What’s the proof of this? No one has ever eliminated poverty, so how can we know if that would eliminate the vast majority of crime?

It also depends on how you define poverty. Is it a specific income level? Is it the ability to afford the necessities but not the luxuries? The terminology needs to be explicitly defined.

Crime is not strongly related to poverty. Rich people commit crime too.

Crime comes down to upbringing and family structure. When the home is rotten, society becomes a little more rotten.

Those are completely different still. Those are services that apply to all people.

Train use is something that varies from person to person. While almost everyone in Manhattan uses them, the frequency of use varies from person to person. Therefore, there needs to be a cost associated with frequency.

Not only should people pay, the amount they pay should be based on the location they are traveling to. This is how all major cities in Europe such as London do it. You pay for what you use and the amount you pay depends on where you go. And they have far better public transportation services than the MTA.

People who use the trains a handful of times should not pay the same tax rate as people that use trains multiple times a day.

Free public transportation eventually results in shitty public transportation and eventually no public transportation. You think the trains are bad now? Wait until there is literally no barrier to entry/use.

People should pay for the services they use. That’s how it is in Europe and Japan, and they are lightyears ahead of the US in terms of public transport.

Good. This sub is indistinguishable from /r/fuckcars

Maybe people would use the MTA if it weren’t a raging, corrupt shithole that didn’t take an hour to go between boroughs and didn’t smell like piss all the fucking time.

The MTA is a blackhole of funding. Millions of dollars to replace a fucking staircase, are you fucking kiding me

Sovereignty and the rule of law are infinitely more important than a “holistic view”.