> The study found that more people would pay, yes, but the cost of
> making them pay would be higher than the revenue from extra fares
> collected. Much higher. The least expensive alternative would cost the
> MTA $18.54 for each potential fare dollar recovered over a 10-year
> period. In other words, if $1 million is currently lost to fare
> evasion, it would cost at least $18.5 million to collect that money.
This is encouraging news. If you live in Washington, DC, and probably most hard rail public transit systems, you may have seen the "money train" making the rounds in the evening hours. I've always wondered how much it costs to collect allo of that coin and cash for fares. The D.C. Metro system even has its own station for the money train, which I understand is near the Pentagon in Arlington.
The last bit about how expensive it is to catch fare dodgers is hilarious. This may be why more retail chains are going with a "no chase" policy on shoplifters. The main reason for these policies is legal--the chains don't want employees attacking customers over a few shoplifted items. I was reading last night that Blockbuster video has a "no chase" policy. It's been widely known in underground circles for years that Barnes & Noble has a no chase policy.
I suspect that this attitude towards fare collection may spill over into the library world, at least when it comes to security. When I was in New York last April, a library friend told me that a local university library had removed their book theft detection equipment. My friend didn't have an explanation, but doing it to save money makes sense. You also have to wonder how many books would be stolen from university libraries these days.
Chuck