Sad ending to that whole story: Charlie did manage to get off the train but had to go on the lam from the Boston police. He ended up in Mexico, living the low life and surviving by playing poker in the cantinas. Then one day, he bet it all on a pair of threes and ended up in the Tijuana jail. From what I understand, he has no friends to go his bail.
He then escaped and found his way north across the border to California, where he checked into the Hotel California. He can check out any time he likes, but he can never leave.
Actually, he escaped and changed his name to Tom Dooley. We all know how that ended.
Well, at least his wife knows where to send his mail.
I hate the song and was dismayed when the MBTA (Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority) adopted ‘Charlie’ as a slogan/representative. Boston is pretty sophisticated, even the people who take the ‘T’. Charlie is not.
[Emphasis added] You misspelled “especially”. 
Tastes differ, and sophisticated or not, I think it’s pretty cool that the MBTA embraced a bit of mid-20th-century Boston folklore.
People, people, people. Of course Charlie’s wife could give him a nickel, or some kindly stranger could give him a nickel. It’s not the money, it’s the principle of the thing.
Charlie is engaging in civil disobedience. The MTA is attempting to levy a burdensome tax on the people in the form of a subway fare increase. Charlie is resisting. What better way to publicize the noble campaign of George O’Brien?
Asking why his wife doesn’t give him a nickel is like asking why hunger strikers don’t just grab a bite, or why Gandhi didn’t buy some salt. Sure, with a nickel, Charlie can get off the subway once. But in the long run, how can he afford to see his sister in Chelsea or his cousin in Roxbury?
What I don’t get is this:
What kind of mutant subway makes you pay to get off the train?
I’ve been in subway systems in NY, London, Paris and a few others as well as light rail/trolleys in dozens of other cities, and in every case, without exception, you pay to get into the train area. When you’re done with your trip, you walk out.
And even then, if there was a “pay to exit” plan, it’s certainly a “Pay to get out of the station” plan, not a “Pay to get off the train” plan. Can you imagine the delays as passengers are fumbling for loose change to pay the exit fee trying to get off the subway before it takes off for the next stop?
Did Boston really have a retarded plan like this or should I put this down to comic license?
Yes, Boston did have such a retarded plan. I remember it well from my childhood. As usual, wiki covers it.
I interpret it as the difference between the fee when he got on and when he got off. The fare was raised during his ride, and the officials were being hard-assed about not giving poor Charlie a discount ride.
It’s a protest song against high fares and frequent raises, go I guess that makes some sense.
BART in the SF Bay has a ticket as go into the station and you swipe it again as you leave subtracting money from the ticket. You can’t get out if it isn’t enough and must got to a machine inside the station to “add fare”.
Some comic license – I don’t think they ask for the extra fare on the train – but Washington DC has a similar plan. The Metro is divided into zones and if you cross from one zone to another, you have to pay extra before exiting the station. Big problem when a bunch of protesters from NYC tried to get off and hadn’t realized they needed to keep their ticket to exit.
Heck, Cleveland had a plan like that, too, for a while, for some trains going in some directions. Basically, you paid at whichever end of your trip was closest to downtown. Which meant that if you were taking the same line from one side of town to the other, you’d probably never be asked for your ticket at all.
Nowadays, it’s even more exploitable: So far as I know, the only stop where they actually ask for your ticket is downtown. Though there are occasionally transit police at other stops, who ask to see proof of fare.
I always figured it was a zone thing. I’ve ridden transit systems that divided their coverage area into zones; and a longer trip (across multiple zones) would cost more than a shorter trip (within a single zone).
So then the question is, how do you enforce it? If I remember Seattle busses correctly, on outbound trips you would get on for free and pay the fare when you got off. On a subway, you could set up turnstiles at the far-flung stations to collect the difference between a two-zone and a one-zone fare.[sup]*[/sup]
But the song clearly states that the conductor asked for the nickel. And as everyone knows, when you change for Jamaica Plain you get on the green line (although it wasn’t called that at the time). Those are trolleys which transition from underground to street-level and have fare boxes on board.
- Under such a scheme, I would think you should be able to return to the zone where you boarded and exit without any additional payment.
That wasn’t Live From the hungry i, was it? My parents had that album, and it’s pretty fun. “This next song is in French. For thoses of you who speak French, it’s Creole French. For those of you who speak Creole French, it’s northwestern Creole French. As perhaps spoken in Idaho.”
I didn’t think “M.T.A.” was on that album, but it’s been decades since I last heard it.