If you think bicyclists need to pay their fare share, you should rejoice - they already are! Local roads are mostly funded from the general fund and sales taxes, which everyone pays. Gas taxes mostly fund the interstates and state highway system.
And bicyclists take up a lot less space and put much less wear and tear on the roads, so drivers are getting a great deal! (otherwise known as a subsidy)
San Francisco simply doesn't have enough housing for all of the workers here, and there's so much demand already that rents and housing costs are going through the roof. We shouldn't be demanding that companies make more employees to move to SF when we don't have the housing to accommodate them.
Not to mention that SF's unemployment rate is already the second-lowest in the state. We just need to train the folks who have been left behind by the tech economy for the jobs that are being created here.
AC Transit's Transbay buses are actually more expensive than BART for anyone coming from Oakland or Berkeley, which really doesn't make sense because many of the bus routes have extra capacity (and it's certainly cheaper to add more buses across the bridge than to add physical capacity at BART stations).
A BART peak surcharge (or looked at another way, an off-peak discount) instead of just an across-the-board fare hike next time could help even out bus vs. train fares. It would also encourage more people to use transit for non-work trips outside rush hours when many seats are empty.
Wow. Can we get a moderator, please? Who knew we were in the deep south circa 1960?
When can I finally use Clipper on the Oakland AirBART? Is BART just trying to convince me that the bus is a pain and I need a $500 million slow train to the airport instead?
The San Francisco Examiner
Website powered by Foundation