Northern Light
Superstar
I don't mind a contrary argument, in as much as I like the idea of a streamlined fare structure (no discounts for seniors or teens) but reduce the adult (new everyone) fare price. The argument is that its easier to understand, has better fairness perception, for the preceding reasons, its also likely to have lower fare evasion and easier detection/enforcement against same.
My thing here is, the argument needs to be made for the right reasons, not to 'save' money strictly by penalizing those w/young kids, but rather as part of a program to genuinely improve efficiency and reinvest those savings in better service and lower fares.
Because children 12 and under were already very heavily discounted, there is very little to be gained by reinstating 'child fares'. That's what made the promise so appealing is that it was very affordable.
I would argue for something more like this:
3 and under is free; everyone else pays an identical fare of $2.75 and there's a 40-ride monthly cap ($110 a month). Note that this is cheaper than the current low income pass, cheaper than the current seniors pass and cheaper than current student pass. So its not punitive to low income earners or to families.
It would mean an increase for those with children 12 and under obviously; though if its a 2-adult household, and both are regular riders, the adult savings my scheme almost certainly saves each adult at least $40 per month or $80 for the couple, while costing no more than $110 for the child.
****
For all of the above, I don't think its a priority; I simply like something I see as less cumbersome, more affordable to most singles and families and that just seems more logical to me.
Anyone wanting to cut it just to save on taxes will find my sympathies lie elsewhere.
