I'm no expert in economics, but bear with me. The MTA operates a natural monopoly. In a natural monopoly you don't have competitors, so your customers can't turn to someone else to receive better service. Furthermore, the government has granted them the right to be the one provider in this market.
I think that this makes them somewhat of a public service. Normally quality of service comes from the pressure of competitors, but in this case there are no competitors. I think the government has a responsibility to see that this is clearly a dishonest tactic and fix it. If the government doesn't enforce honest practice, than it won't get enforced at all (because competitors aren't there to do it). (sorry for the somewhat confused argument, but there's really something wrong with this)
For most intents and purposes, the MTA is the government. NYS sets up lots of various quasi-governmental authorities, because the authorities can issue debt without having votes, whereas the state government needs to have voters approve bonds.
That's awful.
I'm no expert in economics, but bear with me. The MTA operates a natural monopoly. In a natural monopoly you don't have competitors, so your customers can't turn to someone else to receive better service. Furthermore, the government has granted them the right to be the one provider in this market.
I think that this makes them somewhat of a public service. Normally quality of service comes from the pressure of competitors, but in this case there are no competitors. I think the government has a responsibility to see that this is clearly a dishonest tactic and fix it. If the government doesn't enforce honest practice, than it won't get enforced at all (because competitors aren't there to do it). (sorry for the somewhat confused argument, but there's really something wrong with this)