Hacker News Reader

Comment by Gibbon1 | Hacker News Reader

I read an economist's back of the envelop calculation on what the appropriate BART fare should be. When automobile subsidies and externalizes[1] were included the appropriate fare was negative. Ditto for Muni.

And example, I took HWY80 to work and paid nothing for the pleasure. Why should the AC Transit or BART riders have to pay a fare when the freeway commuters don't?

View on HN

I think that's a great analysis; but then the discussion should be around that issue "why is the public paying for this service" rather than whether it's ethical to make it harder to jump the turnstile.

> And example, I took HWY80 to work and paid nothing for the pleasure.

Except gas tax.

And registration fees.

And toll if you were crossing any of the Bay area bridges.

And additional fees to use any of the Bay Area express lanes.

Car travel is not free of government charges, even if the externalities aren't fully internalized.

Looks like you forgot your citation, I'd like to read it if you can update.

https://www.bradford-delong.com/2016/08/so-why-isnt-riding-b...

I'm pretty sure you paid a tax on that gasoline or electricity used to charge a car battery.

am pretty sure Bart is operating on a deficit. Highway maintenance comes out of tax payer's pocket, so that's part of the money you spend riding on a freeway

This is the complete idiocy of it. There are absolutely wonderful public transit systems that operate at a profit and are far cheaper than anything in the states. (E.g. MRT)

drivers pay a fairly sizeable gas tax and also the cost of construction and maintenance per mile of freeway is inordinately less than BART

Reply on news.ycombinator.com