←back to thread

A computer upgrade shut down BART

(www.bart.gov)
232 points ksajadi | 1 comments | 05 Sep 25 14:52 UTC | HN request time: 0.201s | source
Show context
ninetyninenine ◴[05 Sep 25 18:21 UTC] No.45141839[source]▶
I mean despite it's history the snark is well deserved. With so many companies and people in the bay paying taxes, where the hell does all the money go?

Interesting, tidbit you added here. But snark is needed for this situation.

replies(7): >>45142025 #>>45142027 #>>45142042 #>>45142069 #>>45142101 #>>45144445 #>>45147215 #
octernion ◴[05 Sep 25 18:36 UTC] No.45142027[source]▶
your tax money broadly speaking doesn't go to BART; it's massively underfunded. not sure why they are the target of the snark.
replies(3): >>45142137 #>>45145520 #>>45145650 #
nradov ◴[05 Sep 25 18:45 UTC] No.45142137[source]▶
Under funded relative to what? What would the optimal amount of funding be? Are there ways that BART could cut costs to free up budget for IT upgrades?

I'm not trying to be snarky, it's just that for regular citizens who don't have time to attend BART BoD and committee meetings it's almost impossible to tell whether existing money is being wisely spent. So people get the impression that taxes are going up while service quality declines and assume the money must be going into someone's pocket.

replies(2): >>45142223 #>>45144074 #
lokar ◴[05 Sep 25 18:53 UTC] No.45142223[source]▶
In nearly all of the US there is an unresolved (and perhaps unresolvable) debate about to what extent public transit should get a subsidy vs pay for itself.

The dominant position (even in CA) has been no or little subsidy.

replies(2): >>45142316 #>>45142443 #
flerchin ◴[05 Sep 25 19:12 UTC] No.45142443[source]▶
In no way does BART pay for itself. 22% of their operating costs are covered by fares. Public transit is an amenity paid for by taxes. Private transport also has its own subsidy, but it's not even close.

https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/BART_FY24%2...

replies(4): >>45142876 #>>45142901 #>>45143356 #>>45143863 #
bell-cot ◴[05 Sep 25 19:54 UTC] No.45142901[source]▶
> Private transport also has its own subsidy, but it's not even close.

So - what % of Cali's road construction & maintenance is paid for by gas taxes?

replies(2): >>45143043 #>>45144027 #
ggreer ◴[05 Sep 25 21:47 UTC] No.45144027[source]▶
If I'm reading this report correctly[1], California's car registration fees and gas taxes cover more than the cost of roads. Caltrans estimates $20.2 billion in revenue from fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, while their budget is $18.7 billion.

It also looks like public transportation is mostly paid for with sales taxes, federal loans/grants, and $1 billion of taxes on diesel fuel.

1. See chart A on page 24, and chart F on page 28: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/budgets/docume...

replies(1): >>45144164 #
1. bkettle ◴[05 Sep 25 22:01 UTC] No.45144164[source]▶
Note that Caltrans only maintains state roads; looks like from that document that they distribute some money to localities but as far as I can tell we can't see what fraction of local road maintenance that covers. Of course localities also have parking fees, traffic tickets, etc that can help cover road maintenance.