If I got to chose where some of the bailout money went...

Seriously. Obviously I hate the bailout and am really proud to come from a state where they said NO take your socialism, we'll keep our states rights and our charity and our gun rights.

Anyway.

I don't like the bailout. I think it's stupid. I think it defies all economic principles.
But there is one institution that could really use a boost. The MTA.

For non New Yorkers (are you friendly? do you give your seats up for pregnant women?), I'm talking about the Mass Transit Authority. Basically this is the public transportation in the NYC Metropolitan area. Most frequented are the Subways but the buses and even ferries are pretty popular as well. So there are crazy parking fees and gas is $1941029410 a gallon etc etc, and in NYC everyone loves mass transit. There are a few somewhat unique features of mass transit in New York.

-Subways run 24/7. The most you will ever wait for a train is 15 minutes. And you'd have a right to be really annoyed in that case because it doesn't happen to often. In other cities, such as DC, the train shuts down in the middle of the night and if you have to get to work at 5:30 AM then you are in trouble. Also other cities sometimes even have days of the week where there is no mass transit.

-No matter where you are going, the price is the same--as of now $2. You can ride from Queens to Brooklyn, transfers and all, and only pay $2. Or, you can ride from 34th & 6th to 23rd & 6th, and it's still $2. The later is a punishment for extreme laziness which I support.

-The system always seems to be losing. Despite the overcrowded trains, the cops kicking the bums off the stairwell, the great musicians and not so great musicians for entertainment... the MTA can never really keep up.

So the MTA had a few options. Let's do some basic microeconomic theory Obviously, PROFIT= REVENUE- EXPENSES and since profit < 0, then expenses > revenue, and the MTA either has to make more or spend less.
Let's analyze these two options.
1. Spend Less
Ways to spend less include:
a. LESS FREQUENT TRAINS. This is my preference, and I don't mean cutting out daytime trains. I mean cutting out all but maybe two trains that run on each line between 3:00 AM and 5:00 AM. This would mean those who travel at these strange times would have to either plan their commute accordingly or else hang out in the Starbucks for another thirty minutes. This would save millions for MTA in the course of the year and in effect take care of the deficit. But NYC is famous for running all night so they can't do that. Moronic.
b. LESS HOURS FOR THE MTA TICKET BOOTH WORKERS This wouldn't be such a bad idea because mostly they just yell into the intercom for us to look at the map. Most people that take the subway either know the routes, can read a map pretty well, or don't speak English anyway. But we don't want to cut [unnecessary] jobs. I guess.
c. THERE IS REALLY NOTHING ELSE BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE THEY CLEAN THESE PLACES OR ANYTHING.
2. Make More
Say you are selling a book and want to make as much as possible. Would you sell the book for $500 dollars? Of course not! Nobody would buy it. You'd figure out how the highest price most buyers would spend, and charge that. Of course. But the MTA has this great idea that no matter what they charge , they will get the same number of clients..if they charge fifteen cents or ten dollars. This is ignorant. People will just have to find another way to get to work, or maybe not work at the same place or live in the same place. What this could cause is clear...a major strain on the economy. Over 11 million people use the MTA each day. What happens if they can't afford to get to work? MTA wants to change the fair from $2 to $3. This is a 50% increase. It's pretty huge.
The more logical way to make more is to attract more. This is clear because selling one book for $500 makes a lot less than selling 100 books for $10. Duh. You can obviously say eleven million people is too much already and I never get a seat on the train except the seat next to the sleeping drunk guy and I wish less people rode the train. And you'd be right. But do you really think this is how MTA gets a revenue? Think about the ADVERTISEMENTS. Think about all the empty space. Ok, I hate being bombarded just as much as you do, but you know that we are all so engrossed in our own worries and our iPod and our iPhone and whatever else that most of the time you don't notice them. So what about more adds? What about audio or video adds? Thats a lot of money.

So here's our dilema. We have three real options
-Less trains. MTA is not going to do this because they want their reputation for 24/7 whatever.
-More adds. New York has this new fear of branding so this won't happen for another five years but don't worry. It WILL happen.
-Higher fees. This is what MTA is willing to do although its going to overall hurt the economy.

So none of these options are good for both parties (being MTA and the clients, which can be redefined as the general public).

What does our President do? ( I clarify that P. Bush is just as responsible for this bailout as P. Obama is, but either way it is wrong wrong wrong)

He thinks our money would be better spent renovating government buildings and repaving roads and putting fresh coats of paint on stop signs, why not subsidize the MTA?

Ok Right friends, don't shoot me. I did suggest government subsidizing the MTA. Temporarily. As opposed to the NYC economy completely falling apart when they want to charge 50% more for a ride to work.

Don't get me wrong if it were up to me...no bailout. But if they have to take my money, this is a place I think it would be good to go to.