The Mariners paid Metro a $159,000 subsidy to offer the service last year. This year Starline asked for $300,000 for a similar service. I don’t know what the differnce would have been in the level of service offered or in the cost to riders.

So according to this poorly spell checked PI blurb, “up to 1000 fans” would use the service, and the Times has it as low as 300 passengers per game.
Call it 500 per game. 82 homes games means 41000 passengers hauled over the year. They can’t all sit in the $8 seats, but let’s say they all pay no more than $16 for a seat, average it out to $12 per passenger and assume they spend $0 while at the game (they don’t even buy Dippin’ Dots!).
The Ms will be making nearly half-a-million dollars off of their converted Starline fans. Minus the subsidy of $300000, then I guess it’s less.
Is this a situation of “we’re not happy unless we make a bunch of money, and if we don’t, it ain’t worth it” for the Mariners’ behalf? I mean, yes it is lame that the Ms were forced between a rock and a hard place (and that the fans and surrounding commuters suffer) but could they not pick up the Starline contract, bite the bullet, and at least offer something? Not ideal, but making the best out of a crap situation. Or do the dollars and cents not lineup enough in their favor? The sucky part (one of many) would be the cost to the riders, though.

Except it was partially subsidized by the government. Basically, the Ms were getting a sweet deal. The profitability of this program was likely quite nice. (Remember, less money spent on parking = more money spent on Ivar Dogs.)

Not willing to pay what is probably a rounding error on their budget smacks of “we’re taking our ball and going home, unless we get more subsidies” – either directly through Metro, or having the city/county/state government subsidize a (different) commercial enterprise.

Then again, I’m not planning on attending any games this year, so the lack of a shuttle doesn’t affect me.

This isn’t a public subsidy. It’s the M’s paying, out of pocket, for something that does wider good. I don’t see how this is particularly applicable in a social justice debate unless you’re saying that… well, again, I’m not sure how this is applicable.

When shuttle buses take game traffic off the road, it benefits all of us in the area, including those who need to use the freeways and bridges to and through downtown, which are overly clogged as it is.

Derek is clear that this benefits non-M’s attendees in that it reduces congestion and traffic, which under normal circumstances most people seem to treat as a pretty central function of local government.

Yes, but by how much? I think you guys are overestimating the marginal external benefit of subisdized bus service to Mariners’ games. The key terms being marginal and external. And the next question is whether or not the subsidy amount matches this external benefit. Perhaps it’d be better to say the answer is not as clearcut as how I or Derek have argued.

The 545 benefits Microsoft employees rather than society as a whole. the 28 express benefits people who live in East Ballard and work 9-5 jobs downtown and not society as a whole. Etc etc etc.

The existence of one special interest subsidy doesn’t justify the existence of others.

If you have philosophical objections to the very idea of public transit, you probably won’t find this persuasive. But for the rest of us, it sucks.

None of my objections are grounded in philosophy, which I hope is clear. My purpose in providing a (lone?) dissenting voice is to get the fine readers of ussmariner.com to look beyond their own self-interest when discussing policy, as such thinking poisons typical discussions of how governments should allocate tax revenue. Yes, it sucks for Mariners’ fans who ride buses (a group in which I belong), as did the city’s refusal to fund the Sonics’ new stadium sucked for Sonics fans. But we need to look beyond that.

The government provides a pretty significant service to rich people: systems of laws and force backing them that allows people to accumulate property.

Yes, but property rights enforcement is a small portion of governmental appropriations. And even then, most beneficiaries of our system of laws are the middle class. Anyway, it’s still a bogus argument to say that the middle class should be the beneficiaries of tax money since it’s “their” money. For one, it’s not “their” money. For two, it’s the upper class that pays most of it. For three, most people would find it an injustice if the upper class received most of the government’s subsidies, despite most of the money originating from them.

Public transportation to something the public wants to attend in large numbers, in a publicly financed stadium, isn’t justified under “modern progressivism”? Just what’s your definition of modern progressivism? Consciousness-raising sessions?

Progressivism emphasizes redistribution from the upper/middle class to the lower class. The subsidies being discussed here are clearly not that.

Thus, the comment that “a significant majority of taxes is paid by the upper class” is ignorant.

Rich people consume more than middle class people. Also, property taxes. Also, gross receipts taxes. Also, it’d be better to look at the numbers: http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/wa%20pr.pdf . After some calculations, I find that the top 20% pay 42% of Washington’s sales and property taxes. The top 40% pay 64%. This doesn’t include gross receipts taxes, which are paid by corporations. Not a “significant majority,” but I had in mind federal income tax when I said that phrase, not Washington state tax; regardless, the point still stands.

The metro for the last few years, has provided a alternative to keep people who have consumed to much booze off the road. That seems like a “society” issue. “Society” best interest = metro transit

You mean the FTA is blaming Congress and the Mariners? Wow, couldn’t see that coming. I think I know what will happen when I write to my Congress person…they’ll blame the FTA (and the opposing political party) and the Mariners. Then, when I complain to the Mariners, they’ll blame the Congress and the FTA.

I actually send e-mails to my congressman and senators full of expletives, rude comments and insults and get a kick out of the generated responses- “Thanks so much for contacting me about yor concerns involving (fill in the blank so it mirror sht esubject line of the email). We are working hard to (fill in blank so it mirrors subject line of email). In recent months I have (fill in blank with mindless proposed legislation, half of which is off-topic). Hope all is well in Tacoma (Patty Murray signs off her generated e-mails by hoping all is well in the city the e-mail originated in. Gives it a personal touch to deceive the reader into thinking someone actually read the e-mail.)”