By: C Icart, Staff Writer
Hear me out: public transit should be free. There are virtually no downsides to this, and places that have tried it, like cities in the US and Europe, report positive changes.
The initial reaction folks tend to have on this proposition is to ask how we’d pay for it. After all, just because it would be free for riders doesn’t mean there are no costs associated with public transit. Wouldn’t this just end up increasing our taxes? Not necessarily.
Sure, the initial cost of subsidizing free transit would probably be relatively high. However, it may be cheaper in the long run than the “total social cost and externalities of using cars,” including pollution and road repairs.
The discomfort from politicians and policymakers makes sense to me, but the pushback I get from regular people who would greatly benefit from free transit is perplexing. I like how Free Transit Ottawa puts it: think of this as an investment, not a cost. There are effective ways to fund free transit, including reallocating the way current tax dollars are spent. Or, fare-free transit could be funded “by the federal and provincial governments largely through corporate and wealth taxes.” Free Transit Ottawa also found that even if transit were paid for on a municipal level through property taxes, it would still likely end up saving individuals money over what they’re currently spending on transit, driving, or ride-share apps.
In Luxembourg, where public transit has been entirely free for everyone since 2020, and in Germany, where transit was significantly discounted, they found that ridership increased. Policymakers worldwide are increasingly considering factors like “the severity of the climate crisis, the pandemic, and inflation,” and discovering that fare-free transit may be the way to go. That’s right, the benefits of fare-free transit are not only economic; it would also reduce social barriers and carbon emissions. Isn’t that worth investing in?
On top of that, it can increase the reliability of services by reducing boarding times, and improve quality of life for riders. For example, “Kansas City found the vast majority of riders have better access to food, healthcare, and jobs since fares were axed in 2019.” Riders mentioned that the Zero Fare initiative allowed them to exercise their “right to the city.”
Additionally free transit doesn’t favour the “whiter and more affluent” part of the city, like other transportation expansion projects. Free transit ensures Black residents aren’t just funding these projects, but also benefit from transit access themselves, helping to address some of these systemic barriers in the city.
Many readers of The Peak are students who pay for their U-Pass through tuition, and enjoy being able to visit all parts of the city by accessing transit an unlimited number of times. Wouldn’t it be great to continue having that feeling post-graduation, except this time with no fare at all? Free transit increases people’s mobility.
It’s also important to consider that folks who consistently use public transit tend to be disproportionately lower income. Why should they be funding transit and its improvements through fare hikes? For instance, disability assistance in BC is only up to $1,358.50 a month for a single person. So, even though this would make that person eligible for a transportation subsidy, they may choose to spend that money on other necessary expenses.
Letting people ride for free also helps curb the problem of criminalizing people who cannot pay for transit. It’s time to face the truth, “free transit is a poverty justice issue, a disability justice issue, and a racial justice issue.” I will add that it’s also a climate issue. The barriers to this solution are in our heads. It’s time to pressure politicians and policymakers to make transit fare-free, everywhere.
