3 ms·

Again, every NJT commuter to NYC from NJ is subsidized by NJ to earn money in NYC and pay taxes to NYS. NJ's subsidization of NJT reduces the number of car trip

Again, every NJT commuter to NYC from NJ is subsidized by NJ to earn money in NYC and pay taxes to NYS. NJ's subsidization of NJT reduces the number of car trips into Manhattan dramatically. NJ commuters to NYC/NYS pay income tax to NYS and virtually nothing to NJ. The balance of payments deficit to NYS from NJ is in the range of $4 billion annually. I don't remember exactly what kind of operating subsidy NJT needs, but it's a heck of a lot less than $4 billion. NJ's entire state budget is around $50 billion. This is not a small, inconsequential issue, and downplaying its consequences is a little silly, to use your phrase. Also, NJ residents commuting to NYC don't just "do it to avoid city taxes". There are more commuters from NJ than there are open housing units in the 5 boroughs. NJ's housing stock and commuting infrastructure is a massive pressure relief valve on housing costs in NYC. Heck, NJ commuters would saturate every open housing unit in the boroughs, Long Island, Westchester, Southern Connecticut, and then some. Last thought. Manhattan is a massive job center in no small part because of its enormous access to talent inside and outside of the city - the outside the city talent uses mass transit on an enormous scale. NJ might look different without Manhattan there, but NYC would also look different if NJ wasn't there.

woodruffw 2y ago
> Again, every NJT commuter to NYC from NJ is subsidized by NJ to earn money in NYC and pay taxes to NYS. NJ's subsidization of NJT reduces the number of car trips into Manhattan dramatically. Agreed, and agreed. But the "why" is important: NJ subsidizes NJT because it keeps people living in the state, which has its own taxes. I don't mean to come off as stridently anti-NJ here -- I agree that the two are mutually interdependent, and that an abstractly fair congestion pricing deal would include funding for NJT as well (and not just MTA). But that's only half the story: NJ's pols have dug themselves into an "over our dead bodies" position on any amount of congestion charging, have failed to move NJT/MTA collaborative projects forwards, have fought NYS tooth and nail over Gateway's funding[2], and torpedoed their own NJT modernization and expansion projects[1]. In the status quo, my perspective as a NYer is that the MTA is (shambolically) moving towards a better status quo, while NJ digs in on a position that's ultimately incompatible with the region's long term livability and economic growth. I can't think of a good reason why it should be this way since, even at a deficit, both sides ultimately benefit from better commuter networks. (On a related note: I checked the 2025 NJ budget[3], and there's a $6B surplus forecasted. So I don't wholly understand why NJ is considering cutting NJT's budget by $600M[4], or why maintenance has been deferred for so long.) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_to_the_Region%27s_Core https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_to_the_Region%27s_Core [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Program_(Northeast_Corridor)#Funding_and_start_of_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Program_(Northeast_Cor... [3]: https://www.njlm.org/1280/2025-NJ-State-Budget https://www.njlm.org/1280/2025-NJ-State-Budget [4]: https://www.nj.com/news/2024/04/nj-transit-study-targets-600m-in-budget-cuts-expansion-and-reform.html https://www.nj.com/news/2024/04/nj-transit-study-targets-600...
- leetnewb 2y ago
  Few points but overall agree. 1. ARC was a bad project. Gateway was always going to be necessary even if ARC was completed. I'm skeptical that the region would get a second bite at the federal funding apple for Gateway if ARC was built. It's not even clear to me that Gateway's alignment would have been possible if ARC was built. 2. NJT defers maintenance because it funds its operating subsidy through the capital budget. It has at least since Chris Christie slashed the operating subsidy during the financial crisis (NJ budget was massively strained). 3. There were stories a few years ago about NJT problems holding onto train engineers. Trainees would generally leave for jobs at MTA, LIRR, and Amtrak that paid 30%+ more. Going back to that $2+ billion that commuting NJ residents pay to NYS - which presumably subsidizes MTA operations - it sort of looks like that structural tax issue is causing NJ residents to subsidize MTA salaries to the detriment of NJT. 4. Going back to the tax issue. NYS and NYC benefit from NJ commuter access. Building ARC or Gateway make it so NJ can send more commuters to NYC to pay taxes to NYS. Why should NJ pay anything for its construction? I'm generally supportive of congestion pricing. But I think NYC/NYS have a long history of treating NJ like a bedroom community that it has no responsibility toward. It doesn't have to after all - no votes, politicians will never care about non-constituents. But like, to impose another tax that meaningfully impacts NJ residents resides in the context of a deeply toxic, dysfunctional dynamic. NJ residents should rightfully be bothered.
  - woodruffw 2y ago
    > ARC was a bad project. Gateway was always going to be necessary even if ARC was completed. I'm skeptical that the region would get a second bite at the federal funding apple for Gateway if ARC was built. It's not even clear to me that Gateway's alignment would have been possible if ARC was built. This is a fair point, but was ARC actually canceled with the expectation that Gateway was going to be announced? That may have been what happened behind the scenes, but it isn't how it looked on the public side at the time: what I remember thinking at the time was that Chrisie unilaterally pulled NJ out of a joint project with no alternative. > There were stories a few years ago about NJT problems holding onto train engineers. Trainees would generally leave for jobs at MTA, LIRR, and Amtrak that paid 30%+ more. Going back to that $2+ billion that commuting NJ residents pay to NYS - which presumably subsidizes MTA operations - it sort of looks like that structural tax issue is causing NJ residents to subsidize MTA salaries to the detriment of NJT. I hadn't heard those stories about NJT struggling to hold on to talent, that's helpful context. That being said, I don't think that $2B+ is going directly to the MTA -- my understanding is that the MTA's tax inflows mostly come from the MCTMT[1], which is levied against employers. So it's not as though MTA money is coming directly out of NJ residents' pockets, although you could argue that a payroll tax indirectly suppresses their wages. > Going back to the tax issue. NYS and NYC benefit from NJ commuter access. Building ARC or Gateway make it so NJ can send more commuters to NYC to pay taxes to NYS. Why should NJ pay anything for its construction? IMO, the simplest reason is that it still makes NJ wealthier: good transit between NJ and NYC means further incentives for NYC residents to move across the river, and retains people already living in NJ (where they pay sales tax, real estate taxes, etc.). It also enables reverse flow: strong transit between the two brings NYers into Northern NJ for tourism and shopping (I have places that I want to go in Fort Lee, Hackensack, etc. that I don't bother with because NJT is a hassle). I think you're right about how NYC treats Northern NJ. But I also think this doesn't get better, for the reasons you've mentioned. Maybe that could be ameliorated over time by eliminating the state boundaries in the twos' transit networks, but I don't think either has any immediate political appetite for that beyond what already exists with PANYNJ. [1]: https://www.tax.ny.gov/bus/mctmt/emp.htm https://www.tax.ny.gov/bus/mctmt/emp.htm

woodruffw 2y ago

> Again, every NJT commuter to NYC from NJ is subsidized by NJ to earn money in NYC and pay taxes to NYS. NJ's subsidization of NJT reduces the number of car trips into Manhattan dramatically. Agreed, and agreed. But the "why" is important: NJ subsidizes NJT because it keeps people living in the state, which has its own taxes. I don't mean to come off as stridently anti-NJ here -- I agree that the two are mutually interdependent, and that an abstractly fair congestion pricing deal would include funding for NJT as well (and not just MTA). But that's only half the story: NJ's pols have dug themselves into an "over our dead bodies" position on any amount of congestion charging, have failed to move NJT/MTA collaborative projects forwards, have fought NYS tooth and nail over Gateway's funding[2], and torpedoed their own NJT modernization and expansion projects[1]. In the status quo, my perspective as a NYer is that the MTA is (shambolically) moving towards a better status quo, while NJ digs in on a position that's ultimately incompatible with the region's long term livability and economic growth. I can't think of a good reason why it should be this way since, even at a deficit, both sides ultimately benefit from better commuter networks. (On a related note: I checked the 2025 NJ budget[3], and there's a $6B surplus forecasted. So I don't wholly understand why NJ is considering cutting NJT's budget by $600M[4], or why maintenance has been deferred for so long.) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_to_the_Region%27s_Core https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_to_the_Region%27s_Core [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Program_(Northeast_Corridor)#Funding_and_start_of_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Program_(Northeast_Cor... [3]: https://www.njlm.org/1280/2025-NJ-State-Budget https://www.njlm.org/1280/2025-NJ-State-Budget [4]: https://www.nj.com/news/2024/04/nj-transit-study-targets-600m-in-budget-cuts-expansion-and-reform.html https://www.nj.com/news/2024/04/nj-transit-study-targets-600...

leetnewb 2y ago
Few points but overall agree. 1. ARC was a bad project. Gateway was always going to be necessary even if ARC was completed. I'm skeptical that the region would get a second bite at the federal funding apple for Gateway if ARC was built. It's not even clear to me that Gateway's alignment would have been possible if ARC was built. 2. NJT defers maintenance because it funds its operating subsidy through the capital budget. It has at least since Chris Christie slashed the operating subsidy during the financial crisis (NJ budget was massively strained). 3. There were stories a few years ago about NJT problems holding onto train engineers. Trainees would generally leave for jobs at MTA, LIRR, and Amtrak that paid 30%+ more. Going back to that $2+ billion that commuting NJ residents pay to NYS - which presumably subsidizes MTA operations - it sort of looks like that structural tax issue is causing NJ residents to subsidize MTA salaries to the detriment of NJT. 4. Going back to the tax issue. NYS and NYC benefit from NJ commuter access. Building ARC or Gateway make it so NJ can send more commuters to NYC to pay taxes to NYS. Why should NJ pay anything for its construction? I'm generally supportive of congestion pricing. But I think NYC/NYS have a long history of treating NJ like a bedroom community that it has no responsibility toward. It doesn't have to after all - no votes, politicians will never care about non-constituents. But like, to impose another tax that meaningfully impacts NJ residents resides in the context of a deeply toxic, dysfunctional dynamic. NJ residents should rightfully be bothered.
- woodruffw 2y ago
  > ARC was a bad project. Gateway was always going to be necessary even if ARC was completed. I'm skeptical that the region would get a second bite at the federal funding apple for Gateway if ARC was built. It's not even clear to me that Gateway's alignment would have been possible if ARC was built. This is a fair point, but was ARC actually canceled with the expectation that Gateway was going to be announced? That may have been what happened behind the scenes, but it isn't how it looked on the public side at the time: what I remember thinking at the time was that Chrisie unilaterally pulled NJ out of a joint project with no alternative. > There were stories a few years ago about NJT problems holding onto train engineers. Trainees would generally leave for jobs at MTA, LIRR, and Amtrak that paid 30%+ more. Going back to that $2+ billion that commuting NJ residents pay to NYS - which presumably subsidizes MTA operations - it sort of looks like that structural tax issue is causing NJ residents to subsidize MTA salaries to the detriment of NJT. I hadn't heard those stories about NJT struggling to hold on to talent, that's helpful context. That being said, I don't think that $2B+ is going directly to the MTA -- my understanding is that the MTA's tax inflows mostly come from the MCTMT[1], which is levied against employers. So it's not as though MTA money is coming directly out of NJ residents' pockets, although you could argue that a payroll tax indirectly suppresses their wages. > Going back to the tax issue. NYS and NYC benefit from NJ commuter access. Building ARC or Gateway make it so NJ can send more commuters to NYC to pay taxes to NYS. Why should NJ pay anything for its construction? IMO, the simplest reason is that it still makes NJ wealthier: good transit between NJ and NYC means further incentives for NYC residents to move across the river, and retains people already living in NJ (where they pay sales tax, real estate taxes, etc.). It also enables reverse flow: strong transit between the two brings NYers into Northern NJ for tourism and shopping (I have places that I want to go in Fort Lee, Hackensack, etc. that I don't bother with because NJT is a hassle). I think you're right about how NYC treats Northern NJ. But I also think this doesn't get better, for the reasons you've mentioned. Maybe that could be ameliorated over time by eliminating the state boundaries in the twos' transit networks, but I don't think either has any immediate political appetite for that beyond what already exists with PANYNJ. [1]: https://www.tax.ny.gov/bus/mctmt/emp.htm https://www.tax.ny.gov/bus/mctmt/emp.htm