11-25-2019, 08:37 AM
(11-25-2019, 08:20 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(11-25-2019, 07:23 AM)ZEBuilder Wrote: When Cameron heights gets out at the end of the day there are about 3 or 4 guards there because people try to skip the payment.
Seems reasonable.
Not pointing the finger at anyone here, but I think there is a weird anti-enforcement vibe in our society which is not productive. Why do people think our stores are so inexpensive and easy to use? Because almost everybody understands that one cannot go into a store and just take stuff. If we lose that, then either prices have to go up (but only for the honest, note), or we have to go back to having everything behind the counter (which would also increase prices owing to the need to hire more staff). Poor people who really need the Dollarama should be strongly in favour of rigorous anti-shoplifting enforcement; rich people will always be able to pay for personalized service at high-end stores, but the less well-off really need our current efficient retail model.
A similar consideration applies to transit. If one believes that transit should be free, that is fine, a valid opinion; and the lack of a need for enforcement is a benefit of that. But given that we charge for transit, it’s absurd to be opposed to rigorous enforcement.
Leaving aside the VERY real possibility of abuse (plenty of places see poor and especially minorities targeted by enforcement, that absolutely could happen here--not saying it is now, but it could, and as pointed out, students ARE already being targeted) and the resulting effect on those groups who are now visibily targeted by police, and thus in the eyes of everyone are "criminals" and their own eyes (correctly) now feel persecuted, even when law abiding.
Having an aggressive police presence has very real costs, it makes the transit system look dangerous, and unpleasant, and frankly, it is unpleasant. Drivers do not suffer this level of enforcement, despite commiting vastly more crime, and causing vastly more harm as a result. Given the complete failure of our fare payment system, this is a substanial negative for the system. Do not discount the negative effects of enforcement like this.
As a side note on driving, I would very much like to see a cost analysis to see whether fare avoidance costs more than the direct and indirect costs of collisions involving the LRT.