Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Migrant_Coconut]

Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, and Edmonton have all had multiple, separate stabbings on the metro (often fatal) in the last several months... I see a big ridership drop for the lockdown, but in 2023, not so much.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

If transit starts to be perceived as dangerous, then it will undo years of progress. I'm not sure exactly what needs to be done, but it seems like we're getting to the point where some sort of action needs to be taken.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Again, not saying otherwise, but exactly what does TransLink do which they aren't already?

It's a bigger problem than just Translink, I think the solution is going to have to involve the police, the mental health system, and other agencies that deal with the marginalized.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Try driving in Tokyo on a regular basis.

A better comparison is decline in ridership in other NA cities from increasing criminality.

Also the metro Tokyo area has nearly the same population as Canada.

Keeps transit safe if you want it to grow and be appealing.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by whatnext

With its continual government handouts it can limp on forever.

Transit should be subsidized just like roadways and healthcare and retirement savings. It's a public good.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Transit should be subsidized just like roadways and healthcare and retirement savings. It's a public good.

Exactly. It shouldn't be a thing to make profit off of.

[chowhou]

Transportation, just like water and electricity, is one of those things that the more and the cheaper we can provide it to people, the better it is for the economy, society, and the individual. Just like any other public utility, it lubricates so much else that the knock on effects really more than pay it all back.

Better and faster transportation means labour can be moved faster, it means housing can be built in more efficient ways, it means tourists can more freely engage with the city, it means local consumers can more freely engage with the city, it means a safer and cleaner local environment, it means a cleaner global environment, it means a reduction in dependency on global energy markets, the list goes on and on and on.

In a perfect world transit ought to be as close to free as possible, but I think it's still important that fares are charged such that more capital can be accumulated for transit expansion and improvements, and for small co-pay to prevent moral hazard.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Transportation, just like water and electricity, is one of those things that the more and the cheaper we can provide it to people, the better it is for the economy, society, and the individual. Just like any other public utility, it lubricates so much else that the knock on effects really more than pay it all back.

Better and faster transportation means labour can be moved faster, it means housing can be built in more efficient ways, it means tourists can more freely engage with the city, it means local consumers can more freely engage with the city, it means a safer and cleaner local environment, it means a cleaner global environment, it means a reduction in dependency on global energy markets, the list goes on and on and on.

In a perfect world transit ought to be as close to free as possible, but I think it's still important that fares are charged such that more capital can be accumulated for transit expansion and improvements, and for small co-pay to prevent moral hazard.

Transit should be fully subsidised tbh, as well as the ferries. There's no alternative, the government runs it, it should be free.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Transportation, just like water and electricity, is one of those things that the more and the cheaper we can provide it to people, the better it is for the economy, society, and the individual. Just like any other public utility, it lubricates so much else that the knock on effects really more than pay it all back....

Yes, all sorts of subtle and not-so-subtle benefits. Even something as simple as making a trip downtown more feasible for one's aging parents who are reluctant to drive there in heavy traffic but quite enjoy the bus ride.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Transit should be fully subsidised tbh, as well as the ferries. There's no alternative, the government runs it, it should be free.

Well, you could make that same argument for electricity and water. Making something with elastic demand completely free can be hazardous.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Transit should be fully subsidised tbh, as well as the ferries. There's no alternative, the government runs it, it should be free.

disagree. there are other cases where your definition would apply.

- water
- sewerage
- garbage/recycling
- electricity (in BC)

those are more important than transit, and yet they are not free.

there needs to be some costs involved. but like those ones, transit is also supplemented by government funding. they're necessary for society.

you could make the case internet is also just as important in today's age. but its not government provided and probably never will be.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Technically, SkyTrain already breaks even - it's the buses, SeaBuses and WCE that're being subsidized through taxes.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Technically, SkyTrain already breaks even - it's the buses, SeaBuses and WCE that're being subsidized through taxes.

FWIW while I think every Skytrain is a money maker I'm not 100% sure if it has broken even on the books. The capital costs are pretty crazy high. I'm not sure if all the fares since 1986 are enough to pay for the Broadway Extension. Certainly not the construction costs of the entire system, I'd say.

(Also I think many or most CoV busses are also money makers, it's the suburban busses that are the most subsidised.)

[Migrant_Coconut]

Maybe, maybe not - point is, how many transit systems in North America have an operating surplus instead of a deficit? The governments chip in to build the thing... and that's it.

[WarrenC12]

Expo line has been profitable on operations (at least pre-COVID), but not enough to ever hope paying back the capital costs. As a whole I'm not sure the system is currently breakeven.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe, maybe not - point is, how many transit systems in North America have an operating surplus instead of a deficit? The governments chip in to build the thing... and that's it.

Not a single major network in North America, but there are a few dollar van/jitney / pesero / and all kinds of share taxi systems that typically integrate into bigger systems, except in the smaller Caribbean and LatAm countries.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Expo line has been profitable on operations (at least pre-COVID), but not enough to ever hope paying back the capital costs. As a whole I'm not sure the system is currently breakeven.

Not through tolls [farebox]... but other tangeable benefits are what it returns. The fares on highways don't come close to paying even for their maintenance... because... well, there are no tolls... We build them for the knock-off benefits.

How many highways or road expansions would we have to build without our rapid transit system? How much valuable real-estate would be devalued or just expropriated?

[twoNeurons]

Saw a reply on Translink's instagram account saying that they have a team looking into digital wallet cards (ie. Compass on Apple Pay). Anyone know or hear of any progress on this?

I just got back from San Francisco and LOVED their digital clipper card that you could refill and purchase right on the phone using Apple Pay. I'm so SICK of losing compass cards.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Transit should be fully subsidised tbh, as well as the ferries. There's no alternative, the government runs it, it should be free.

When things are free, they are rarely appreciated and people start to resent paying for it. Fares can be kept low but there should be SOME cost... so people have higher expectations.

Otherwise, complaints like... oh man, this station is filthy, they should clean it up... are returned with "well, it's free, what do you expect?" and there's little motivation to improve it.

Not to go TOO much on a rant, but I also think SMALL user fees should be applied to medical appointments and procedures as well, if you're paying for something you'll have higher expectations from the doctor treating you... you've got some skin in the game... so to speak... and doctors are held to a higher standard (make it fee-free for people under a certain income if affordability is a concern)

Nothing is TRULY free... remember.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Not to go TOO much on a rant, but I also think SMALL user fees should be applied to medical appointments and procedures as well, if you're paying for something you'll have higher expectations from the doctor treating you... you've got some skin in the game... so to speak... and doctors are held to a higher standard (make it fee-free for people under a certain income if affordability is a concern)

IMO for the most part, emergency and acute health care isn't very elastic. Not too many people are casually deciding to fracture their femur or develop lung cancer because they know the treatment will be covered. As a result, I wouldn't be concerned about there not being a co-pay for medical treatments. I might get on board with a small co-pay for non-emergency or acute healthcare though. Anyone who has spent time in ER might have seen the young parents bringing their toddler into the ER with a cough, or anyone going to a walk in clinic might have seen an elderly person complaining about their hearing aids not working.

Transit usage can have a strong elastic component though and we might not want transit overconsumed when it isn't necessary or productive, just like how we might not want water overconsumed when it isn't necessary or productive.

Personally, I'd like to see distance based fares and generally a bit lower fares. It makes me sad that on the Hong Kong MTR travelling a few stations might only set you back a buck.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Personally, I'd like to see distance based fares and generally a bit lower fares. It makes me sad that on the Hong Kong MTR travelling a few stations might only set you back a buck.

I would just like to see daily and monthly fare caps. They have this in Portland, and its much more equitable for people who can't pay an entire monthly pass up-front, or for riders who don't know if they are going to ride enough in a day to justify a daily pass.