Metro Transit long on riders, short on money

  • Article by: KEVIN GILES , Star Tribune
  • Updated: February 3, 2009 - 12:13 AM

As economy tightens, maintaining existing bus and rail service will be tough. Another fare increase is possible.

  • 138
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
marpalleclFeb. 2, 09 1:50 PM

The system is so overly subsidized that it can not function without those subsidies. So by buying a car I am paying for people to ride the bus. By buying gas, I am paying for people to ride the bus. By paying my proerty taxes, I am paying for others to ride the bus, but it does not supply service where I need to go... I am not anti bus, but for the ridership to only pay 30% of the actual cost is rediculous. I pay for roads in Ely MN, so I also have to pay for people to ride buses that have absolutely no impact on my life? We need mass transit, but it most certainly needs to be more equitable to the non bus riding consumer and thus they will not have so much of a negative financial impact when the economy does stumble.

motfuulFeb. 2, 09 2:20 PM

by taking all that rail to the scrap yard. That could be another way to help balance the budget.

bkd001Feb. 2, 09 2:21 PM

Give buses more lanes, that should help.

thatsmeFeb. 2, 09 2:30 PM

I guess the non users will have to throw yet more money at this liberal money sucking vortex. You would think that as liberals always claim, people would be flocking to the buses to save cash, then of course more fares would be paid and the cost to me, the non-user would go down. I'm sure it works that way on paper.

marlboro20xFeb. 2, 09 2:30 PM

I don't see the problem. Just bail transit out with more subsidies. Might as well subsidize the riders while we're at it too. Why stop there? Might as well pay people to ride the bus and light rail!

mnrob32Feb. 2, 09 2:32 PM

About rising ridership? Why not just report that Metro trans is another gov't agency run by union thugs looking to cash in on Obama's 1 trillion payback scheme.

mazdarulesFeb. 2, 09 2:34 PM

I am not anti-bus but the fares could be raised a little bit and not affect people's pocketbooks too much. Even if the fares went up 50 cents a trip that would only be an extra $5/week for the average working person. You can't tell me that this would be a problem for most people, that's just one less lunch at Arby's.

tink0077Feb. 2, 09 2:38 PM

I don't mind paying a higher fare, but I'll be darned if you are going to take my curly fries. You can have my arby's when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!

maypowFeb. 2, 09 2:43 PM

My rent pays poperty taxes which fund schools...but I have no kids...and my taxes pay for the dome and the Carl playground but I can't afford tickets....get it!!

mazdarulesFeb. 2, 09 2:43 PM

I would never suggest getting rid of Arby's, how I love those Arby's Melts, but it was merely a suggestion to cut down from 5 Arby's lunches in a week to 4.


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters