Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 176 posts

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#101

Post by [deleted] »

betterunix2 wrote: post #54
Nelkins wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very skeptical of the "required" money quoted by anyone who is affiliated with the MTA or state government in general. There's a lot of evidence that indicates the MTA is used as a personal piggy bank. Take, for example, this gem: "MTA wrote $4.9M check to three upstate ski centers in bizarre move requested by Cuomo officials" [1]. Or this one[2] (also part of this NYT series): "Subway workers now make an aver…

I remain confused about the pay figure the NYTimes gave for subway workers; I have a close relative who works in the subway and I know a number of subway workers, and none of them make anything close to that kind of salary, even counting overtime. So unless that counts something other than the hourly employees, or counts pension contributions as salary (in which case it is just an argument against pensions), I have a…

[deleted]

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#102

Post by chimeracoder »

neuromantik8086 wrote: post #92
chimeracoder wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets voted out. We're tired of it, but New York government is not a democracy. The two ruling parties have passed an complex network of laws which, in effect, mean that officials are accountable only to the political party, not to their constituents. Case in point: one of the largest advocates of elim…

A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting. It makes me feel as though it would be much easier to switch to a third party without totally breaking with the established parties. Unfortunately, third parties in NYS have yet to grow a spine and endorse their own candidates, primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families e…

> A lot of the reason I remain living in New York is because of fusion voting.

Fusion voting is actually one of the exact mechanisms that the two dominant parties use to ensure that third-parties remain completely non-viable. As you point out, fusion voting means that third parties have a stronger incentive to endorse one of the Democratic or Republican candidates instead of running their own, because it ensures their right to ballot access.

> primarily because if they don't get enough votes in the elections they cease to exist (i.e., why Working Families endorsed Cuomo instead of Teachout last gubernatorial election).

It's a little more complicated than that. Cuomo promised the Working Families Party that, if they endorsed him, he'd push for a particular piece of policy that they'd wanted. After they endorsed him, he then started the "Women's Equality Party"[0], which also endorsed Cuomo, in a direct attempt to split the vote from the Working Families Party.

His goal was to drive the Working Families Party vote under 50,000[1], which would have denied them ballot access in future elections, so that he wouldn't have to worry about their influence or endorsement in the future.

Fusion voting is an embarassment to democracy. It's "hilarious" when you show up to the ballot box, and the same candidate is running unopposed on three party lines: as a Democrat, a Republican, and an Independence party candidate[2].

[0] led by himself and his family, run mostly by men.

[1] Don't quote me on the number, but I think that's the threshold

[2] For those who aren't from New York: yes, this is sadly pretty common. Though more often than that, only one party even bothers to front a candidate in the race in the first place, so the general election is a series of uncontested elections, with each candidate running on only one party.

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#103

Post by vkou »

betterunix2 wrote: post #54
Nelkins wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be very skeptical of the "required" money quoted by anyone who is affiliated with the MTA or state government in general. There's a lot of evidence that indicates the MTA is used as a personal piggy bank. Take, for example, this gem: "MTA wrote $4.9M check to three upstate ski centers in bizarre move requested by Cuomo officials" [1]. Or this one[2] (also part of this NYT series): "Subway workers now make an aver…

I remain confused about the pay figure the NYTimes gave for subway workers; I have a close relative who works in the subway and I know a number of subway workers, and none of them make anything close to that kind of salary, even counting overtime. So unless that counts something other than the hourly employees, or counts pension contributions as salary (in which case it is just an argument against pensions), I have a…

> pay increases that basically track the cost of living in NYC

There's the problem. Half the population is convinced that the people who do all the work to make living in a city possible should not be able to afford to live in said city.

San Francisco is the most extreme example of this insanity, where everyone in the service sector either has multi-hour commutes, or live in a closet with 3 other roommates.

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#104

Post by betterunix2 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #20
randomerr wrote: post #2

New York doesn't have enough money to get it done. The politicians are too busy paying for all the election promises they've made over the last 50 years. And they absolutely need to cut the bureaucracy (code word for 'unions' and 'government agencies') that are deeply entrenched in the government. I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets…

Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's important to point out that fixing/upgrading the system comes from the capital budget, and the promises you're describing are paid out of the operating budget. The debt service for the former, is earmarked, by law, from the latter, which clocks in at 16% according to recent figures[0]. And we might have larger capital allocations if there weren't the ongoing and very generous sal…

As long as the existing system is fully funded and properly maintained, there is no pressing need to replace anything. The original signal system worked fine for a century and could continue working fine for another century, as long as maintenance is being done. I would suggest that what the system needs more than the new signal system is expansion; there were actually more transit lines the last time the system had to handle this many passengers. One of the things that 2nd Ave. subway does -- in a small but meaningful way -- is increase the number of trains that can operate in Midtown during peak hours, because it creates a new branch line for trains to terminate on (capacity at terminals is a limiting factor in some cases; this is why 71st-Continental is used as a terminal, despite the fact that the 4-track line continues to 179th St., and why several E trains terminate at 179th or Kew Gardens during peak hours.).

The 2nd Ave. subway would also have helped to reduce crowding on the Lexington Ave. line if it had been built to 125th St., where there is a Metro-North station. That is an unfunded plan at the moment, and there would likely be opposition from the wealthy Upper East Side residents to such an extension (not just the extra crowding, but also the poorer people who live in East Harlem taking the train).

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#105

Post by betterunix2 »

nine_k wrote: post #32
gsnedders wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question I have is, why were things like the Hudson Yards station, work on the perpetually delayed 2nd Avenue subway, Fulton St. station renovation prioritized over the core signal and preexisting aging track infrastructure? Which gets votes? Renewing existing infrastructure is something nobody understands.

"Renewing existing infrastructure" as in "not canceling L train", or "R trains running without problems", etc? That could get some votes. BTW 2nd avenue subway should be seen as "less crowded green line trains", which matched popular demand rather well, and it did work, to my mind.

The crowding on the Lexington Ave. lines is partly due to Metro-North commuters at 125th St. and Grand Central -- the 2nd Ave. subway does absolutely nothing to help with that, because the extension into East Harlem was not funded.

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#106

Post by gerbilly »

lr4444lr wrote: post #20
randomerr wrote: post #2

New York doesn't have enough money to get it done. The politicians are too busy paying for all the election promises they've made over the last 50 years. And they absolutely need to cut the bureaucracy (code word for 'unions' and 'government agencies') that are deeply entrenched in the government. I don't think New York can do it until the people get tired of watching the decay and the current political machine gets…

Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's important to point out that fixing/upgrading the system comes from the capital budget, and the promises you're describing are paid out of the operating budget. The debt service for the former, is earmarked, by law, from the latter, which clocks in at 16% according to recent figures[0]. And we might have larger capital allocations if there weren't the ongoing and very generous sal…

>it's important to point out that fixing/upgrading the system comes from the capital budget, and the promises you're describing are paid out of the operating budget

Who cares what budget it comes from? It's just money in the end.

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#107

Post by beamatronic »

chimeracoder wrote: post #63
spike021 wrote: post #40

I find this situation incredibly interesting as an outsider. I live in the SF Bay Area where we have a Muni "subway", if you can even call it reminiscent of one and BART. They're both absolutely awful, between not having good/expansive coverage/timely service. A plethora of issues plague both. Both times I visited NYC this year I took the subway everywhere. Out of probably 40-50 subway rides, only a handful were dela…

> I found NYC's subway a pleasant improvement. Yet I keep seeing articles about how it needs to be fixed. Decades of underinvestment means that it's not as good today as it was ten years ago, or as good ten years ago as it was a few decades before that. That said, even with all its problems, the NY metro area still has far better and more extensive public transportation than any other metro area in the country. Over…

Because 100+ years ago someone saw the right path forward and they forced this into existence with political power. How can this be done today? Elon Musk comes to mind. Humanity seemingly has to be forced forward by a visionary backed by power.

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#108

Post by chimeracoder »

betterunix2 wrote: post #84
chimeracoder wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You seem to think the TWU has power that it really does not have. All the TWU can do is stop the MTA from eliminating jobs, they cannot stop the MTA's plans to install new equipment. I don't think you understand how much power the TWU does have. Not only do they have the power to stop projects altogether, like automating the trains (which they did, as noted in the article), but they do have the ability to either de…

The article says the union did exactly what I said the union can do: prevent the MTA from cutting jobs. That does not prevent the MTA from modernizing the signal system -- the entire context of the dispute over the L line was the MTA's effort to reduce trains to a one-man crew, from the current two-man crew, after a modern signal system was installed and operational . The MTA is busy installing that same modern syste…

> The TWU had nothing to do with it and continues to have nothing to do with it.

It sounds like you're treating the TWU and MTA as two separate entities. Legally, yes, that's true, but in practice, more often than not, the TWU and MTA act in tandem. If you just look at one and not the other, or the interplay between the two, you miss out on the broader picture.

(In this specific case, I don't see a particularly significance in the distinction between "blocking the project from happening" and "blocking them from realizing a major cost-saving benefit that motivates and funds the project".)

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#109

Post by chimeracoder »

beamatronic wrote: post #107
chimeracoder wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I found NYC's subway a pleasant improvement. Yet I keep seeing articles about how it needs to be fixed. Decades of underinvestment means that it's not as good today as it was ten years ago, or as good ten years ago as it was a few decades before that. That said, even with all its problems, the NY metro area still has far better and more extensive public transportation than any other metro area in the country. Over…

Because 100+ years ago someone saw the right path forward and they forced this into existence with political power. How can this be done today? Elon Musk comes to mind. Humanity seemingly has to be forced forward by a visionary backed by power.

> Because 100+ years ago someone saw the right path forward and they forced this into existence with political power. How can this be done today? Elon Musk comes to mind. Humanity seemingly has to be forced forward by a visionary backed by power.

New York's current problem is that it already has too many elected officials with power that is completely unchecked and uncheckable by voters[0]. I'm not convinced that the solution to that problem is to have another person whose power is completely unchecked and uncheckable by voters.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15988458

Re: What Would It Take to Fix New York’s Subway?

#110

Post by chimeracoder »

betterunix2 wrote: post #100
chimeracoder wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t think you understood what parent meant by “single track”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-line_working I understand what they meant; I'm explaining that even when running trains on dedicated tracks (e.g. the local line is shut down for maintenance, but the express line still runs), it causes delays that many find unbearable. Running trains in both directions on a single track would degrade service ev…

In fact, single-tracking in most of the subway degrades service even more than it technically needs to, due to the inability of the interlocking system to reverse track directions. To single track the MTA has to tie down the stop arms and coordinate by radio, and it is almost never worth it. The MTA does sometimes use single tracking in the East River tunnels, where the interlocking allows the track direction to be r…

> In fact, single-tracking in most of the subway degrades service even more than it technically needs to, due to the inability of the interlocking system to reverse track directions. To single track the MTA has to tie down the stop arms and coordinate by radio, and it is almost never worth it. The MTA does sometimes use single tracking in the East River tunnels, where the interlocking allows the track direction to be reversed.

Thanks for adding this - I'd forgotten about that.

Post reply on HN