• CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fortunately none of them died as far as I can find. Surgeons had to crack open the skull of the bystander they shot in the back of the head to relieve his brain swelling though. I hope he recovers because he’s gonna be set for life.

      They spent 150 million on overtime for cops to stop fare evasion. How much were they losing in fares? I’m gonna go ahead and guess it wasn’t even a teeny fraction of that.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        They spent 1500x more on enforcement than they could have ever recovered from fare evaders. Just like every single other monitoring and enforcement program for public services.

        Has there ever been a single program like that which is actually a net positive? Fare enforcement, food stamps means testing, public services with drug screens, “welfare queen” check ups, means testing, etc. I’m not aware of a single instance where it wouldn’t have been cheaper just to let a few people get benefits that “didn’t deserve them” than putting these restrictions in place

        But God’s forbid we let poor people have nice things, or just to do good things for our society. Goddamned toxic puritanicalism. …

        • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Somebody on Lemmy a while back asked about the phrase, “the cruelty is the point,” and whether it was true and fair. Well, here’s the evidence: The point is not a net gain on fare collections.

          The fact that the numbers are public and they keep doing it proves it: The cruelty is the point.

        • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Absolutely right. Brings to mind something I read a while ago which I will paraphrase.

          “Liberals want everyone to get what they need even if a few cheat the system. Conservatives want nobody to get what they need if there’s a chance anyone will cheat the system.”

        • falcunculus@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I disagree, the poor would be worse off without public transit since else it’d be much harder for them to move around. In fact many if not most public transit systems are subsidized and operate at a loss.

          The richer don’t use it and so care little, beyond the macro level that it benefits businesses and such.

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Public transit never turns a profit, not because it’s bad business but simply down to the economics of providing affordable transit. In fact, fares recover such a small percentage of a public transit agency’s budget that there’s good arguments being made for making public transit fare free. Public transit is a net good for communities so making it as accessible to those who want or need it is important

          • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think you may have missed his point. He wasn’t arguing against public transit, just the fare. It should be free. For the reasons you yourself mentioned.

    • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The fun part is of the 4 people shot, only the one had skipped the fare. Two were bystanders, one was another cop.