Somewhere we discussed that ridership rose ~2% after the last ~5% hike. Don't hold me to exact numbers (all were single-digit %) but the point was that raising fares was supposed to cause a net lower ridership and something like only a 3% increase in revenues (fares up 5%, ridership down 3%) and instead revenues went up 8% (Fare hike + rising ridership)
From an economist's standpoint that says that the fare hike was too low--not extracting a pay-what-it-is-worth-to-you price from enough people.
From a public policy standpoint, Sec. Pollack wants higher fares (from those who can pay) and a better low-income pass program (to deliver mobility to those who cannot afford higher transportation costs but need to get to work and social services)
I'd like to see 15% higher rush&crush fares, and then better needs-based / off-peak / off-hours / counter-rush discounting (Transit is most valuable when cutting through rush hours and users at that time should pay. Meanwhile, it is hard for transit to compete with cars in any market where the cars are flowing freely. Lower prices would help transit better compete with cars at those times)
