Metro Threatening Cuts

[fauxklore]

Ridership may be up, but so are costs and, hence, shortfalls. They're talking major cuts - like no train service after 10 p.m., which would be a real killer for those of us who sometimes do things like, say, going to the theatre after work.

But why worry about what Metro will do, when you can write haiku about it:

Instead of cutting
out train service after 10,
I suggest more ads.


They are also talking about running non-rush hour trains 30 minutes apart. Given how long I waited to change trains at L'enfant Plaza after going to the theatre tonight, I might pose this theological question:

Would the messiah
be able to make metro
run efficiently?

Comments

[mortuus.livejournal.com]

I'm hoping these are just worst-case-scenario threats to get what they want. If much of this is enacted, I suddenly see myself driving my car everywhere (along with everyone else who abandons Metro because they become nearly useless).

[fauxklore]

I think they're talking extremes to get the jurisdictions to pony up more money. But I really do think they haven't tried hard enough to get other sources of revenue. For example, while there is more than there used to be, transit here has a lot less advertising than there is on any other transit system I've used.

The real problem is, of course, the lack of a dedicated funding source for Metro.

[gregbo.livejournal.com]

Why put up more ads?
There will not be more shoppers
Bad economy

[fauxklore]

Metro ads tend to
be for things like fighter planes,
not consumer goods