government pays for a service so that end users don't have to pay the full cost -> end users start using the service more than they otherwise would -> existing subsidy proves insufficient -> "raise taxes!"
-
-
Show this thread
-
this pattern is part of the reason that roads are in poor condition (lmfao if you think the gas tax covers the cost of maintaining--let alone expanding--our road network)
Show this thread -
there is a broader level in which induced demand is at play too--when gov actually overcomes people's reluctance to pay taxes and manages to raise them, new programs pop up to make use of new revenue
Show this thread -
There will always be things which lose money but are deemed social necessities--we can't just stop paying for them, even if they never pay for themselves. But paying for things which lose money relies on OTHER things MAKING money...
Show this thread -
...which is why it's essential for any program with its own revenue source (like transit wrt fares) to maximize that revenue source, and use as little subsidy as possible--best case scenario is for it to turn a profit, so it can contribute to subsidies for OTHER things
Show this thread -
Every dollar of transit operating cost that's paid for by transit fares is a dollar which doesn't need to come from the state, and can therefore go to other programs that are less capable of generating their own revenue...
Show this thread -
...moreover, this is the case even when transit is still state-operated. You don't need to be privatized to seek a profit!
Show this thread -
"Privatization vs Nationalization" is a misleading dichotomy--the one that matters is "are we trying to be solvent or not?"
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.