4 ms·

If free attracts the "destitute and mentally ill", then probably we should be: 1) Not allowing anyone to be destitute and; 2) Also providing free and comprehe

• Rebelgecko 4y ago
  In my state there are both moral and legal roadblocks preventing that - except in extreme cases you can't force someone into treatment. You can write tickets for people who urinate or smoke on the trains but if someone has no assets there's really no point.
• supersour 4y ago
  I love this idea in theory, but recognize that you are moving the discussion from providing effective, safe, and equitable transportation towards solving homelessness. Both issues are important, but in the context of this article one must ask, "what is best for the majority of public transit users?". It's certainly possible that a $2 rate improves quality or security meaningful ways. The problem of "sketchy homeless and mentally ill people" is large enough that I personally prefer cycling over public transport when possible.
  • dools 4y ago
    > I love this idea in theory, but recognize that you are moving the discussion from providing effective, safe, and equitable transportation towards solving homelessness. Sure, but if the objection to "public transport should be free" is "then there will be a bunch of scary homeless people there" shouldn't be "let's charge enough so they can't ride the bus" it should be "hey let's fix that too!" We can fix two things. More even!
    • mixmastamyk 4y ago
      You would think, but obviously not happening. This quarter measure (enacted before prerequisites) makes it worse for the working poor. And anyone who is in favor of transit, tourists too, who are important for the economy.
• FormerBandmate 4y ago
  Great. Both of those things would make DC much better, I’m glad you have a simple solution to them
• za3faran 4y ago
  We should also be asking why are there so many mentally ill people to begin with, and also address that cause.