this post was submitted on 13 May 2026
10 points (85.7% liked)
United States | News & Politics
4055 readers
187 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
No pics of text
Memes are now allowed, as long as they're US centric, general political memes please see !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
Post news related to the United States.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Means testing is how you create programs that are doomed to fail from the start. Wealthy and middle class voters always start to resent the poors getting "free stuff" so programs get cut back until they buckle, and then they get eliminated. There is a reason the Republicans haven't been able to destroy Obamacare, but not Medicare or SS.
Means testing also rarely saves the government money. All the extra bureaucracy for tracking eligibility usually costs more than it saves. It's better to provide for everyone then make it up with progressive taxation.
The report's argument is that making more people eligible for the existing means-testing while still making the rich pay (those making 400% of the US poverty level currently ride the subway as much as those 0–150%!) has been calculated to be one-third the cost of free busses. The program isn't adding or restricting means-testing, which is what gradually happened to ACA Medicaid as you mentioned, but relaxing means-testing that already exists.
My argument against the report is that free fares would increase the bus ridership especially for the poor, invalidating the reasoning that it "wouldn’t reduce the costs of travel for most riders, since 76% of daily transit trips are on the subway".