• Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 month ago

    They spent 1500x more on enforcement than they could have ever recovered from fare evaders. Just like every single other monitoring and enforcement program for public services.

    Has there ever been a single program like that which is actually a net positive? Fare enforcement, food stamps means testing, public services with drug screens, “welfare queen” check ups, means testing, etc. I’m not aware of a single instance where it wouldn’t have been cheaper just to let a few people get benefits that “didn’t deserve them” than putting these restrictions in place

    But God’s forbid we let poor people have nice things, or just to do good things for our society. Goddamned toxic puritanicalism. …

    • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      Absolutely right. Brings to mind something I read a while ago which I will paraphrase.

      “Liberals want everyone to get what they need even if a few cheat the system. Conservatives want nobody to get what they need if there’s a chance anyone will cheat the system.”

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      Somebody on Lemmy a while back asked about the phrase, “the cruelty is the point,” and whether it was true and fair. Well, here’s the evidence: The point is not a net gain on fare collections.

      The fact that the numbers are public and they keep doing it proves it: The cruelty is the point.