MTA Unlikely to Offer Promised Extra Subway, Bus Service

They had every incentive in the world to shape up or ship out -- their own bottom line. And still they couldn't make ends meet. So basically the choice is between private for-profit enterprise with limited service and high fares or affordable gov't service for everyone.

Yes, exactly -- even with a monopoly and subsidies from the City and before $5/gallon diesel the private bus companies weren't sustainable.

That's the problem: It wasn't really a free-market. Competitors were dissuaded from entering the marketplace leaving an inefficient private enterprise.

In a free-market, an upstart would come in with a level playing ground---no anti-trust exemptions, no subsidies to them or their competitors. The upstart would quickly force the existing private bus company to ship up or ship out.

...even with a monopoly and subsidies from the City and before $5/gallon diesel the private bus companies weren't sustainable.

Unsustainable because they never had an incentive to improve themselves nor were they accountable to customers, stakeholders, or even local politicians; only to the MTA.

How would there be enough business for two companies to make a profit, especially competing with each other on fares and service?

I'm at a bus stop with my friend the businessman. Up comes three vehicles: a decrepit MTA bus, a plush coach bus, and a van. The only thing they have in common: they accept Metrocards. The businessman pays $4 for the coach and I pay $1 for the van and we all get to where we want to go.

The only way a for-profit company could run on those routes is with huge fare increases. And that's not what we want from public transportation.

Then people will ride a bike, take a water taxi, carpool, telecommute, and so on. An entrepreneurial immigrant with a van gets a license to install a Metrocard reader and offers a $1 ride on the same route. Bolt Bus Co. sees an untapped market in the high-end and opens up a $4+ dollar coach service.

Let's think this through, shall we, and learn some history, too. When the transit lines were first constructed, the city was not as built up as it is now. The incentive for the private companies to build transit lines was not the 5 cent fare being paid - they were real estate companies selling property in upper Manhattan and the outer boroughs (have any of you ever wondered how Harlem or Flushing or Jamaica or Bensonhurst or Sunnyside or Tremont or a 100 other areas of the city got developed? All transit companies.) Once the transit companies made their money from real estate, they let the transit lines languish until the City took them over (the City knew that the lines were now essential infrastructure). But the City never had the money to maintain the lines either, because of the American aversion to taxes. So now you "market forcers" want to privatize the transit lines? Fine. But what will pay for them? $2 fares? Well, there's no more large tracts of the city waiting to be developed - it's essentially all built and the only development is actually relatively small-scale re-development, not enough to fund a transit system. As has been noted many times here, though most of you refuse to listen, no transit system anywhere in the world is fully private. They ALL, and I mean ALL, are either government entities or are privatized receiving heavy government subsidies. Yes, even in Tokyo they are heavily subsidized by the government. The only answer is to keep the public funding but get serious about eliminating waste, fraud, corruption, etc.

Yes, exactly -- even with a monopoly and subsidies from the City and before $5/gallon diesel the private bus companies weren't sustainable. How would there be enough business for two companies to make a profit, especially competing with each other on fares and service? The fact is that re-privitizing those bus lines would result in higher fares and reduced service.

The only way a for-profit company could run on those routes is with huge fare increases. And that's not what we want from public transportation. There's nothing wrong with asking government to prop up the MTA considering the massive public benefit we all receive from the City's mass transit system. That being said there's still a lot the MTA could do to save money, I'm sure.

Re: #23

The bus companies subcontracted by the MTA never competed for customers. Each had a monopoly on their line(s).

There should've been two or more bus and van companies licensed to service a route and licensed to accept tokens/metrocards so that they would have to compete based on frequency and quality of service.

I miss the dollar vans; now those were entrepreneurial.

I largely agree with Dadoc:

Hint ,hint, take away token booths. Remove them. And the "clerks". 1 person per station, with radio, not sitting on their ass, no booth. Make them a station-master, responsible for flow, assistance, reporting hazards/cleaning, service. Put the guy who was recently bagged for trespassing @ Union Square (PLEEZ!). Sell the MTA real estate, jail the contracting theives, make the alleged "system" accountable. 2bucks, comparatively, for one of the only 24/7 systems in the world (yes, I'e ridden the others) is still a bargain, but the waste, sloth, graft and BS is ridiculous.

Riding since the '50s

Dadoc

I'm sorry, I should have said that the legislature passed the 50/20 pension plan but Pataki vetoed it so it's not in effect but easily could be some day.

Hello???? Anyone paying attention??? The MTA just recently took over the last few private bus lines in the City:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D04E4D91E3BF933A15757C0A9629C8B63

Prior to that the City was subsidizing the lines because they were losing money. Re-privatizing the entire bus system today would lead to two things: higher fares and vastly diminished service, particularly in outlying areas of the City leaving hordes of lower-income people stranded. This is an essential public service, it's not like selling pencils.

If you want to help the MTA then start by voting out all the assholes in Albany who are in the union's pocket, the same assholes who not long ago changed the retirement plan so that workers can retire at age 50 after 20 years of service. Prior to that the retirement plan was age 55 after 25 years of service. That's going to kill the MTA and nobody seemed to notice.

If this was happening in any other of city other than NYC the MTA would have become a public/private or entirely private venture a decade or two ago. Its too bad no public officials have the vision or fortitude to make progressive decisions and lead this city. Instead they all want to line their own pockets (or the pockets of some made up non-profits orgs, isnt that right Mrs. Quinn?) and then stroke each others egos.

My first question - where is the transparency in the MTA?

That doesn't really work with the MTA because as a private company the MTA would not be in a competitive market. There would be no anti-MTA waiting in the wings with other subway trains.

Tokyo says hi. The subway and regional railway there is owned by over a dozen private companies. It's fucking amazing to experience for anyone who has visited. America needs to get off its ass and get its shit together and stop half-assing everything.

That doesn't really work with the MTA because as a private company the MTA would not be in a competitive market. There would be no anti-MTA waiting in the wings with other subway trains.

That's a scary statement.

How do you know there couldn't be another company who could jump into the marketplace?

Private competition will always make things better?

Have any of you whiners experienced a domestic flight recently?

This comment totally neglects American history.

You seriously want to go back to the days of airline regulation in this country?

I just booked two flights; one to Minnesota ($275) and one to Boston ($170). Not too bad of a price, right?

Methinks some of you are conflating market competition with accountability. Yes, incompetent MTA officials should be accountable when the MTA fails its goals, but there's really no benefit to be captured by privatizing the MTA.

The two aren't inextricably linked?

Firing a public official is much more difficult and costly, usually.

And, no, I'm not. Like I said previously, when a government bails out an inefficient service with more tax payer money, is anyone really being held accountable?

The real vauge rheotoric is saying that you're going to be the politician who changes things and holds the MTA accountable for their actions...c'mon do you seriously think a politician is going to be able to comb through the budgets and how the money is allocated well enough? Let alone how does the politician know what is the best way to allocate the money? Isn't the market a better way to determine prices and budgets of a service?

Private competition will always make things better?

Have any of you whiners experienced a domestic flight recently?

#15

The private bus lines in Queens were private in name only. They received millions in MTA subsidies, paid their management market salaries and underpaid the employees (They did the same job as other MTA drivers, but got less money and a questionable pension system). Without MTA millions, they couldn't have operated for a single day.

Didn't the MTA just acquire/envelop/subsume the privately owned Queens bus lines? Didn't the MTA just (less recently) absorb the Triboro Bridge and Tunnel Authority? They're going in the opposite direction from privatization, they're building a regional multi-mode transportation monopoly, straight from Moses' rulebook. If PATH weren't part of the hugely powerful and equally corrupt bi-state Port Authority, they'd have found a way to own that too.

I'm as big on free markets as it gets, but as people have pointed out, none of this vague rhetoric about the virtues of competition really applies here. Free markets are efficient because of competition. Companies in free markets work because there is money to be made, and if they don't work hard to capture that money, somebody else will.

That doesn't really work with the MTA because as a private company the MTA would not be in a competitive market. There would be no anti-MTA waiting in the wings with other subway trains.

Methinks some of you are conflating market competition with accountability. Yes, incompetent MTA officials should be accountable when the MTA fails its goals, but there's really no benefit to be captured by privatizing the MTA.

But alas, that doesn't fit in with the bogus libertarian free-market-fixes-ever thing dogma, does it?

The more I think about this, the more it bothers me.

It's not bogus; it's not dogma.

It's the belief that Google can do a better job with online ads and searches than the government could ever do. It's the belief that Apple makes a better portable music device than the government could do. It's the belief that my pencil on my desk is better and more efficiently constructed than the government could ever do--the classic Friedman example.

The eraser, metal thingy, wood shaft, and graphite are all produced separately, put together, and shipped all for the cost of what? Twenty cents?

Now, if the government was responsible for the process, who doesn't believe that the pencil's market price would be higher?

Hint ,hint, take away token booths. Remove them. And the "clerks". 1 person per station, with radio, not sitting on their ass, no booth. Make them a station-master, responsible for flow, assistance, reporting hazards/cleaning, service. Put the guy who was recently bagged for trespassing @ Union Square (PLEEZ!). Sell the MTA real estate, jail the contracting theives, make the alleged "system" accountable. 2bucks, comparatively, for one of the only 24/7 systems in the world (yes, I'e ridden the others) is still a bargain, but the waste, sloth, graft and BS is ridiculous.

Riding since the '50s

Dadoc

But alas, that doesn't fit in with the bogus libertarian free-market-fixes-ever thing dogma, does it?

So you'd rather have the alternative? Central economically planned services---bureaucracies?

The very idea that a second company could create a competing light rail system within NYC is ludicrous.

See above for what I think the logical free-market solution would be. But, hey, why not light rail, too? This certainly wouldn't work in midtown, but what about by the South Street, parts of the financial district, along York Ave, or in Central Park?

Of course space is tight in the city and I'm not a professional in the mass transit engineering field, but I don't think anything is inconceivable with our ingenious, technological minds in this country. When you tie up money in red tape and have politicians be the ones who come up with the ideas for transit money, you stymie the creativity of the private workforce.

And what is this shit about competition? Who's going to compete with the MTA if it's privatized? Is a second company going to put in new tunnels as an alternative? Of course not. This is why the notion of competition makes no sense when it comes to utilities. Competition plays out fine in a lot of consumer market, but this isn't one of them. You can turn the MTA into a private company, but that won't create competition. The very idea that a second company could create a competing light rail system within NYC is ludicrous.

You need to look at this on the macro scale first. The idea that government should continue to bail out an inefficient service with additional tax payer money and higher fares is something I think we all disagree on. This is a result of the MTA being a public authority instead of private enterprise.

On the micro scale, you first start with the bus routes. Allowing private carriers to enter the marketplace would be a great thing, I posit.

The problem is with the rail in that the resources are limited, just like laying utilities like you mention. But utilities are still more private than the subway. Towns and cities all over the country don't renew contracts with X and then sign one with Y. Y then buys the cable and fiber optic lines from X.

You could have something similar with each subway line. We had something similar to it before in NYC (IRT, BMT, etc.). The consequences of companies competing to have the cleanest stations, best service, and best subway cars is something that boggles my mind. It could easily spur new life into certain areas as companies could deal together to gentrify an area and fix the subway station in the area. Lower East Side and the JMZ, anyone?

As basic political economics tells you, private enterprise delivers a better good and at a lower cost than public enterprise. Are you a believer in central planning? If so, maybe the current system appeals to you. If you believe in capitalism and the free-market, maybe my post appeals to you more.

I wish I could edit the above post to replace the word "fairs" with "fares." So it goes.

I agree with that line about "the magic privatization fairy." This is how fairs and budgets are with subsidies. Without them the situation would be even worse.

And what is this shit about competition? Who's going to compete with the MTA if it's privatized? Is a second company going to put in new tunnels as an alternative? Of course not. This is why the notion of competition makes no sense when it comes to utilities. Competition plays out fine in a lot of consumer market, but this isn't one of them. You can turn the MTA into a private company, but that won't create competition. The very idea that a second company could create a competing light rail system within NYC is ludicrous.

But alas, that doesn't fit in with the bogus libertarian free-market-fixes-ever thing dogma, does it?

Dissolve the MTA.

Split the system then lease the operations and maintenance to several private firms.

Bring in more ads inside. And outside.

Lease more space.

Sell naming rights to stations.

Hire Charmin to maintain restrooms.

I have had very nice station attendants, and pretty good experiences with the employees of the subway, but my big problem with the subways is the lack of cleanliness, lack of service (not enough subways), and the financial irresponsibility.

If there are bad employees out there, report them! You don't have to take their crap. If you meet good ones, say something, too! You can! Honestly, I had the nicest lady at 156th street station on the 1 train, it made me happy to come home and see her as I got out of the subway, always smiling and singing. My current subway employee is always waiting at the gate to open it for mothers with strollers and people with big bags at 137th and Broadway. Very helpful employees.

There is no system in the world that runs without heavy government funding and it's amazing to me that people keep bringing up this failed argument as if the magical privatization fairy will wave his wand over the U.S. and make it all OK.

No system meaning transit system, I hope.

The railroads in this country ran pretty well until they were regulated, no? The ICC set back railroads and trucking in this country, and the inefficiencies raised the price tag for the consumers.

What's your proposal, Splicer? Oh, yeah to hold them more accountable for spending. What's fairy tale-like to me is the idea of one of the biggest bureaucracies in the city and region spending every cent correctly without waste.

First things first, though. The MTA should be forced to account for ever penny they spend - EVERY PENNY - and have those figures available for public review. I guarantee you that I can easily find enough wasted money to alleviate some of their financial woes. After that, the state and federal governments need to fully fund public transportation. With gas prices so high and the roads utterly congested, it's stunning that so little importance is put on a completely necessary expenditure.

And then your second recommendation is to fully fund public transportation. That's an empty statement, really. You can say that about Medicaid, Medicare, education...but throwing money at the problem is never a solution when it comes to government.

Agree with TSOL.

Seriously, in about 20 years of riding the subway, I don't think I can remember a single time when a station attendant was helpful. For the most part, they stay in the booths and do nothing. They are the DMV of public transportation... the idea that these lazy lumps of crap are unionized, get pensions, etc. is sickening.

I know in the past I've read that the MTA has over 60,000 employees. 60,000! If that isn't an indication of a problem, I don't know what is.

according to an older Gothamist report, they make about $30 an hour. Now granted, that's not investment banker money, but still.

http://gothamist.com/2006/12/27/transit_workers_2.php

The "magical privatization fairy" is called competition, which results in accountability, which means that either things improve or someone is fired.

Asshole station attendants give no service and no information, and get free pensions and health care and bureaucrat-style job security.

Fuck them and fuck the MTA.

The subways were a private entity (as was the national passenger rail system) until the incompetents in the 40s and 70s, respectively, figured out they were losing money and turned it all over to local and federal governments. There is no system in the world that runs without heavy government funding and it's amazing to me that people keep bringing up this failed argument as if the magical privatization fairy will wave his wand over the U.S. and make it all OK.

First things first, though. The MTA should be forced to account for ever penny they spend - EVERY PENNY - and have those figures available for public review. I guarantee you that I can easily find enough wasted money to alleviate some of their financial woes. After that, the state and federal governments need to fully fund public transportation. With gas prices so high and the roads utterly congested, it's stunning that so little importance is put on a completely necessary expenditure.

Bloomberg and his ilk epitomize the thinking of most, if not all, people in positions of power. As long as the roads are clear for their Hummers, the rest of us can go to hell. The French aristocracy were equally flippant and we know how that turned out.

is the MTA a private company or a government agency? why is there so much ineptness and inefficiency? You know how much opportunity and growth the MTA has limited the Transportation system? I can think of a million ways to make the trains better. Steve Jobs would have none of this. Please Privatize the trains.