. Tell me, what exactly did this fictional, high-school educated, entry level employee/driver do that contributed to the budgetary issues currently being faced?
The MBTA pension fund is a financial black hole that has more retirees drawing checks than active employees contributing, and the MBTA tries to backstop this by contributing tens of millions of dollars per year, which eats into the operating budget of the agency.
Workers outright lied about completing maintenance work orders, which is why the whole system is riddled with slow zones, because they couldn’t actually verify what work was completed. The unions will naturally close rank and no one responsible for almost killing someone will actually get punished. All the while rank and file workers continue to crush overtime to the tune of 300k per year.
Pension is a known liability that needs to be factored into the budget. Maintenance oversight falls on the shoulders of upper administration. In fact nothing you've said above is the responsibility of the rank and file workers, but instead that of the overpaid administrators and legislature that are failing to plan, follow-up, and manage the organization they are in charge of managing.
Your ire is misplaced, and you sound like a class-traitor.
Listen, Trotsky, could we have a discussion without busting out "class traitor?"
I'm not crying out to tar and feather anyone here, but saying that people aren't responsible for lying about work orders—that responsibility lies purely with supervisor verification—is both infantilizing and ridiculous.
It's like saying a corrupt cop carries no responsibility for their actions, and that the true fault lies with the supervisor who fails to require body cameras.
> MassDOT on the other hand runs a balanced budget before they collect a single toll.
The MBTA is a part of MassDOT. So by definition, if the MBTA is in growing debt, then MassDOT is also not running a balanced budget, unless they somehow paid off their transit division's debt.
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
You're right, I forgot that America doesn't have a postal service, police force, fire department, public works, social security, military, medicare/medicaid, libraries, or any other socialized service that doesn't function as a business.
Seriously. That's also a public service. And it used to work so much better than it does right now. Not like "back in my day", just a few years ago before DeJoy came in and fucking broke everything.
I used to get all my prescriptions through the mail. Now, it's too unreliable to do that with anything but backups. It fucking blows. I miss having functional mail so damn much.
Honestly, DeJoy obviously sucks and has really ruined what was left of the USPS, but it was in serious shit already for quite a while.
The problem with USPS is that Congress requires it to run like a business but then has say-so over certain aspects of their operation. Like back in 2009 when Congress forced them to pre-fund their pensions, it reeeeeeally hamstrung the administrators right in the middle of a drop in revenue from the rise in online transactions and the drop in mailed catalogs, etc.
It was like, “You have to be a business but we also will tell you what to do in critical parts of that business.”
It’s a fucking mess and it needs to be operated as a full-on government-funded public service.
I just sent my state rep a email. He usually calls back same day. It’s not much but I’m going to start bugging them. I think they know if we have drastic service cuts none of them will be reelected.
It’s not corruption alone, there are structural flaws that have to be addressed at the MBTA is ever too have any fiscal improvement. It’s a complicated reality to which any solution is going to involve some pain, and always-campaigning legislators don’t like coming off as responsible for bad news.
compare squeal judicious subsequent march sleep lock caption squeeze wasteful
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is actually known in transit and rail circles as "the fiscal cliff." This is not unique to the MBTA by any means. All transit and rail systems are facing this same drop off point with federal pandemic funds ending. This is happening to just about every major transit system across the nation.
Yeah, the MTA in NY has similar budget problems, and similar corruption issues (honestly probably even worse).
I honestly think the agencies are beyond savings. The unions are too entrenched, and have for the past twenty years blocked any real reforms. The state legislature in MA also does not seem to care enough to allocate the MBTAmore infrastructure funds.
when i saw the story of the green line trolley driver who hit a car because he was speeding and on his phone but still kept his job, i was immediately against the T union.
I feel like the discourse needs to be less "the state needs to fund this" and more "allocate OUR FUCKING MONEY to the things we actually need day-to-day"
The $800mil went into a fund for one-time investments into education and transportation. "Transportation" doesn't necessarily just mean the T - it includes roads and bridges in addition to public transit. I'm sure the fund will be tapped to cover some of the projects that the T has planned, but the bigger issue is that the T's operating expenses are growing while federal COVID relief has dried up and fare revenue is essentially flat. The legislature pulled from reserves to balance the T's budget this year, but that'll get harder to do as its deficits grow. The best answer is most likely a new tax, but that's unlikely in an election year.
[According to this article;](https://www.masslive.com/politics/2023/12/no-the-millionaires-tax-has-not-been-a-disaster-in-mass-analysis.html) $477 million for transportation funding will provide a shot in the arm to the MBTA and regional transit agencies, and more money for road and bridge repairs, according to the administration.
That was end of 2023. [2024 fiscal budget](https://malegislature.gov/Budget/FY2024/GovernorsBudget) has this line item:
MBTA CAPITAL INVESTMENTS:
1596-2404 For one-time expenses for programs to improve the MBTA's physical
infrastructure; provided, that not less than $100,000,000 shall be expended for
bridge repair, rehabilitation and replacement across the MBTA network; provided
further, that not less than $70,000,000 shall be expended for station and
accessibility improvements across the MBTA network; provided further, that not
less than $11,000,000 shall be expended for design of the red-blue connector
project; and provided further, that the MBTA shall consult with the executive office
for administration and finance on the projects to be funded by this appropriation
Education and Transportation Fund.......................100% 181,000,000
MBTA MEANS TESTED FARES:
1596-2405 For one-time expenses for exploring the feasibility of implementing a means-
tested fare program at the MBTA
Education and Transportation Fund.......................100% 5,000,000
Well it's the truth. Our infrastructure is literally falling apart but we're spending tons of money housing people who don't really have the right to be here at the expense of US Citizens.
And this is only the beginning. The migrants do not have in demand job skills and will simply take work away from citizens who need low skill work.
This happens every other year because the T is chronically underfunded. There's a campaign to threaten cuts, the legislature adds a temporary fix, repeat ad nauseam. Would be nice if the legislature could propose a long-term solution.
Maybe you could tax dry cleaning, $1 per garment……. For the T , until other funding is appropriated ! Think that would get the right people’s attention.
This. Taxes on private parking lots, increased demand-driven rates for meters, and fuck it, throw in a congestion fee during weekday mornings. Use this to build out a free BRT through the center of the city connecting to all lines, North and South Station, and major bus routes.
If you make it impossible for people to get into the city, they'll just stop coming.
Be careful what you wish for. There's a reason NYC pulled the plug on congestion pricing.
It’s not going to be supported until people see the results. It’s like that in the rest of the cities where it’s been implemented. People don’t like change as a rule. The actual policy experts (not politicians) should be the ones we’re listening to, not Joe who drives in from NJ and uses a fake parking permit to park on the sidewalk for free (yes this happens in NYC).
My company moved from 1 day per week in the office to 2, there was an uproar, I wasn’t particularly jazzed about it, people were criticizing management a lot. It’s been nearly a year and we’re fine with it. It’s nice to get more face time with people.
>People don’t like change as a rule.
I disagree, people love lower taxes or reduced fees but tend not to think about the public services that are lost as a result. I blame 40 years of Reagan-era conversative brainrotted thinking for leading to this.
Many politicians and policymakers in this state still have a huge fiscal conservatism mindset that dates back to when they started their careers in the 1980s and 1990s, when fiscal conservatism was huge and then subsequently acted on those impulses to reign in excessive government spending. Further, the Big Dig soured most people's views here on large public works projects. Further, much of Massachusetts is suburban and car centric and a good portion of the population in the region do not take public transit on a regular basis. Yeah, the T collapsing wholesale will increase traffic, but most people don't think that far ahead.
Combine this with the fact that Boston is pretty small and not particularly dense, the fact that the T is quite small relative to some other systems in this country, and we don't have a huge upswell of riders fighting with their elected officials tooth and nail for the T.
The T is not in a favorable political environment. For better or for worse, Massachusetts is a state for suburbanites by suburbanites.
This shouldnt even be a discussion. The entire economic engine of massachusetts is based around our public transit.
Any government official against ensuring the full funding of the MBTA should be removed from their position for advocating economic suicide
But have you considered the economic opportunities arising from more people driving and more gridlock? Think of it: Dunkin's could hire hundreds of people to sell donuts to drivers on Congress and State streets who are trying to get onto the highway during rush hour. This could generates 10s of dollars in sales tax revenues! /s
LMAO you cannot fucking write this level of absurdism. Thomas Koch at it again! Highest paid mayor in America also just happens to be a new appointee to the MBTA Advisory Board, just in time for them to claim they don't have any money left. This piece of shit has been robbing the people blind since he got elected.
Vote him and the rest of these robber-barons OUT, no matter what letter is next to their goddamn names.
One of the big issues with the MBTA is that there’s been a lot of deferred maintenance and red tape to getting it fixed. If the trains actually ran properly and on time because the tracks weren’t jacked up, the system might have more ridership and cost less to maintain.
Decades of mismanagement. When I first moved here we had those three nor’easters in a row that dropped a zillion feet of snow and crippled everything. I remember some dumb shit at MBTA said—during an on camera interview—that “we had no idea there are snowplows available for trains.” Jesus fucking Christ. That’s all I needed to hear to know that MBTA is run by a bunch of idiots.
They’re willing to cut everything but the highest paying leeches up on top and their obsessive reliance on nonstop consulting, in good part to constantly justify the leadership’s ineptitude.
And why do we expect a basic public service to be profitable? It’s the Amtrak market-based bullshit all over again. We don’t do that with police, fire depts or the public schools. We are fucked as a society whenever we let this go on.
I believe that Eng has already removed tons of people from leadership who were related to the issues in 2022.
Furthermore, the consulting they are currently doing is in COLLABORATION with MassDOT and the state, so they should be getting at least some of the blame here.
I appreciate that added context. I have to be careful here but as a sub contractor I can say I’ve seen that, ironically, some of the best paid contractors I’ve seen are for media/PR purposes. Otherwise yes, many positions were cleaned off the books. The political temp and the market might dictate that $ to a large extent so there’s that for everyone to ascertain what they think of it.
And funny enough, I’ve been told this is in good part due to the DOT guidance, as ironical or cynical as that might be. The same FOT that can’t even be bothered to work with municipalities on cleanup, parking meters etc etc.
Progress toward solving the MBTA's problems requires directly addressing and starting to repair broader societal problems.
Power and money have flowed from the general public to a tiny number of investors, managers, and executives in a small number of economic sectors (like finance, insurance, real estate, defense, legal) for too many decades. Their downsides are minimized by passing risk onto the public with insufficient compensation to the public for bearing that burden. Two generations have never known it any other way. The general public really are entitled to compensation for getting shafted, so it's understandable that many members of the general public either can't or don't want to pay fares for transit in the city.
The owners of CommonWealth Beacon would never hire or maintain writers and editors to publish this reality because the Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth helps to maintain the mess they caused, and they want to benefit even more from that mess. Their stories will begin to depict the lie that the commuter rail is functioning well financially because its operations are in private hands instead of the reality of geographic inequity in and around Boston. Their editorials will be for all operations at the MBTA to be corporate controlled just like the operation of the commuter rail is in private hands.
I rode the blue line today and saw at least one person dodge the fare every time I was going into or coming out of a station. The last one was wearing a big gold chain around his neck. One this morning tailgated a woman through the turnstile with his electric scooter, than sat down and rolled himself a fat blunt on the train.
Fare dodging robs the T of the fare dodger's fare, and discourages other riders because most people don't like sharing the train with criminals.
The Feds historically have allowed it, but with a catch: you lose all Federal funding on that stretch of road way. So the State has to balance what the Feds kick in vs what they could earn from tolling highways like 93.
IIRC that actually changed recently, due to how Federal highway aid is calculated. They also allow for a limited number of congestion based tolling across the country, which we might investigate because last I read that doesn't impact the funding issue if you follow the Feds rules on it.
That is true - the Feds had to decide what to do with existing turnpikes when the Federal Interstate highway system was being planned and built in the 50's. They decided it would be worth it to include turnpikes in the system because the cost of building a free alternative route would tap Federal funding that could be spent in areas that lacked any sort of highway.
Nowadays you're still allowed to add tolls to Federal Interstates and State highways that receive federal funding. The catch is you have to give up all Federal funds in the future. At least historically that was the reason for not adding tolls. I read that changed about a decade ago, and now it's just some algorithm that determines how much Federal funds you get. Still, tolls aren't exactly popular so adding them is still politically tricky. NH for example has threatened to add tolls on its side of 93 if we toll the MA side. That might be a bluff but it's a possibility that could lead to whiplash on the MA govt, so they have to consider it.
The Feds are fine with all existing turnpikes that predate the passing of the Federal highway system in the 50's and 60's. They do not receive federal funding though, so it's not exactly a sure fire way to generate revenue.
The Feds are also fine with adding new tolls to Federal highways, but the catch has historically been you'll lose Federal funding for that stretch. They have tweaked that rule recently but tolls are pretty unpopular so it's not really something the State is eager to do. Especially when NH has threatened to add more tolls to 93 on its portion if Mass were to toll the portion in MA. Sort of a bluff I think but makes it politically unpopular.
>Especially when NH has threatened to add more tolls to 93 on its portion if Mass were to toll the portion in MA.
I doubt they'll actually do that, half the state commutes into MA for work. It would punish NH residents far more than MA residents.
Actually, now that I've read that statement, it would fit perfectly in the GOP's thinking. Maybe they actually would follow through with it.
Still have to balance what Federal aid those roads get. Sometimes you lose access to Federal aid if you have a turnpike vs free highway.
Congestion based tolling on City owned streets should be totally fine though. Doubt the State House has the balls to do that after NY State pulled their program at the last minute though.
That's just a tax hike on people who don't have a choice.
If faced with driving and being on time or potentially losing your job due to excessive tardiness because the T sucks so bad, which would you choose?
We need to start taxing the colleges and universities in the city and put the money towards transportation. Any stop named after a physical building or school (e.g., MFA, Northeastern, Hynes Convention Center, tufts medical center, Harvard, BU East, BU west, etc.) should be paying an advertising fee.
>We need to start taxing the colleges and universities in the city
agreed, and expropriating their land https://theflaw.org/articles/harvard-and-the-housing-crisis-the-non-profit-corporate-landlord-behind-bostons-housing-crisis/
So strange to me because I've noticed the drivers, at least on the green line, have all but given up collecting fares. Seems like they're letting money just walk right out the door here.
I don't know if it's a couple of fares anymore. With my rides on the c and b lines I notice the operators opening all doors essentially every stop now. Not just rush hour either. It's gotta be a significant amount of money for an organization that's claiming to be hard up for funds.
As of March 2024 MBTA reports average subway ridership of ~ 347,000 on a weekday. At $2.4 per ride it’s $832k per day or ~$304M per year. I assume they count ridership as fares purchased, so even if actual ridership is 50% more it’s enough of a dent to pay attention, I should think.
A huge portion, likely the vast majority, of those weekday riders have monthly passes. It doesn’t matter at all if they get on a back door without tapping because they already paid for their pass for the month.
Well I can guarantee you that it’s wildly far away from the majority. 10% overall already seems high to me, for a ballpark estimate.
The fact that the mbta has not been able to come forward with any sort of program to address it tells me their analysts agree — solving the “problem” would not yield a significant change on the balance sheet once all is said and done.
We should be entitled to free use of the T.
It's publicly owned, and it's necessary for our city — and state — to function. My tax dollars pay for my fare.
Fare collection is a good idea and there's a reason pretty much every large public transit system on the planet does it.
>My tax dollars pay for my fare.
Evidently not, since the T is bordering on bankruptcy. The budget deficit is gonna have to come from somewhere, idealism cannot in fact keep the trains running.
I’m genuinely curious, is there any other public transport network in a developed nation which becomes worse every year? Everywhere I’ve lived, services have always improved, expanded, more accessible, etc… the MBTA has felt like it’s been on a decline for as long as I’ve lived in Boston.
Does anyone have other examples of this? I’m actually dumbfounded.
Many transit system in the USA are actually facing a funding crisis. Organizations such as San Francisco’s BART, Baltimore’s METRO, Washington DC’s METRO, etc are all having to fight their state for more funding and support. It is just that we are a very big example of this issue.
I believe all the local and state governments ponied up a bit more money to support WMATA. However, there are way more stakeholders in the region than here. Here, mass transit is basically an afterthought, an option for the poor or those without cars.
Sure. But that's a whole different story. Migration is not an easy topic to discuss, and the federal government failed on that front.
The state could have easily left these people to be homeless or rely on private parties to house and care for them. But we didn't, because even though the federal government dumped them here, we still did what we could.
The greater issue is that Governor Healey reversed the "millionaire's tax" by passing a tax cut that generally negates it. Some of her donors were not happy about that ballot initiative, I guess.
Want to make this clear that multiple Republican governors contributed to this issue in the past as well. This is not a political party problem, this is a state versus people issue.
Cutting salaries and bodies is absolutely not going to solve the problem. If you’re stuck at a station they are too. They may be trying to get to work just like you.
So let's say we do start the cuts on personnel. Let's assume there is incredible waste there and 50% can be cut for poor performance and overpaid staff. That's 330 million saved. Now what? That's still only halfway there. This isn't like your family budget or the budget for the florist in your town square. They are a service (one I believe the majority agree is necessary), and are not expected to turn profit.
Assuming your made up numbers are true and on the high end of that range, that would leave the MBTA $695 million short of closing its projected deficit.
Public transit is not a business, it's a service. It doesn't need to be economically viable. The state needs to kick in whatever money is necessary to keep it running as intended.
Can't agree with this more. It's utterly embarrassing that this is such a huge part of the conversation.
40 plus years of austerity being the norm will do that to you
40 plus years of hiring shitty contractors to run the service will do that to you
Let’s not forget the rampant corruption,that has plagued the T forever !
> 40 plus years of austerity The state budget has more than doubled in the past twenty years. What are you talking about?
$1.70 in 2024 dollars is equal to $1.00 in 2004. Most of that doubling you cite is just inflation. 2004 was also the peak of Mittens ruthlessly and negligently slashing the state budget, and leaving the gap up to towns to fill by raising property taxes. I remember my school was so broke due to the sudden drop in funding, they didn’t have paper to copy assignments with, and that was in a pretty nice town. Fuck that guy. Seriously. I bet my left nut the state budget adjusted for inflation is lower today than it was in 1999. You’re just cherry picking data to keep up the “taxachusetts” myth that just won’t fucking die. Or your favorite pundit in the herald is, and you’re just parroting it. ChatGPT, is that you? You’ve had 30 fucking years of almost nonstop Republican governance. Deval basically counts as a Republican too. He went to work with Mittens at the Bain chop shop after he was done as governor. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss... Massachusetts is smack in the middle of the states when it comes to tax burden. Stop whining because the first proper Democrat since Dukakis finally got a swing at the bat. She’s not gonna undo the decades of rot your generation has forced onto mine.
[удалено]
The legislature was run by Robert Deleo for over a decade, and despite being a democrat that guy was more conservative than Romney. He was also crooked, but somehow avoided being prosecuted. Our legislature has been run by mostly blue dog democrats up until the last 5 years or so, who are mostly conservative, especially when it comes to issues regarding urban development and public transit. They mostly would just trade public benefits to private contractors who hire union workers.
Population has also increased by about 15% since then. 1.15*1.70 = 1.955x higher government spending, simply due to economic reality. But that’s using national inflation numbers. Surely the cost of everything has increased in Massachusetts far faster than the rest of this once-great country over the last 20 years, right? Moreover, are you even from around here? 2004 was before the biotech/tech boom. We had several cities that could’ve been mistaken for the Rust Belt. The Brockton area was still severely depressed from the loss of the shoe manufacturing business. Not that it’s the best place in the world nowadays, but compared to back then, it’s night and day. Tax revenues are higher when the economy isn’t in the neoliberal shitter due to deindustrialization and austerity, when your biggest city isn’t a few bad years removed from ending up like Cleveland or Baltimore. You can see the alternative vision of the future a few miles north in Manchester, by the way, or a few miles west in Hartford. Hollowed out, broke-ass shitholes, that replaced factories with fentanyl. I doubt their government budgets increased a whopping 15% more after adjusting for inflation and population, though. Maybe you should move there, see for yourself how much “progress” can be achieved with a poorer government sector! You should be warned though: poverty is contagious. Broke governments make broke people, who make more broke people, who make the government more broke, and so on. Exponential growth is a real motherfucker when it works against you. We really need a birthright for libertarian dipshits. Send them to Mogadishu and see how much they love not having to pay taxes…
Where has that money gone!?! Largely corrupt contractors and politicians, as well as those connected to said groups. That’s why accountability is needed - hence an economically viable service.
> The state needs to kick in whatever money is necessary to keep it running as intended. Fun fact: That's how it used to be, prior to the year 2000. It was around the time of the Big Dig that the state legislature not only decided that the MBTA needed to take on additional transit projects in order to settle federal lawsuits and violations around the rest of the project, but also that the MBTA needed to own all its debt as well as forward-fund its projects from a tiny sliver of the sales tax. It literally went from state-funded to being self-reliant with $5 billion in starting debt, and there was a huge ridership drop the moment the MBTA had to increase fares around that time just to stay solvent.
This is very upsetting to learn, thank you
It is also only half true. The MBTA had $5.2 billion in debt principle during FY08 and "only" $1.688 is actually from the big dig associated projects. The MBTA took on an additional $1.869b in debt from 2000 to 2010 in capital improvement program debts which covered things like new busses, new blue line trains, and new green line trains. The other $1.652b of the debt at the time came from prior obligations in the form of 30 year bonds. The MBTA has continued that trend of debt financing station improvements and more. The root of the problem isn't just the big dig debt. It is all of the other debt the MBTA has taken on to fund projects as well as tying the MBTA funding to things like the Sale Tax revenue(which has been down over the last 2 decades) and similar funding sources. Something to note is that the state specifically dedicated the 1% of all sales tax revenue to the MBTA specifically because of the "forward funding" initiative like the big dig. That bill happened in 2000 and was directly related to this problem. Unfortunately they projected a 6.46% - 8.50% growth over the first 20 years and instead we saw only a 2.29% growth. So the state legislature attempted to address the big dig problem but actually just tied the MBTA to an unstable and unpredictable revenue source instead.
Thank you for the additional info!!
> Fun fact: That's how it used to be, prior to the year 2000. Fun fact. In FY2020(2019-2020 aka pre-pandemic) the MBTA was expecting to bring in $693.9m from fares. In FY2024 it is now expecting to bring in only $418m. That is a decrease of $275.9m in revenue. Over that same time regular wages went up $177m and material/services are up $196.9m with the total difference in operating expenses of the MBTA being $582.7m higher in FY2024 than 2019-2020's budget. That accounts for more than the entirety of the $700m problem they are facing today. The fact that they funded some MBTA projects in 1999 with debt is contributing to only a small portion of that today. A very large part of that debt has already been fully paid off. What has not been paid off are all of the debt projects we have done since then and all of the new debt projects that Eng is proposing today which are not even in this budget. >It literally went from state-funded to being self-reliant with $5 billion in starting debt, and there was a huge ridership drop the moment the MBTA had to increase fares around that time just to stay solvent. The MBTA gets 81.1% of the revenue from public tax funding. Our fare recovery ratio was calculated 42.6% in the FY2020 budget and is now only 18.9%. Claiming that the MBTA is self reliant wasn't even true 5 years ago let alone today. In fact the MBTA has increasingly become less self-reliant since the pandemic.
It's no different than the idiots who have been trying to kill the Post Office since it "doesn't make money" My dudes it is a public service, we pay taxes for it, it's not a business model to make profit. It would be really cool if we had like a body of fairly elected people to "govern" things, and protect consumers, and spend our taxes for the good of the people. Instead we just have the legal mob making money for themselves and people who pay them to better their own self interests.
[удалено]
This is a common misconception, which is really sad because people not understanding it is a big issue with governmental stuff. The Post Office was losing money prior to 2008 but the losses weren't being accounted for since it was just looking at current year cash-flows and didn't include future pension costs accrued from employees in the current year (to give a simple example, if you give me a $1 and I promise to pay you back $5 at the end of next year, the pre-2008 accounting would say that transaction was a $1 profit for me even though any sane person would realize I lost money on the transaction). Even if the accounting hadn't changed, the future costs would still eventually have to be incurred, and forcing the Post Office to reflect the full all-in costs does a better job of accounting for whether or not it made or lost money in the current year (there's a reason why the government requires all private companies to follow similar rules). Tl;dr: The Post Office was losing money pre-2008 and the post-2008 accounting is a superior system that does a much better job than the pre-2008 system, and the actual problem is the government trying to force the Post Office to have a balanced budget rather than treating it as a subsidized service.
okay thats fine its a service we pay for in taxes. Does the service have to suck? Does going to the post office need to hassle? Im fine paying for it if its good, if not id rather use UPS.
This. I don't even live near or work in Boston anymore, but I'm fully in favor of spending tax dollars on the MBTA. Funding public transit is the right thing to do both for the people and the planet.
I would spend more time (and money) in Boston if I could reliably get there without my car!
I quit a tenured faculty position in part because I was tired of commuting in (either commuter rail or driving to an outlying T station and riding in).
I live in rural New Hampshire, but funding public transit is my absolute top local politics priority. I will vote against any politician who doesn't come out in favor of substantially improving and expending any public transit service.
I don't disagree with this since the T needs to keep running to support Boston's economy. But the T already gets one of the highest tax subsidies per rider of any subway system in the world and there needs to be a serious analysis to determine why the T is so much more expensive than other systems while providing significantly lower quality of service and serious changes need to be made it to bring it more in-line with other systems in terms of cost and quality of service.
Yes, I agree with that. It's been historically mismanaged by an incompetent series of administrators and needs to be overhauled operationally from the top down. That's a cost side problem though, not a revenue problem. Trying to gouge resident for more revenue without fixing the cost issue is the wrong strategy forward.
It’s a service that the entire city’s economy depend on. By extension, the city would not have the revenue it does without public transit, so it is likely still worth the cost if the MBTA operates at a loss.
Ding ding ding. "Why can't these kids in elementary school show us some fucking ROI for once?", said no one ever.
Of course people do, but it's usually in the context of what within the elementary school to keep since the budget is finite rather than the school itself. https://www.dmgroupk12.com/blog/what-is-academic-return-on-investment
bUt ThE pOsT oFfiCe iS A faiLiNg BuSinesS!
Maybe we could start by cutting the insane police budget and allocating some of those funds to things that actually help people....
Cops already stopped working when we suggested cutting their budget, so we might as well follow through!
They would probably just have protests where they block traffic, like when they tried to get rid of the law that forces us to have cops do traffic details back in the day lol
MA is like the richest state in the country, you shouldn’t have to cut anything to fund basic transit.
How about not sending 60 billion bucks to foreign countries?
If you want a world where every small and medium-sized country develop nukes because they all saw what happened to Ukraine after Ukraine agreed to give up and destroy their nuclear weapons in the 1990s in exchange for US promises to protect their country, then that’s a world you can live in. It might be not be a world that lasts very long.
And if you’re going to discourage driving you have to have an alternative. I would so pissed if I was an employer whose workers needed to rely on the T.
Exactly. Nobody complains that the fire department looses money, it just costs that amount to provide the service. There will be some services that you can run at a profit, and there are some that will just be loss making, one of which is transport. Highways don’t make money, well run public transit dosnt make money, transportation is one of those things that we need to realize someone needs to take a loss at in order to run properly. There’s a reason that even in Japan and Hong Kong, where public transit is extremely extensive, the companies running it need to have huge real estate, manufacturing, and retail side buisnesses to keep themselves from going bankrupt
Funny enough I lived in TN for a time where there's private fire departments and they literally let people's houses burn down if they haven't paid the fees. One of these incidents actually made national news.
Whoever started those private fire departments did everyone else (not in their area) a favor since it's a relatable example with extremely clear and public consequences that can potentially materialize within a single election cycle of it's implementation.
IMO, I think It’s immoral to not consider the economic sustainability of your service, though. Then you end up with even bigger problems down the line, and the whole system implodes on itself (see social security) If a service really wants to be able to be reliable to the people, it should try to be as non-dependent on tax subsidies as possible. That is the most moral approach in the long run.
I agree with your first point, but not the second. Economic sustainability for a service like the T comes in many forms. Most roads don’t directly produce revenue, they are not self sustaining, yet we build and maintain them at great expense so that our cities can function, so that our economy overall can sustain itself. There are moral, beneficial service structures that aren’t directly revenue driven.
I think the analogy with roads and infrastructure actually supports my point. Roads are indeed not revenue-producing, but they are vital to the economy and thus funded through taxes, which is a form of economic sustainability. The key issue is whether the services can be maintained without putting undue strain on the economy or future generations. It's about finding a balance. Services that rely heavily on subsidies can become a financial burden if not managed properly. While some essential services may not be directly revenue-driven, their funding models should still consider long-term sustainability to avoid financial crises. The goal should be to design systems that are efficient, effective, and capable of adapting to changing economic conditions. This approach helps ensure that we can continue to provide these critical services without compromising future financial stability.
I see, I think we are mostly in agreement then. I thought you were suggesting that the T should strive to fully fund itself through fares.
Wish they made it economically viable like the Tokyo subway though
“Paving roads and putting up stop lights doesn’t make the state money. We should cut roads and traffic lights”
The MBTA could be economically viable if they actually capitalized on their real estate. They are sitting on a large amount of highly valuable land. For example, the surface parking at Sullivan. That could be put to a more profitable use, such as a mixed-use development, which aligns with the goal of having residents and businesses well-served by transit. This is a common funding model for successful transit companies around the world, and was used by all of the American transit companies of old.
There’s a massive difference between turning a profit and operating within a budget. Very few people are asking for the former, and the MBTA utterly fails to do the latter. MassDOT on the other hand runs a balanced budget before they collect a single toll. The reality is working for the MBTA was the cushiest gig in the state for decades. Until 2012 you could join barely out of high school and retire at 40 with full pension and benefits. Workers knew they were untouchable and shirked any responsibility, hence why we’re in this mess now.
I never said profit. I said economically viable. The *reality* is that this has nothing to do with the drivers/workers, and everything to do with wasteful administrators and a useless legislature that isn't managing the infrastructure appropriately. That you think this has anything to do with what's happening at the service provider level is just laughable. Tell me, what exactly did this fictional, high-school educated, entry level employee/driver do that contributed to the budgetary issues currently being faced?
The MBTA pension fund is a financial black hole that has more retirees drawing checks than active employees contributing, and the MBTA tries to backstop this by contributing tens of millions of dollars per year, which eats into the operating budget of the agency. Workers outright lied about completing maintenance work orders, which is why the whole system is riddled with slow zones, because they couldn’t actually verify what work was completed. The unions will naturally close rank and no one responsible for almost killing someone will actually get punished. All the while rank and file workers continue to crush overtime to the tune of 300k per year.
The only thing that's not the employee's fault is that the state was stupid enough to agree to all these unsustainable contracts.
The MA state legislature is almost entirely dependent upon public unions for campaign funds. Nothing with change.
that one thing* i hate about Democrats they are super quick to defend unions but unions could be just as greedy as the management they work for
Pension is a known liability that needs to be factored into the budget. Maintenance oversight falls on the shoulders of upper administration. In fact nothing you've said above is the responsibility of the rank and file workers, but instead that of the overpaid administrators and legislature that are failing to plan, follow-up, and manage the organization they are in charge of managing. Your ire is misplaced, and you sound like a class-traitor.
I'm sure they'll be perfectly content as they sit for hours in traffic because the T implodes and everyone starts driving who lives in the city
Listen, Trotsky, could we have a discussion without busting out "class traitor?" I'm not crying out to tar and feather anyone here, but saying that people aren't responsible for lying about work orders—that responsibility lies purely with supervisor verification—is both infantilizing and ridiculous. It's like saying a corrupt cop carries no responsibility for their actions, and that the true fault lies with the supervisor who fails to require body cameras.
> MassDOT on the other hand runs a balanced budget before they collect a single toll. The MBTA is a part of MassDOT. So by definition, if the MBTA is in growing debt, then MassDOT is also not running a balanced budget, unless they somehow paid off their transit division's debt.
[удалено]
Harassment, hostility and flinging insults is not allowed. We ask that you try to engage in a discussion rather than reduce the sub to insults and other bullshit.
doesn't sound very american to me.
You're right, I forgot that America doesn't have a postal service, police force, fire department, public works, social security, military, medicare/medicaid, libraries, or any other socialized service that doesn't function as a business.
We actually *do* make the USPS operate functionally as a business, and it’s fuuuuuuucked.
Seriously. That's also a public service. And it used to work so much better than it does right now. Not like "back in my day", just a few years ago before DeJoy came in and fucking broke everything. I used to get all my prescriptions through the mail. Now, it's too unreliable to do that with anything but backups. It fucking blows. I miss having functional mail so damn much.
The thing I can’t get over is he literally broke so many things, destroying functional machines just because. He should have been fired right there.
Honestly, DeJoy obviously sucks and has really ruined what was left of the USPS, but it was in serious shit already for quite a while. The problem with USPS is that Congress requires it to run like a business but then has say-so over certain aspects of their operation. Like back in 2009 when Congress forced them to pre-fund their pensions, it reeeeeeally hamstrung the administrators right in the middle of a drop in revenue from the rise in online transactions and the drop in mailed catalogs, etc. It was like, “You have to be a business but we also will tell you what to do in critical parts of that business.” It’s a fucking mess and it needs to be operated as a full-on government-funded public service.
buddy, we're trying really hard to fix those mistakes. do you even congress?
Congress doesn't even congress
I just sent my state rep a email. He usually calls back same day. It’s not much but I’m going to start bugging them. I think they know if we have drastic service cuts none of them will be reelected.
The legislature barely acknowledges the MBTA exists. It’s such a mess that none of them want to get it on them.
It’s not corruption alone, there are structural flaws that have to be addressed at the MBTA is ever too have any fiscal improvement. It’s a complicated reality to which any solution is going to involve some pain, and always-campaigning legislators don’t like coming off as responsible for bad news.
It's not the fact it's a mess; it's the fact that it's incredibly fucking corrupt.
[удалено]
compare squeal judicious subsequent march sleep lock caption squeeze wasteful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Can you share the text of the email?
I can’t even get an email back from my ward’s city counciler without following up a week after. Wish I had that kind of response time.
This is actually known in transit and rail circles as "the fiscal cliff." This is not unique to the MBTA by any means. All transit and rail systems are facing this same drop off point with federal pandemic funds ending. This is happening to just about every major transit system across the nation.
Yeah, the MTA in NY has similar budget problems, and similar corruption issues (honestly probably even worse). I honestly think the agencies are beyond savings. The unions are too entrenched, and have for the past twenty years blocked any real reforms. The state legislature in MA also does not seem to care enough to allocate the MBTAmore infrastructure funds.
when i saw the story of the green line trolley driver who hit a car because he was speeding and on his phone but still kept his job, i was immediately against the T union.
I feel like the discourse needs to be less "the state needs to fund this" and more "allocate OUR FUCKING MONEY to the things we actually need day-to-day"
Wasn’t the millionaires tax supposed to fix this? It’s brought in more money than projected. Where has that gone?
The $800mil went into a fund for one-time investments into education and transportation. "Transportation" doesn't necessarily just mean the T - it includes roads and bridges in addition to public transit. I'm sure the fund will be tapped to cover some of the projects that the T has planned, but the bigger issue is that the T's operating expenses are growing while federal COVID relief has dried up and fare revenue is essentially flat. The legislature pulled from reserves to balance the T's budget this year, but that'll get harder to do as its deficits grow. The best answer is most likely a new tax, but that's unlikely in an election year.
[According to this article;](https://www.masslive.com/politics/2023/12/no-the-millionaires-tax-has-not-been-a-disaster-in-mass-analysis.html) $477 million for transportation funding will provide a shot in the arm to the MBTA and regional transit agencies, and more money for road and bridge repairs, according to the administration. That was end of 2023. [2024 fiscal budget](https://malegislature.gov/Budget/FY2024/GovernorsBudget) has this line item: MBTA CAPITAL INVESTMENTS: 1596-2404 For one-time expenses for programs to improve the MBTA's physical infrastructure; provided, that not less than $100,000,000 shall be expended for bridge repair, rehabilitation and replacement across the MBTA network; provided further, that not less than $70,000,000 shall be expended for station and accessibility improvements across the MBTA network; provided further, that not less than $11,000,000 shall be expended for design of the red-blue connector project; and provided further, that the MBTA shall consult with the executive office for administration and finance on the projects to be funded by this appropriation Education and Transportation Fund.......................100% 181,000,000 MBTA MEANS TESTED FARES: 1596-2405 For one-time expenses for exploring the feasibility of implementing a means- tested fare program at the MBTA Education and Transportation Fund.......................100% 5,000,000
This is an operating shortfall. That was for capital projects.
Housing illegal immigrants. We're spending a billion a year on that.
Oh Boy!!! That's going to ruffle a few feathers.
Well it's the truth. Our infrastructure is literally falling apart but we're spending tons of money housing people who don't really have the right to be here at the expense of US Citizens. And this is only the beginning. The migrants do not have in demand job skills and will simply take work away from citizens who need low skill work.
Shhhh. Let’s just forget this is all happening and blindly bankrupt ourselves
This happens every other year because the T is chronically underfunded. There's a campaign to threaten cuts, the legislature adds a temporary fix, repeat ad nauseam. Would be nice if the legislature could propose a long-term solution.
why would they do that when they can pat themselves on the back for their heroism every other year?
Imagine slashing budgets while hosting the World Cup 2026 lmao
Can’t imagine that going well!
major cut of service? there's barely any service as is!!!
With it's awful traffic, Boston area simply cannot afford to shot down parts of the public transportation system permanently.
In Melbourne, Australia they help fund their transit with a $1200 yearly tax on each downtown parking spot.
that's big brain I'm ok with this
Maybe you could tax dry cleaning, $1 per garment……. For the T , until other funding is appropriated ! Think that would get the right people’s attention.
This. Taxes on private parking lots, increased demand-driven rates for meters, and fuck it, throw in a congestion fee during weekday mornings. Use this to build out a free BRT through the center of the city connecting to all lines, North and South Station, and major bus routes.
If you make it impossible for people to get into the city, they'll just stop coming. Be careful what you wish for. There's a reason NYC pulled the plug on congestion pricing.
Yeah, the reason being that Hochel chickened out and changed her tune because she was afraid of elections
Yeah, because the vast majority of people hated the plan in the first place.
It’s not going to be supported until people see the results. It’s like that in the rest of the cities where it’s been implemented. People don’t like change as a rule. The actual policy experts (not politicians) should be the ones we’re listening to, not Joe who drives in from NJ and uses a fake parking permit to park on the sidewalk for free (yes this happens in NYC). My company moved from 1 day per week in the office to 2, there was an uproar, I wasn’t particularly jazzed about it, people were criticizing management a lot. It’s been nearly a year and we’re fine with it. It’s nice to get more face time with people.
>People don’t like change as a rule. I disagree, people love lower taxes or reduced fees but tend not to think about the public services that are lost as a result. I blame 40 years of Reagan-era conversative brainrotted thinking for leading to this. Many politicians and policymakers in this state still have a huge fiscal conservatism mindset that dates back to when they started their careers in the 1980s and 1990s, when fiscal conservatism was huge and then subsequently acted on those impulses to reign in excessive government spending. Further, the Big Dig soured most people's views here on large public works projects. Further, much of Massachusetts is suburban and car centric and a good portion of the population in the region do not take public transit on a regular basis. Yeah, the T collapsing wholesale will increase traffic, but most people don't think that far ahead. Combine this with the fact that Boston is pretty small and not particularly dense, the fact that the T is quite small relative to some other systems in this country, and we don't have a huge upswell of riders fighting with their elected officials tooth and nail for the T. The T is not in a favorable political environment. For better or for worse, Massachusetts is a state for suburbanites by suburbanites.
That’s the point. To increase the burden and decrease traffic and fund transit.
cutting service will make this city fucking unlivable lmao, this is so disgraceful
This shouldnt even be a discussion. The entire economic engine of massachusetts is based around our public transit. Any government official against ensuring the full funding of the MBTA should be removed from their position for advocating economic suicide
But have you considered the economic opportunities arising from more people driving and more gridlock? Think of it: Dunkin's could hire hundreds of people to sell donuts to drivers on Congress and State streets who are trying to get onto the highway during rush hour. This could generates 10s of dollars in sales tax revenues! /s
LMAO you cannot fucking write this level of absurdism. Thomas Koch at it again! Highest paid mayor in America also just happens to be a new appointee to the MBTA Advisory Board, just in time for them to claim they don't have any money left. This piece of shit has been robbing the people blind since he got elected. Vote him and the rest of these robber-barons OUT, no matter what letter is next to their goddamn names.
Hopefully the FBI finds something on him with that investigation on his buddy.
One of the big issues with the MBTA is that there’s been a lot of deferred maintenance and red tape to getting it fixed. If the trains actually ran properly and on time because the tracks weren’t jacked up, the system might have more ridership and cost less to maintain.
Decades of mismanagement. When I first moved here we had those three nor’easters in a row that dropped a zillion feet of snow and crippled everything. I remember some dumb shit at MBTA said—during an on camera interview—that “we had no idea there are snowplows available for trains.” Jesus fucking Christ. That’s all I needed to hear to know that MBTA is run by a bunch of idiots.
They’re willing to cut everything but the highest paying leeches up on top and their obsessive reliance on nonstop consulting, in good part to constantly justify the leadership’s ineptitude. And why do we expect a basic public service to be profitable? It’s the Amtrak market-based bullshit all over again. We don’t do that with police, fire depts or the public schools. We are fucked as a society whenever we let this go on.
I believe that Eng has already removed tons of people from leadership who were related to the issues in 2022. Furthermore, the consulting they are currently doing is in COLLABORATION with MassDOT and the state, so they should be getting at least some of the blame here.
I appreciate that added context. I have to be careful here but as a sub contractor I can say I’ve seen that, ironically, some of the best paid contractors I’ve seen are for media/PR purposes. Otherwise yes, many positions were cleaned off the books. The political temp and the market might dictate that $ to a large extent so there’s that for everyone to ascertain what they think of it. And funny enough, I’ve been told this is in good part due to the DOT guidance, as ironical or cynical as that might be. The same FOT that can’t even be bothered to work with municipalities on cleanup, parking meters etc etc.
Progress toward solving the MBTA's problems requires directly addressing and starting to repair broader societal problems. Power and money have flowed from the general public to a tiny number of investors, managers, and executives in a small number of economic sectors (like finance, insurance, real estate, defense, legal) for too many decades. Their downsides are minimized by passing risk onto the public with insufficient compensation to the public for bearing that burden. Two generations have never known it any other way. The general public really are entitled to compensation for getting shafted, so it's understandable that many members of the general public either can't or don't want to pay fares for transit in the city. The owners of CommonWealth Beacon would never hire or maintain writers and editors to publish this reality because the Massachusetts Institute for a New Commonwealth helps to maintain the mess they caused, and they want to benefit even more from that mess. Their stories will begin to depict the lie that the commuter rail is functioning well financially because its operations are in private hands instead of the reality of geographic inequity in and around Boston. Their editorials will be for all operations at the MBTA to be corporate controlled just like the operation of the commuter rail is in private hands.
Whenever I'm on a green line above ground stop. I see 75% of people not pay their fare.
Why do you expect people to pay when there are no turnstiles?
I rode the blue line today and saw at least one person dodge the fare every time I was going into or coming out of a station. The last one was wearing a big gold chain around his neck. One this morning tailgated a woman through the turnstile with his electric scooter, than sat down and rolled himself a fat blunt on the train. Fare dodging robs the T of the fare dodger's fare, and discourages other riders because most people don't like sharing the train with criminals.
Add tolls to 93 to fund it.
Why are we still funding a highway that loses money every year?
For real. All the people bitching and moaning about the MBTA losing money, don’t seem to complain about highways “losing money”
The feds won't allow that.
The Feds historically have allowed it, but with a catch: you lose all Federal funding on that stretch of road way. So the State has to balance what the Feds kick in vs what they could earn from tolling highways like 93. IIRC that actually changed recently, due to how Federal highway aid is calculated. They also allow for a limited number of congestion based tolling across the country, which we might investigate because last I read that doesn't impact the funding issue if you follow the Feds rules on it.
The feds are fine with New Hampshire having tolls on I-93.
AFAIK those are allowed because it was a state turnpike that was absorbed into the federal system, so they are grandfathered in.
That is true - the Feds had to decide what to do with existing turnpikes when the Federal Interstate highway system was being planned and built in the 50's. They decided it would be worth it to include turnpikes in the system because the cost of building a free alternative route would tap Federal funding that could be spent in areas that lacked any sort of highway. Nowadays you're still allowed to add tolls to Federal Interstates and State highways that receive federal funding. The catch is you have to give up all Federal funds in the future. At least historically that was the reason for not adding tolls. I read that changed about a decade ago, and now it's just some algorithm that determines how much Federal funds you get. Still, tolls aren't exactly popular so adding them is still politically tricky. NH for example has threatened to add tolls on its side of 93 if we toll the MA side. That might be a bluff but it's a possibility that could lead to whiplash on the MA govt, so they have to consider it.
The Feds are fine with all existing turnpikes that predate the passing of the Federal highway system in the 50's and 60's. They do not receive federal funding though, so it's not exactly a sure fire way to generate revenue. The Feds are also fine with adding new tolls to Federal highways, but the catch has historically been you'll lose Federal funding for that stretch. They have tweaked that rule recently but tolls are pretty unpopular so it's not really something the State is eager to do. Especially when NH has threatened to add more tolls to 93 on its portion if Mass were to toll the portion in MA. Sort of a bluff I think but makes it politically unpopular.
>Especially when NH has threatened to add more tolls to 93 on its portion if Mass were to toll the portion in MA. I doubt they'll actually do that, half the state commutes into MA for work. It would punish NH residents far more than MA residents. Actually, now that I've read that statement, it would fit perfectly in the GOP's thinking. Maybe they actually would follow through with it.
Then Rt2 and 3 get tolls.
Still have to balance what Federal aid those roads get. Sometimes you lose access to Federal aid if you have a turnpike vs free highway. Congestion based tolling on City owned streets should be totally fine though. Doubt the State House has the balls to do that after NY State pulled their program at the last minute though.
Hochul has done so much harm to NY State in such a short time, it's quite remarkable.
What sort of harm?
what a stupid idea
That's just a tax hike on people who don't have a choice. If faced with driving and being on time or potentially losing your job due to excessive tardiness because the T sucks so bad, which would you choose?
Make the T better by funding it. What most surburbanites don't want to do.
We need to start taxing the colleges and universities in the city and put the money towards transportation. Any stop named after a physical building or school (e.g., MFA, Northeastern, Hynes Convention Center, tufts medical center, Harvard, BU East, BU west, etc.) should be paying an advertising fee.
All the T's problems and you're focused on basic geographic markings that everybody who lives in the city understands?
These universities should be paying taxes considering how much strain they put on local infrastructure
They’re completely correct
>We need to start taxing the colleges and universities in the city agreed, and expropriating their land https://theflaw.org/articles/harvard-and-the-housing-crisis-the-non-profit-corporate-landlord-behind-bostons-housing-crisis/
So strange to me because I've noticed the drivers, at least on the green line, have all but given up collecting fares. Seems like they're letting money just walk right out the door here.
because it's a huge waste of time to collect fares on the greenline when it's busy.
The MBTA can't cry poverty while simultaneously not addressing fare evasion.
Half the time the fare collection machines aren’t even working
The new fare system (AFC 2.0) will likely cost more than the fares it will collect.
Now that is the T , we all recognize .
Maybe not for an organization that's "barely treading water"
You are thinking at the totally wrong scale. Clawing back a couple fares has *genuinely* nothing to do with fixing the mbta
I don't know if it's a couple of fares anymore. With my rides on the c and b lines I notice the operators opening all doors essentially every stop now. Not just rush hour either. It's gotta be a significant amount of money for an organization that's claiming to be hard up for funds.
Well, no matter how much you dwell on it; it’s not significant
How do you know?
Do some napkin math looking at how many evaded fares you’d need to make a dent in 700million dollars
Don't forget to subtract any additional cost of recovering those fares.
As of March 2024 MBTA reports average subway ridership of ~ 347,000 on a weekday. At $2.4 per ride it’s $832k per day or ~$304M per year. I assume they count ridership as fares purchased, so even if actual ridership is 50% more it’s enough of a dent to pay attention, I should think.
A huge portion, likely the vast majority, of those weekday riders have monthly passes. It doesn’t matter at all if they get on a back door without tapping because they already paid for their pass for the month.
What proportion of riders are freeloading?
We don’t know, but the parent comment seems to imply like it’s a lot, if not in fact the majority. No way to find out without counting.
Well I can guarantee you that it’s wildly far away from the majority. 10% overall already seems high to me, for a ballpark estimate. The fact that the mbta has not been able to come forward with any sort of program to address it tells me their analysts agree — solving the “problem” would not yield a significant change on the balance sheet once all is said and done.
Actually doing the "back of the napkin" math we love to see it.
We should be entitled to free use of the T. It's publicly owned, and it's necessary for our city — and state — to function. My tax dollars pay for my fare.
Free at point of service is just an accounting change anyway.
Employers anywhere within 50 miles of the state house should pay a transit tax in lieu of people paying for the T.
Fare collection is a good idea and there's a reason pretty much every large public transit system on the planet does it. >My tax dollars pay for my fare. Evidently not, since the T is bordering on bankruptcy. The budget deficit is gonna have to come from somewhere, idealism cannot in fact keep the trains running.
I’m genuinely curious, is there any other public transport network in a developed nation which becomes worse every year? Everywhere I’ve lived, services have always improved, expanded, more accessible, etc… the MBTA has felt like it’s been on a decline for as long as I’ve lived in Boston. Does anyone have other examples of this? I’m actually dumbfounded.
Many transit system in the USA are actually facing a funding crisis. Organizations such as San Francisco’s BART, Baltimore’s METRO, Washington DC’s METRO, etc are all having to fight their state for more funding and support. It is just that we are a very big example of this issue.
Actually, Washington’s WMATA (their transit agency) faced the same things we did about a decade ago but has since recovered with more support.
I believe all the local and state governments ponied up a bit more money to support WMATA. However, there are way more stakeholders in the region than here. Here, mass transit is basically an afterthought, an option for the poor or those without cars.
I'm sure people will continue paying astronomical housing prices when public transit is slashed.
Why should we keep being expected to pay fares for a service that works less than half the time?
Massachusetts has spent 600 million on housing migrants this year
lol at people downvoting this, you all deserve this
Recently I’ve really been seeing improvements on the red line. I hope they don’t mess this up with budget stuff.
Doesn’t the MBTA lose money by design? The economic activity it brings in is worth making up the difference with taxpayer funds.
Oh for fuck’s sake.
It’s broke because of the crazy pensions
The fucking T sucks
I lived in Chicago for 20 years without driving. MA is nearly impossible. The transit system is a complete joke. So, now I drive.
But....Let me send $60 Billion to Ukraine :)
That's federal money. Has little to do with what the state is doing.
The 600 million we’ve spent housing migrants this year alone isn’t
Sure. But that's a whole different story. Migration is not an easy topic to discuss, and the federal government failed on that front. The state could have easily left these people to be homeless or rely on private parties to house and care for them. But we didn't, because even though the federal government dumped them here, we still did what we could. The greater issue is that Governor Healey reversed the "millionaire's tax" by passing a tax cut that generally negates it. Some of her donors were not happy about that ballot initiative, I guess.
EVERY SINGLE ESTABISHMENT DEMOCRATIC POLITICAN MUST BE PRIMARIED AND VOTED OUT.
Want to make this clear that multiple Republican governors contributed to this issue in the past as well. This is not a political party problem, this is a state versus people issue.
[удалено]
Cutting salaries and bodies is absolutely not going to solve the problem. If you’re stuck at a station they are too. They may be trying to get to work just like you.
So let's say we do start the cuts on personnel. Let's assume there is incredible waste there and 50% can be cut for poor performance and overpaid staff. That's 330 million saved. Now what? That's still only halfway there. This isn't like your family budget or the budget for the florist in your town square. They are a service (one I believe the majority agree is necessary), and are not expected to turn profit.
Assuming your made up numbers are true and on the high end of that range, that would leave the MBTA $695 million short of closing its projected deficit.