This issue has actually bothered me ever since I found out by accident 1 month ago that they ALREADY passed this measure.When I say “measure” I meant to say ROBBERY because by raising the monthly pass from $75 to $100 these thieves will guarantee that public buses will become the Wild Wild West.Often I have to travel to my job in Malibu via multiple bus transfers & what they plan to enact in Sep will cripple me.Due to the new Santa Monica stop on the expo line these JERKS want to end the only way that I can get to Malibu.Sure because everyone in the GOLDEN RICHIE RICH STATE OF CALIFORNIA owns an Audi A3.
The Metro board which consists of 13 members to my knowledge voted in a 12-1 majority (90% of the board is caucasian/non-minority) to increase fares.Their justification stems from the fear of not knowing what the state of the California economy in 2017 & 2020 (FUTURE FARE ROBBERY DATES).So,they arbitrairily raise the rates on the very people that need this vital service instead of firing 1,000 people (METRO employs at least 9,000 people for various jobs throughout Los Angeles County).
There are so many almost useless or inflated areas in this organization that could be trimmed to avoid rasing fares.More people who drive on a regular basis could be convinced to use the Metro system.However that would require a BIG bump in security & transit stop upgrades to convince the public its worth it.
Now,don’t call me someone who wants to see thousands lose there job but now MILLIONS will be affected.Only Gloria Molina was brave enough to even stand up & vote against this racist measure.My justification of calling this fare raise measure racist is this:At least 70% of the portion of Metro riders are minorities,elderly & the disabled.Many a time I’ve seen drivers tell someone in a wheelchair “sorry,but their just isn’t enough room” due to the overcrowding.A great portion of the lines on Metro are local lines that most people never use.Its only the lines such as Rapid,Express & other lines that are used as transfer lines to get to major destinations such as Santa Monica.
Overcrowding would also apply to lines in predominately poorer neighborhoods where people are less likely to own cars.
You would hardly see someone in a wheelchair travelling in Encino being told that their “just isn’t enough room”.Try daring to travel from the heart of the city of LA to Santa Monica & that’s a whole different game.
The point that I’m trying to make is that Metro seems to have snuck this fare increase onto the unknowing public.Most people I’ve asked don’t know jack squat about what Metro plans to do & I’m infuriated.
It seems that I may be forced to get a Vespa or something small (if only they ran on electricity) just to get cross-county.
Anyway the crap is going to hit the fan when the public tries to go about their day in Sep only to find out “YOU’VE BEEN ROBBED”!
By the way,if you’re thinking “why don’t these people just break down & buy a car” then you truly don’t understand.
I am sure it sucks to pay an extra twenty five bucks for your bus pass, but I am also not seeing the racism. If it is mostly people of color who use the bus, then they are also going to bear the brunt of the fare increase. That’s not racist. It’s not particularly progressive, but it’s not racist.
Racist? You gotta be kidding. I’m guessing you see racism just about everywhere.
As for the cost, do you know that a typical public transit system only generates less than 20 percent of its budget from fares? The rest comes from taxes (city, local, state and federal) in one way or another.
– pause –
A one minute search revealed the latest LA transit system budget. Fares only account for NINE PERCENT of the total budget. It sounds to me like fares should go up by a factor of about ten before you can complain about fare costs. Go ahead and get your Vespa, and then find out about insurance, maintenance, licensing, parking, security, fuel and other costs.
It’s been a standard tactic of the Bus Riders Union and other groups opposing fare increases to call these increases “racist”. Ostensibly because the impact of the increase falls on LA’s poor, who are largely Latino with some blacks. The practical reason for throwing around the term “racist” is that it’s more sensationalist, and has a better chance of worrying Latino and black politicians who need votes to stay in office. It’s actually a class issue, and has nothing to do with race.
As others have pointed out, a monthly bus pass will still be heavily subsidized, even with the fare increase.
Usually the BRU castigates the MTA for building or extending rail lines because they perceive those efforts to be at the expense of the bus service. Further, the bus riders are overwhelmingly people of color, so the accusations of civil rights violations and racism inevitably come up. It doesn’t really hold up though. The trains do get a handful more Anglo “choice” riders, but still the ridership in the subway and LRT system is overwhelmingly non-white and working class.
A great many things are called Racist when they are not. They reflect a prejudicial discrimination against the Poor, irrespective of race. In most American models, there happens to be a correlation between the poor and those of color, for reasons that have nothing to do with bus fares. So political exercises that militate against the poor quite naturally affect more people who are non-white.
In my city, the bus fares have more than doubled in the past 7 years. From my vantage point, the cause seems to be an attitude of “Those poor people who have to ride on old shabby buses, let’s buy a fleet of new shiny ones, so they can travel in a style they are entitled to.” (But cannot afford).
I rode on the Metro Link just yesterday from Forest Park to the Cards game and back.
While the fares are somewhat high, the cost of running public transportation is much, much higher. I believe that fares only pay about 25% of the cost while taxpayers foot the rest of the bill. As a disproportionate number of minorities use public transportation, that means to me that raising the cost of such fares a little is NOT racist. If anything, others are still subsidizing the fares, but maybe not so much.
I don’t know enough about the specifics of this case to weigh in, but the idea that such a policy, one that is not necessarily based (primarily) on race, cannot be classified as “racist” is wrong in my opinion. The rationale is that the cost-benefit analysis done on most policies sometimes gives short shrift to minority interests and concerns based on racial stereotypes or prejudices. Therefore, a policy can be colloquially described as racist even if it doesn’t specifically mention race. This is part of the logic behind disparate impact. In short, even if a policy doesn’t mention race, or isn’t crafted by “racists”, it’s still arguable that such a policy is racist.
No,when you walk into WalMart looking for your shampoo or something they’ve got your mugshot stored in their database at the door.That information along with the wi-fi signal from your smartphone is used to “track” you through retailers like cattle.Most people are either too lazy to even know this sort of thing is going on or have no way of knowing.They’re not going to advertise this sort of thing but recently when I went to a shopping mall,they DID.A sign at the front of the mall stated that they’re using the wi-fi signal from smartphones to track consumers.
Yes,the fair increase will affect those that use the transit system,but those ARE the very people that can’t make ends meet.