Union-Tribune editorial:
[...] state Sen. Catherine Blakespear, D-Encinitas, treats the declining demand for transit as secondary to what she calls its status as a “fundamental public benefit.”
So much for the idea that public goods still have to be used to justify their cost — especially when subsidies rise even as usage falls. She does, however, acknowledge that the pandemic has made it far more common for people to work from home and says “transportation patterns must adapt” to this fact.
Uh, senator, they did! Many people happily gave up on this “fundamental public benefit,” welcoming not having to spend an hour a day or more going to and from work. The private sector has figured out that people like working from home. This is why construction of new office buildings has plunged and why CNBC reported last year that more office space is being removed than added in the U.S. for the first time in at least 25 years. CEOs have “updated their priors” and grasped the evidence that 2019 isn’t coming back.
But for many government officials who are spending taxpayer money and don’t have shareholders to worry about, their belief in public transit is unwavering. So what if it needs more than 80% in subsidies, year in and year out, and soon maybe 90%. Transit is inherently good and cars are inherently bad. And if a great majority of Californians disagree, tough luck for them.
In related news. the subsidies have become so budget-busting that NCTD wants to raise fares on the already ultra-low-ridership buses and trains:
