Tuesday, November 18, 2008
City While Metro's Raising Fares for Everyone...
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Matt over at Orphan Road points out that we in Seattle are actually subsidizing bus service in the rest of King County. Systemwide, Metro's "fare recovery"—how much of Metro's operating expenses are paid for by fares—is much lower in the East subarea (14.4 percent fare recovery) and the south subarea (19.6 percent) than in the West subarea, which includes Seattle (25.7 percent). Ridership, unsurprisingly, is also much higher in the West subarea, with 73 million annual rides to the south's 24 million and the east's 11 million. So if you're a Metro rider in South or East King County, you have us Seattleites to thank for the fact that your bus fares aren't going up more than 50 cents.
Share via
1
can we please just get rid of the ride free and the whole peak/nonpeak time fare structure? how about just make the bus fare $2 (or whatever it needs to be) and thats it?
or does that make too much sense to actually happen?
or does that make too much sense to actually happen?
2
why is public transit so expensive? does this really mean that in order to turn a profit even just in the city, Metro would have to charge $10 a ticket? How is dumping 20 people onto a vehicle with a set route and schedule more expensive than driving a hummer by yourself 20 miles each way to work?
My bus pass is heavily subsidized, so I shouldn't even be complaining, but damn!
My bus pass is heavily subsidized, so I shouldn't even be complaining, but damn!
3
It's time for me to fix this.
Look, originally we taxpayers here in Seattle were subsidizing the inefficient wasteful ways of the suburbs with low water and electricity prices - and unlike us, they tended to water during droughts and use more per capita than we did in both water and electricity, no matter how we asked them to act like Seattle in conserving.
So, we jacked up their rates. Doubled them and tripled the price if they overused it.
That encouraged them, for the most part, to change.
Time to do the same with Metro fares.
(sigh)
Look, originally we taxpayers here in Seattle were subsidizing the inefficient wasteful ways of the suburbs with low water and electricity prices - and unlike us, they tended to water during droughts and use more per capita than we did in both water and electricity, no matter how we asked them to act like Seattle in conserving.
So, we jacked up their rates. Doubled them and tripled the price if they overused it.
That encouraged them, for the most part, to change.
Time to do the same with Metro fares.
(sigh)
5
@3, on the other hand, we get to live in the suburbs and you live in a rathole that smells like piss. we don't even venture over there any more now that your sports teams went to shit, but you guys seem to have no problem coming out our way, where all the jobs are. enjoy the upcoming tolls
6
@5. Yes, you do get to live in the suburbs. And I'm happy as a clam voting up property taxes when my apartment costs will only go up marginally. Enjoy your mansion!
7
This post is completely incorrect. The rest of King County subsidizes the bus service for Seattle. Bus service is funded mostly by sales tax receipts.
10
John's right on here, this is way off. You act as if all the money comes from fare revenue, and ignore where the bus service is!
Both of those seem like pretty important numbers to include along side this!
Both of those seem like pretty important numbers to include along side this!
11
Wait, ECB is an urbanite reactionary? I am shocked, shocked to discover this sentiment at The Stranger!
12
Erica, try getting around on the Eastside by bus sometime. They're all outfitted with fine hardwoods and leather, and the caviar - paid for by the hardworking taxpayers of Seattle - is exquisite.
13
@5
You obviously don't know much about Seattle. There are plenty neighborhoods in Seattle that aren't "ratholes that smell like piss". The nice thing about being in Seattle is there is a good chance you can go to the store, go out for dinner, get a coffee, or grab a beer after work without having to get in your car.
Oh and don't look now but there are slums on the Eastside, homeless people, and business districts that "smell like piss".
As for the tolls I could really give a flying foo since I take public transit when I've had to commute to the wrong side of the lake.
You obviously don't know much about Seattle. There are plenty neighborhoods in Seattle that aren't "ratholes that smell like piss". The nice thing about being in Seattle is there is a good chance you can go to the store, go out for dinner, get a coffee, or grab a beer after work without having to get in your car.
Oh and don't look now but there are slums on the Eastside, homeless people, and business districts that "smell like piss".
As for the tolls I could really give a flying foo since I take public transit when I've had to commute to the wrong side of the lake.
16
other than the sketch conclusion, why the anti-suburb mass-transit sentiment? for those who refuse to live in the city, or cannot afford to, isn't it still a good idea to make transit available? isn't it just as necessary there?
having lived in out in exurbia for a spell, the personal cost of using metro was exponentially higher. this is a significant detail if your aim is to increase usage of transit.
having lived in out in exurbia for a spell, the personal cost of using metro was exponentially higher. this is a significant detail if your aim is to increase usage of transit.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Seattle's Crappiest Bus Route by Unpaid Intern
-
Your Daily Douchebag by Dominic Holden
-
How Many Ballots Are Left to Count? by Eli Sanders
-
The Procession for Officer Brenton by Dominic Holden
-
Cyclist Hits Pedestrian by Dan Savage
-
What She Said by Dan Savage
-
What He Said 2 by Dan Savage
-
The Morning News by Paul Constant
-
The World Series of Baseball by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: She Needs Oral by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (16) RSS