General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Nuggets of note from the MBTA Web Site:

There is a public meeting (with comment period) on the "Rail Vision" project on Thursday at 10:00 am. This is the study looking at regional rail, electrification, freqency, etc.

The FCMB has the Red-Blue Connector on its agenda for next week AND looking at constructability for a date TBD
 
Very interesting that it busts the old myth that the Orange Line was named for Orange Street. That one was always a lot fishier than the fairly intuitive Harvard-->Crimson-->Red, Emerald Necklace-->Green, Harbor-->Blue origins.
 
An interesting interview with the two guys who created the "T" logo and design manual for the new MBTA in the 60s.

https://www.citylab.com/design/2018/09/how-boston-got-its-t/570004/

The T's graphic system is one of the underappreciated gems of the city. It is one of the things that defines my childhood as a Bostonian. Completely timeless, the signage will look just as modern 30 years from now.

I do find myself disagreeing with them about the rolling stock, though. I think it helps wayfinding to have the trains liveried according to their line, especially as the T's architecture gets more varied. No confusion as to what line you're on when the red train comes out of the tunnel.
 
Van,
Thanks for the great article on the MBTA graphics. I think they are near perfect for the transit system. The only regret is that not enough of the pre-T graphics were preserved off-site. A lot of the old wall maps and station signs were rich with the history of the pre-MBTA systems: BERY and the old MTA. Unfortunately many of tem were lost, as historical preservation wasn't a prominent practice in the 1960's.
 
An interesting interview with the two guys who created the "T" logo and design manual for the new MBTA in the 60s.

https://www.citylab.com/design/2018/09/how-boston-got-its-t/570004/

Awesome article. Also interesting to learn that orange was picked for no particular reason… I have read elsewhere that orange was picked because part of the downtown portion of Washington Street was once long ago called Orange St and this was an homage to that. That explanation always sounded extraordinarily obscure.
 
Great ideas on raising revenue for a strapped transit system.

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/strapped-to-the-status-quo-express/

Raise fares to pay for the system. Subsidize fares for the poor through welfare and the middle class through tax breaks and not through subsidized fares to obscure the real cost of the system. Putting more of the power of the purse back into people's hands is the only way to ensure that the transit system is responsive to the needs of paying riders and then transit expansion is about economics again and less about politics.
 
"Subsidize fares for the poor through welfare and the middle class through tax breaks"
I think many tax payers only work with the 1040 EZ form that doesn't break out transportation deductions.
 
"Subsidize fares for the poor through welfare and the middle class through tax breaks"
I think many tax payers only work with the 1040 EZ form that doesn't break out transportation deductions.

It would be MA Form 1, which has a commuter deduction section in Schedule Y, Line 15.

But you can never pay for a system through fares and thus the tax break approach is no good. Fares aren't a sustainable source of funding. Have to work with the much bigger picture ideas that Jim discusses in the piece.
 
Last edited:
Raise fares to pay for the system. Subsidize fares for the poor through welfare and the middle class through tax breaks and not through subsidized fares to obscure the real cost of the system. Putting more of the power of the purse back into people's hands is the only way to ensure that the transit system is responsive to the needs of paying riders and then transit expansion is about economics again and less about politics.

Seems to fly in the face of the purpose of public transit, and I can't think of any system world wide that covers itself on fares alone with no subsidies. Also, that would very much hurt the lower class if they have to pay the upfront costs and wait until the end of the year to get it back via tax refund.
 
Why would you want to subsidize the poorer ends of the income spectrum? I’m inclined to think the the wealthier you are, the more you’re likely to conteibute to congestion.
 
Employers rely on a mobile, available talent pool, and demand a 5-day office hours week but mostly have externalized the cost of commuting to workers, road users, and real estate owners. In general our roads are most boken at commute times (and because employers still demand too-rigid 9 to 5 ish hours). I would like a tax paid by rigid (peak-forming) employers.

Virginia replaced its gas excise with a small wholesale tax and all the rest was income tax.

The theory was that work commuters whose time was most valuable also suffered the most from congestion time, and were the appropriate people to ask for jam relief. Suburban dwelling office workers were the high wage people who were jamming everything up and demanding better commute hour infrastructure

Rural Republican reps liked this too--they got a progressive break on the regressive gas tax for their rural-wage and car dependent constituents, and saw the burden of income tax imposed/shifted onto Lexus Liberals in the Washington inner burbs the exurbs had asked: why am I paying an excise tax for traffic relief when my area is not growing or subject to jams. Answer: they won't.

It was also the right deal for lower income retired folks, who might drive alot, but who do not drive at congested times (they are not creating rush hour jams).
 
Last edited:
Raise fares to pay for the system. Subsidize fares for the poor through welfare and the middle class through tax breaks and not through subsidized fares to obscure the real cost of the system. Putting more of the power of the purse back into people's hands is the only way to ensure that the transit system is responsive to the needs of paying riders and then transit expansion is about economics again and less about politics.

There's a problem with putting power into the people's hands. There's too many different voices.
 
So, dictatorship then?

Nope. But there is a reason we are a (representative) democratic republic and not a pure democracy.

All issues up for vote by the entirety of the registered voters would lead to craziness and nothing would ever get done.

This is why we vote for representatives.
 
Automate....automate.....automate.......

The solution is to get rid of most of these jobs and their bloated pensions and regain human progress.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...keolis-says/J8nKOusNrOuqmMf1HF6d9H/story.html

"By John R. Ellement GLOBE STAFF SEPTEMBER 26, 2018
Train 804 did not leave from Providence as scheduled on Wednesday - because the crew was late for work, according to Keolis Commuter Services.

The contractor for the MBTA’s commuter rail service posted a bland statement about the schedule change on the T’s service alert page and on the Twitter account maintained by Keolis....."
 

Back
Top