Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure it's not true that more than half of Americans avoid paying FICA because their income is too low. It would have to be $0.
Also sales, property, and so on.
Sure, but FICA is an income tax.
Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
361–370 of 401 posts
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, marginal dollar on road yields greater than marginal dollar to economy. Current political structures in the US means that marginal dollar on passenger rail is absorbed by the agents in charge of ensuring the rail existence. i.e. the $500 million railway and the $1 billion version of (say) the Central Subway will both yield probably the same economic benefit. Rent-seekers know that they can extract a large amoun…
Do you have any sources for this info?
I have not kept them handy.
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#363Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…
Related: Homelessness is Solvable - Malcolm Gladwell
> https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/solvable/solvable-podc...
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, I personally would much sooner use public transportation that charged $10 (with no exceptions) than free public transportation. Sharing close quarters with aggressive, smelly, intoxicated, unstable people is stressful and unpleasant
The Kansas City Zoo has to let people in certain counties visit for free every so often, as part of the agreement by which it receives funding from those counties. This used to be implemented as periodic "free" days, but those became so notorious for outbreaks of violence that they switched to sending vouchers for different days to every household in those counties so the free-day visitors are spread out rather than…
I bet that probably increases the number of visitors visiting for free too. Since, many parents and families may not be able to take a specific day off if they work in low-wage service industry jobs. It’s probably better all around, but has more cost with mailing vouchers.
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friendly hello and a few bucks
No one ever gave you cash? Did you ask for it?
It didn't end well, but, the majority of people who are homeless are invisible, they don't appear to be any different than the average city person. The people who are being complained about are by in large people who are in need of public health services that have been slashed since the 1980s in the United States or never existed. I don't have a solution
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
100% this, I’ve been homeless and slept on the bus or subway to stay warm (and safe) and not once did someone try to help me. And now I’m years out of being in that situation and I am part of the same problem, I almost never take public transportation and use Lyft or my car to get around.
> I’ve been homeless and slept on the bus or subway to stay warm (and safe) and not once did someone try to help me. Curious how someone could have most helped you at that time in your life if you don't mind sharing.
> I’ve been homeless and slept on the bus or subway to stay warm (and safe) and not once did someone try to help me.
The way in which you wrote this could be misinterpreted, so any clarification would be welcome: did you then or do you now feel as though someone is obligated to help you? If so, who and in what ways?
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I was saying, what's stopping us from forcing the politicians to provide better options? Is there some way we can organize a discussion about practical solutions to this issue, and then pick that and tell the politicians to go do it? I'm not saying our current solutions are good by the way, which seems to be what some people replying are interpreting my comment as. I'm personally in favor of just state funded smal…
Yeah, housing first is absolutely the way to go. Sadly the very thing causing homelessness also makes housing-first much more difficult: astronomically-expensive real estate. Condos in Seattle cost more than $500/sqft, and investing tons of money to construct these buildings further props up the ridiculous valuations. Socialized housing is absolutely the answer, but homelessness will never be solved until we stop tre…
>homelessness will never be solved
Interesting. Question: do you think that if all of a sudden a wand was waved and everyone homeless in a given city/geography was magically housed that there would still be (eventually, over time) further homelessness or do you think that homelessness would cease to exist from that point forward? What do you think would happen in say, 5-10-15 years out?
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is it that's preventing us from forcing our politicians to offer better options? I would vote for a solution to this, and even donate money to it, if enough other people were doing the same. Don't most people feel the same about this issue? What systemic problem is preventing a huge mass of people who agree on this from making a meaningful change happen?
If you give everyone houses, it relieves pressure from the housing system which causes rents to go down. Therefore, every landlord opposes actually solving homelessness. Since we have government by the rich and landed, we get their position encoded in policy. The degree to which reality diverges from this prescription is the degree to which the politicians fear either a) a declining bushiness environment or b) riots
>If you give everyone houses, it relieves pressure from the housing system which causes rents to go down.
Care to explain your logic around this statement?
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. Have you ever wondered that may be inequality should be a problem worth solving instead of finding yet another way of isolating yourself from the problem?
But it can't really be _fully_ solved. In any case there will be people who simply refuse the responsibility of being a proper adult and _choose_ to live under a bridge. In a city of a 700K+ people (Seattle) there will be hundreds of such folks. What do you do with them in a free country?
>But it can't really be _fully_ solved. In any case there will be people who simply refuse the responsibility of being a proper adult and _choose_ to live under a bridge.
Do you think humans have agency and can choose or ?
Re: Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What a lot of those same people don't understand, is that taxes pay for the road systems. I don't think those people are failing to understand anything. They're just people who use the road systems and don't use public transit.
And those same people fail to realize the fact that they are moving at all in their car in traffic is thanks to those 50 people crammed in the bus in the next lane. Could you imagine if the million people who take LA metro daily suddenly switched to cars? The city would functionally break.
Yes, for some reason, no one ever thinks of the opportunity costs here. This is why all public transit should be free and all street parking should be paid. If I need to pay 6 bucks to go into town and back on the train, but I can pay a couple bucks in gasoline cost and have free parking, why would I choose the train? The city can change this so easily and maybe even in a way that they lose no money.