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

BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

statecraft.beehiiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 139 posts

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#111

Post by kimixa »

bombcar wrote: post #40
ars wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> BART along the same alignment still moves 2x more people than the Bay Bridge does though, which is something to remember as non-users of BART clamor for its defunding. How much does BART cost per year (or per decade) vs the Bay Bridge? A huge advantage of roads vs public transit is you don't need staff. (Maintenence is needed on both, but even then I suspect roads are cheaper to maintain.)

Also the drivers fund the heavy moving equipment which is a huge subsidy for the roads. The BART has to pay for everything out of fares and sundry. The highway authority just has to build and maintain the road not the vehicles.

True - the majority of the BART maintenance cost is the rolling stock not the track. How much does the average commuter spend on car maintenance and fuel? Or even the capital expenditure in the first place, if that commute is the difference between needing a(nother?) car for the household in the first place.

And costs like the drivers and station workers is just split over the 1-per-car drivers across an equivalent road. I don't know anyone who enjoys that commute, likely arriving more stressed rather than less, and you can't read or prep for your real work in any way when driving.

It's a common fallacy to ignore relatively small per-person costs, even if the total adds up to a massive amount due to the numbers of people.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#112

Post by jeffbee »

ars wrote: post #22
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #2

As the article states, the reason why BART is so heavily impacted is because it was mostly designed as commuter rail. BART is unique in that historically it paid most of its costs in farebox revenue. While peak-hour (morning and evening commute) ridership is catching up again (BART publishes numbers so you can check the work here), usage outside of peak hours is at an all-time low because of the increase of WFH jobs.…

> BART along the same alignment still moves 2x more people than the Bay Bridge does though, which is something to remember as non-users of BART clamor for its defunding. How much does BART cost per year (or per decade) vs the Bay Bridge? A huge advantage of roads vs public transit is you don't need staff. (Maintenence is needed on both, but even then I suspect roads are cheaper to maintain.)

Uh, the other (correct) way to look at it is the Bay Bridge requires a staff of 1000 people to move 1000 people across the Bay. Just because you externalize the costs doesn't mean you eliminated them.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#113

Post by Karrot_Kream »

hitsurume wrote: post #102
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what comes out in public meetings, and local government makes decisions based on who speaks up at public meetings or who takes the time to contact their local representatives. I was listening in on the Oakland Budget negotiations that happened the other day and multiple speakers talked about how they mistrust the police and do not want to offer them additional funding. The pro-police crowd almost always co…

Your comment is really misguided. Anyone in lower income does not have time to attend meetings or pay attention to local politics. Think about it this way, crime does not happen in affluent areas because they will more often generate much more attention to police their neighborhood for safety. Lower income areas are ALWAYS where the crime is because the population there does not have the time or resources to form a s…

> Your comment is really misguided.

I think you're reading something into my comment that isn't there, probably because the nature of this site lends itself to reply opposition. I'm not against police enforcement. I'm trying to say, this desire you speak of isn't visible.

While what you say is true about lower income residents, plenty of community groups who perform outreach to lower income communities show up and comment against the police. Pro-bono law forms, homeless volunteers, soup kitchen folks, they all claim that low-income people dislike the police.

All I'm saying is that this disconnect is frustrating. Fundamentally low-income people are just being spoken for. On this site it's high-income people who claim to know what low-income people think, and in public meetings it's community groups who claim to know what low-income people think. I myself grew up low-income but am high-income now and I'm wary (my skin color is dark) of but overall positive (I mean what's the alternative? Lawlessness?) toward the police, but again I'm a high-income earner in a high-income district.

All I can say with certainty is that cops are expensive and that nobody seems to be excited enough to secure the tax revenue needed to fund them. If the only point of contention here was policing attitudes that would be one thing, but transit agencies don't even have enough money to maintain service let alone hire officers.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#114

Post by jeffbee »

arnonejoe wrote: post #108

If you are commuting to SF in the morning from the east bay, there's the community driven east bay casual carpool. There used to be a pickup point at most of the east bay bart stations and the common drop off is at the corner of Fremont and Howard in soma. When I used to commute in, there were a few people in line and it only took a minute or two for the next car to pull up. It's a little weird at first to jump in a…

Nobody uses this any more. It is effectively not possible to cross the bay with the casual carpool. For the same reason nobody rides BART: those trips are not necessary these days.

https://www.kqed.org/news/11934347/will-casual-carpool-ever-....

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#116

Post by reducesuffering »

camel_gopher wrote: post #35

The core problem is assholes on the trains. People stopped riding because there’s either someone dangerous, someone crazy, or someone tweaked out. Literally on every Bart car, probably 2/3 of the time I ride. I end up using the Bart watch app to report this stuff every other time I ride. One guy tried to light a seat in fire. Another tailgated me through the gates and proceeded to push past me. Another was slumped ov…

> No ticket, no ride.

I've ridden BART sometimes recently, and they are much more aggressive about requiring tickets and making freeloaders exit now. Feels like they're cracking down.

I haven't had an unsafe experience yet, while I have been attempted carjacking. Granted that was at midnight, a time I wouldn't try to ride BART. And I would probably avoid most stations at night, especially Civic Center anytime.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#117

Post by throwaway2037 »

ghaff wrote: post #36
ramesh31 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>BART is unique in that historically it paid most of its costs in farebox revenue. Because it's expensive as hell, and the only sane option for commuting into the city during rush hour. A $10 round trip to go 5 miles from the east bay to downtown is absolutely crazy. Easily double the price of any other metro in the US.

Not if you compare to commuter rail. I'm further out but if you look at commuter rail parking, the train itself, and subway if I need to take it, I'm $35 to commute into Boston for the day. (If I do it every day, the pass is a bit cheaper.) Yes, if I don't need to park at the subway and don't need to take commuter rail, it's about $5 but that's not really the norm for a lot of people coming in from the suburbs.

    I'm $35 to commute into Boston for the day
Jesus! Between what stations? That is a crazy fare.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#118

Post by throwaway2037 »

ramesh31 wrote: post #28
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #2

As the article states, the reason why BART is so heavily impacted is because it was mostly designed as commuter rail. BART is unique in that historically it paid most of its costs in farebox revenue. While peak-hour (morning and evening commute) ridership is catching up again (BART publishes numbers so you can check the work here), usage outside of peak hours is at an all-time low because of the increase of WFH jobs.…

>BART is unique in that historically it paid most of its costs in farebox revenue. Because it's expensive as hell, and the only sane option for commuting into the city during rush hour. A $10 round trip to go 5 miles from the east bay to downtown is absolutely crazy. Easily double the price of any other metro in the US.

I like when people complain about metro fares. What would the equivalent cost (and speed!) of driving be? Remember that you will need to pay for parking. The answer: Much more than 10 USD, and much longer than BART.

Also, I checked the fare between Powell Station and 12th / Oakland, it is 3.85 USD one way. So, 7.70 USD round trip. Crossing the bay twice at 100 km/h is pretty cheap at that price.

Re: BART ridership is still down nearly 70% from pre-Covid levels

#120

Post by jandrese »

bombcar wrote: post #50
ars wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I rode the DC metro with family because I was warned about parking and traffic in DC. BIG MISTAKE! On the second day I took a car, and it took 1/3 the time, and 1/10 the cost EVEN with searching and paying for parking. Public transit should be free.

Farebox recovery is so damn low that I can only think the fares remain as an excuse to kick homeless and other undesirables off who aren’t technically breaking any rules or laws.

As if the bums don't just jump the gate every time.
Post reply on HN