Salaries and Firms - DC

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by WHTFH
9% increase for D.C. residents doesn't seem unreasonable. But...



10.8% increase for VA and MD residents (rail)
33.3% - 46.2% increase for VA and MD residents (parking)

Bastards.

Yes, but there's a lot more demand for the limited parking than there is for the less limited space on the trains.

Unfortunately, it means a lot of people will say "screw metro" and start driving. Which is why I've always thought they should impose some sort of toll on everyone entering the city (or taking 66 or 395 or something) and use the money to subsidize (further) public transit. Driving is simply too cheap.

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Yes, but there's a lot more demand for the limited parking than there is for the less limited space on the trains.

Unfortunately, it means a lot of people will say "screw metro" and start driving. Which is why I've always thought they should impose some sort of toll on everyone entering the city (or taking 66 or 395 or something) and use the money to subsidize (further) public transit. Driving is simply too cheap.

Driving is cheap (arguable), parking ain't.

I think we're looking at $12 a day on a monthly contract in our garage.

So, $190 a month, toss in gas, toss in the aggravation of life when a drop of rain hits the pavement and some twit in an 18-wheeler has flipped it on the exit to Shirlington, and you see why some folks will continue to stomach the fare increase.

The people who are going to get hammered are the bus folks - those that travel one way on the bus from the metro. The discount goes from 85 cents to about 20 cents.

The elimination of the 10% fare bonus for $20 metro cards is a bummer, however.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by MisterEbola
Driving is cheap (arguable), parking ain't.

True dat. It amazed me that in one of the recent tax bills, in an effort to encourage public transit , Congress allowed employees to pay not only for transit passes with pre-tax dollars, but also parking spaces. As it turns out, the far bigger benefit goes to the person paying $200/month for parking than the person paying $3/day for transit fares.

All told, I would much prefer to take metro, even if the price is higher than parking downtown, simply because I can't stand traffic, and I can read the paper on the train.

I, too, am bummed about the 10% bonus. But, yeah, the bus people take it on the chin. although isn't there a provision for SmarTrip users to get a better discount (once the readers are on the buses)?

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
True dat. It amazed me that in one of the recent tax bills, in an effort to encourage public transit , Congress allowed employees to pay not only for transit passes with pre-tax dollars, but also parking spaces. As it turns out, the far bigger benefit goes to the person paying $200/month for parking than the person paying $3/day for transit fares.

I could not, in any way, understand the rationale for the pre-tax allowance for parking. My understanding of the bill was to encourage the utilization of mass transit. Perhaps the underlying tone of the parking is to encourage car-pooling. However, the end result is that anybody that drives gets a huge discount off parking.

[tballstinks]

I think they subsidized both because not everyone has a metro option. I used to live in Old Town. To take the metro I had to walk to a bus stop, take a bus across town, then get on the metro, etc. That works fine for gov't folks, but it didn't work well for BigLaw attorneys who were working until midnight every night (this was 1999-2000).

My second thought is that driving isn't so easy either. For one thing, I66 is HOV only on all lanes, which means that people in Tysons are screwed and have to get to the Vienna lot before it fills up, or take chain bridge road to GW Parkway, etc.

The real solution is to take jobs out of DC. That is exactly what they are tying to do with the Dept. of Homeland Security. I hope they put it out near Dulles Airport and then proceed to take as many jobs out of DC as possible.

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by tballstinks
I think they subsidized both because not everyone has a metro option. I used to live in Old Town. To take the metro I had to walk to a bus stop, take a bus across town, then get on the metro, etc. That works fine for gov't folks, but it didn't work well for BigLaw attorneys who were working until midnight every night (this was 1999-2000).

I'm assuming that this is the situation for the trip into town. Certainly the good folks at your firm would provide client-paid-for transportation home after the completion of the memo at 11:30 p.m.

I think the idea was that most people have to drive to the Metro and park before they can Metro into the city. Nobody wants to have to take a bus AND a train or walk more than 15 minutes or so to a Metro stop, so if you can't park, a Metro discount is useless. You get the pre-tax benefit both for the Metro pass and for the parking garage in the burbs.

[tballstinks]

Originally posted by Lexus Talionis
I think the idea was that most people have to drive to the Metro and park before they can Metro into the city. Nobody wants to have to take a bus AND a train or walk more than 15 minutes or so to a Metro stop, so if you can't park, a Metro discount is useless. You get the pre-tax benefit both for the Metro pass and for the parking garage in the burbs.

Yes, I should have been clearer. There is also a pre-tax benefit for using the firm's parking garage. The building where my firm was located had an underground parking garage. The cost was $190/month, but the money came out of my check pre-tax. I understand your point about parking in the burbs, but that really wasn't an option for Old Town.

Originally posted by MisterEbola
I'm assuming that this is the situation for the trip into town. Certainly the good folks at your firm would provide client-paid-for transportation home after the completion of the memo at 11:30 p.m.

Yes, I could fill out a voucher, call for a taxi, and wait outside, or I could go down to the garage, get in my car, and be home in 15 minutes (quick drive at that time of night). The metro simply doesn't work well unless you live near a station or lot, or have regular working hours and can take time for the bus.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by tballstinks
The real solution is to take jobs out of DC.

That's an interesting way to put it. I can easily accept the proposition that the solution is that jobs and housing should be close together or easily linked. I'm not sure the logical corollary to that is that jobs should move out to Dulles. Why not improved housing in DC, and/or improved Metro service to existing housing in DC? Is Dulles such a better place to live that we should abandon DC*? Are voting rights that important?




* I fully acknowledge that I live in Maryland and so lack a certain right to be critical in this context, but I moved to my job, and would gladly move back to DC but for that job.

[MisterEbola]

Originally posted by tballstinks



Yes, I could fill out a voucher, call for a taxi, and wait outside, or I could go down to the garage, get in my car, and be home in 15 minutes (quick drive at that time of night). The metro simply doesn't work well unless you live near a station or lot, or have regular working hours and can take time for the bus.

Why wait outside? I just call the cab service, tell 'em I want a cab, bill for the next 10 - 15 minutes, and then pop on down stairs to the waiting car.

As to paying, I just give 'em my credit card and write it up as a personal expense.

[tballstinks]

Originally posted by MisterEbola
Why wait outside? I just call the cab service, tell 'em I want a cab, bill for the next 10 - 15 minutes, and then pop on down stairs to the waiting car.

As to paying, I just give 'em my credit card and write it up as a personal expense.

I will be the first to admit that the bureaucracy in my firm was unbelievable. We were required to use vouchers for taxi rides from the office. Not only that, but to get reimbursed for a meal, no matter how small, we had to get a reimbursement slip signed by a partner, then send it to the NY office, then wait 2 weeks for a check. That got pretty old, pretty fast.

As for the taxi, my point is that the bus, metro, then taxi option takes longer and is more of a hassle than driving. We weren't getting much sleep in those days and it just wasn't worth it.

[tballstinks]

Originally posted by baltassoc
That's an interesting way to put it. I can easily accept the proposition that the solution is that jobs and housing should be close together or easily linked. I'm not sure the logical corollary to that is that jobs should move out to Dulles. Why not improved housing in DC, and/or improved Metro service to existing housing in DC? Is Dulles such a better place to live that we should abandon DC*? Are voting rights that important?




* I fully acknowledge that I live in Maryland and so lack a certain right to be critical in this context, but I moved to my job, and would gladly move back to DC but for that job.

My view is that many of the transportation problems could be solved if we treated the entire metro area as one unit, rather than putting everything within the confines of DC. I don't think the answer is extending the metro to Dulles and Tysons, I think the answer is to spread everything out a little bit. DC is just too concentrated. There are too many people converging on too small of an area. Think of all the people in VA (as far away as Herndon and Woodbridge) that are trying to get across the river every morning. It just doesn't make any sense. We clearly can't move long standing agencies, but we certainly shouldn't be compounding the problem by putting new agencies in DC. Just my 2 cents.

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Yes, but there's a lot more demand for the limited parking than there is for the less limited space on the trains.

Unfortunately, it means a lot of people will say "screw metro" and start driving. Which is why I've always thought they should impose some sort of toll on everyone entering the city (or taking 66 or 395 or something) and use the money to subsidize (further) public transit. Driving is simply too cheap.

For fifty cents a week people are gonna start hitting traffice jams, putting miles on their car, pay for more gas and parking garages?

Cool. More beer for me.

Originally posted by MisterEbola
The elimination of the 10% fare bonus for $20 metro cards is a bummer, however.

Wait... we lose an additional 10% on top of the fare increase? I was getting that additional 10% pre-tax also (extra 10% on the farecards purchased with pre-tax income), which I'll have to pay for after-tax now, so make that 13-14% or so. So, in all, we're looking at like a 25% increase in fare prices, plus the huge hike in parking.

Bastard monopolists.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by WHTFH


Bastard monopolists.

Yeah, they're really profit-maximizing.