Possible NJ Transit Fare Increase and Service Cuts

Fares go up all over, on Metro North, this Sunday, March 22, 2015, including on lines west of the Hudson River. The new faes are already in our NJT ticket vending and ticket office machines.

The cost comparison between driving and public transportation is best based on the IRS allowed mileage rate for business use. The IRS is not known for being lavish in allowing excessive deductions. The costs included in the IRS rate are: "The standard mileage rate for business is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating an automobile, including depreciation, insurance, repairs, tires, maintenance, gas and oil." This is what the average automobile costs to operate. Note that there is no mention of tolls or parking lot costs in the IRS description so those need to be added if they would be incurred by the motorist.

The IRS rate for 2015 is 57.5 cents per mile. So for someone who drives 20 miles each way to work 5 days a week, i.e., 200 miles per week the cost (if no tolls or parking) is $115 according to the IRS allowance. Note that driving incurs greater risk of personal injury than the train and on the train other tasks can be performed, such as reading for work or pleasure, etc. so there are non-economic considerations as well.

philipmartin wrote:Fares go up all over, on Metro North, this Sunday, March 22, 2015, including on lines west of the Hudson River. The new faes are already in our NJT ticket vending and ticket office machines.

NJT didn't put a notice on its website about hold-down fares going up - that's still planned to happen, right?

Indeed they did...

http://www.njtransit.com/sa/sa_servlet. ... iceId=2406" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I used to use that (reading etc) as a benefit for taking the train and it works most of the time. However, at the end of the day (work or otherwise) I just want to get home. No sense in adding to the travel burden if the train (& all its associated connections NJT or not) takes 2+ hours w a SEC transfer vs 50 minutes by driving, no matter how much reading I can do (I cannot really nap comfortably since i have to get off at intermediate stops on both trains.) Sure owning a car is expensive, but how many can do away with them? (If you drive more than 7,500 miles a year, the insurance rate is the same.) Time is equally as important as money. Moreover, my schedule almost never matches with the PVL schedule (they somehow put in 2 hour windows right when it's time for me to come home on the weekends for example and service does not exist in the NY direction after 4pm). The next closest station is on the BCL but even then there are no guarantees and it is 15 minutes from my house. Since I am not a daily commuter, it will certainly be an easier decision for me if I have to pay more than I do now.

Ken W2KB wrote: The IRS rate for 2015 is 57.5 cents per mile. So for someone who drives 20 miles each way to work 5 days a week, i.e., 200 miles per week the cost (if no tolls or parking) is $115 according to the IRS allowance. Note that driving incurs greater risk of personal injury than the train and on the train other tasks can be performed, such as reading for work or pleasure, etc. so there are non-economic considerations as well.

Well if you add tolls and parking, wear and tear of the car, increased gas usage from traffic then I think the costs will be pretty comparable to NJT. Plus of course driving in New Jersey's rush hour traffic is dangerous, stressful and in general bad for person's mental well being. At least in my opinion. Also, you have to consider the harsh winters that we had this year and last, Even a moderate snow fall creates an absolute havoc on the highways. Trains sometimes have moderate delays but nothing approaching what happens on higways when it snows.

Public agencies are being more "safety aware" in severe weather nowdays, so trains are more apt to be canceled or put on an alternate/improvised schedule based on what administrators feel is best. It isn't just about the trains moving. You need people to fuel locomotives, punch tickets, and operate the controls ot move the equipment, as well as folks that have the job of fixing any problems with physical plant or traction or signal power. That said, i'd much rather be on a train than in an automobile if i need to get somewhere. I've done just that in many a severe winter situation and have not regretted it at all.

I am not sure what goes on in the minds in trenton or elsewhere in NJ, but it seems unfair (to me) that the people taking traffic off the road be made to pay more with no gas tax increase. It's like rewarding people for being part of the traffic jam in my mind. Maybe it's just me and i'm crazy.

Amtrak7 wrote:

philipmartin wrote:Fares go up all over, on Metro North, this Sunday, March 22, 2015, including on lines west of the Hudson River. The new faes are already in our NJT ticket vending and ticket office machines.

NJT didn't put a notice on its website about hold-down fares going up - that's still planned to happen, right?

The new fares, (except the ORTs,) are in the website: go to "schedules and fares," select stations, view schedule. Fares are at the bottom.

They haven't changed the paper schedules, so if you go to the PDF schedules, they show the old prices.

What a world we're in where SEPTA is the poster child in the region for financial solvency, with the recent Act 89 and fare increases based on inflation being predetermined and written into the tariffs.

Funding policy aside, SEPTA has always done better than most at spending wisely and not burying itself in debt.

SCB2525 wrote:Funding policy aside, SEPTA has always done better than most at spending wisely and not burying itself in debt.

I think a solid argument could me made against that, in the relevant forum.

The WSJ reports that the fare hike is proposed to be 9%. I wonder how much ridership they will lose with gas being as cheap as it is now? I would have thought that making the current fares off-peak and the new peak fares 15% higher was a much better option.

EuroStar wrote:The WSJ reports that the fare hike is proposed to be 9%. I wonder how much ridership they will lose with gas being as cheap as it is now? I would have thought that making the current fares off-peak and the new peak fares 15% higher was a much better option.

Who knows how much longer gas will be cheap. It's already gone to over $2.

morris&essex4ever wrote:

EuroStar wrote:The WSJ reports that the fare hike is proposed to be 9%. I wonder how much ridership they will lose with gas being as cheap as it is now? I would have thought that making the current fares off-peak and the new peak fares 15% higher was a much better option.

Who knows how much longer gas will be cheap. It's already gone to over $2.

It's still 75% it was a year ago.

So, i'm confused.... i just checked trenton to new york prices and it's the same.... what gives?