“The Literal Price of Freedom”

My goodness, I didn’t have that on my Bingo card. I had just written last week’s piece for the Morning Reckoning about opportunity cost.

And yet, there was Jon Stewart, back on television in all his glory, getting it completely wrong. I actually smacked my head when I heard his nonsensical outburst. Of course, if it’s an outburst nowadays, it’s usually about Tucker Carlson.

And what did Stewart say with respect to Carlson’s report on Moscow’s supermarkets?

There is a hidden fee to your cheap groceries and orderly streets. Ask Alexey Navalny or any of his supporters.

NEWS REPORT CUTS IN: In Vladimir Putin’s Russia, political repression is everywhere. And hundreds have been arrested for daring to honor Navalny so publicly.

Right, because the difference between our urinal-caked chaotic subways and your candelabra’d beautiful subways is the literal price of freedom.

My God, he was serious.

Let’s use the rest of this Reckoning to take apart Stewart’s ridiculous assertion.

Opportunity Cost

First, let’s review the definition of opportunity cost.

From last Thursday’s Reckoning:

Opportunity cost is an economic concept that refers to the potential benefits an individual, investor, or business forgoes when choosing one alternative over another.

In simpler terms, it’s what you give up to do something else.

This idea is crucial because it helps people understand the actual cost of their decisions, not just in terms of money but also in terms of forgone opportunities.

Opportunity cost is about trade-offs.

But since when did freedom have to be traded for clean subways?

If Stewart had his head up his ass any further, he’d puncture his pancreas. First, let’s look at the simple logical errors he made.

The Logical Errors

False Equivalence

Freedom encompasses many aspects of life, not just the physical state of public transportation. Linking a specific issue, like subway cleanliness, to such a broad concept as freedom creates a false equivalence. It implies that any inconvenience or discomfort experienced in pursuing freedom is inherently justified, which is not necessarily true.

Unclear Causality

Stewart implies that dirty subways are a direct consequence of freedom. However, this causality is unclear and debatable. Many factors contribute to the cleanliness of public spaces, including funding, infrastructure, and cultural norms. Attributing it solely to freedom ignores these complexities.

Ignores Alternatives

Intentional or not, Stewart suggests there is a binary choice between having dirty subways and sacrificing freedom. This is a false dichotomy. There are likely solutions and strategies to improve the cleanliness of subways without compromising core values like freedom.

Dismissive of Concerns

Framing the issue as “the price of freedom” is dismissive of legitimate concerns about the state of public transportation. It can downplay the impact of dirty subways on commuters’ health, comfort, and overall experience.

But if these logical arguments don’t do it for you, let’s look at real-world reasons why big city subway systems are toilets.

Budgetary Constraints

Limited Resources

Many subway systems, such as New York City’s MTA, face significant budgetary constraints. Funding is often allocated to critical infrastructure repairs, safety improvements, and operational costs, leaving less available for cleanliness and maintenance.

Prioritization

In cities like Chicago, where the CTA operates buses and trains, budget allocations must cover many needs, sometimes prioritizing system expansion or technological upgrades over cleanliness.

Political Challenges

Bureaucracy and Red Tape

Political bureaucracy can slow down or complicate efforts to allocate funds efficiently. In cities like San Francisco, competing political interests and regulatory hurdles can delay the implementation of cleaning initiatives.

Funding Battles

Public transit agencies often rely on city, state, and federal funding, leading to complex negotiations. For instance, Los Angeles’s Metro system has faced challenges securing consistent funding streams, impacting its ability to maintain and clean its facilities.

Logistical and Operational Issues

High Usage

Subway systems in densely populated cities like NYC experience extremely high usage, making constant cleanliness a challenge. The sheer volume of passengers can quickly undo cleaning efforts.

Homelessness and Social Issues

Cities like Portland and Seattle have faced challenges related to homelessness and social issues within their transit systems. These issues can contribute to cleanliness problems, as transit stations sometimes serve as shelters for the homeless population.

Let’s look at some specific reasons.

Specific Examples

NYC’s MTA

Despite efforts to increase cleaning frequencies, the MTA struggles with maintaining cleanliness due to its vast size, aging infrastructure, and the need to balance cleaning with keeping the system operational 24/7 because keeping the system operational 24/7 is damn near impossible.

Chicago’s CTA

The CTA has initiated several cleanliness programs but faces challenges due to its extensive network and the need to prioritize funding for safety and operational improvements.

San Francisco’s BART

BART has faced criticism for cleanliness and maintenance issues, made worse by budget shortfalls and increased demands on the system.

Los Angeles’s Metro

LA Metro has made strides in improving cleanliness through increased funding and new initiatives but still needs help with its expanding network and balancing various priorities.

Portland’s TriMet and Seattle’s Sound Transit

Both systems grapple with the impacts of urban homelessness, social issues on cleanliness, and the need to allocate limited resources across expansive transit networks.

Wrap Up

If only Jon were so indignant about his government starting but not ending its wars.

If only Jon were angry at his fellow citizens for pooping in the subway.

But Jon decided to kill the messenger instead.

The question remains: Why shouldn’t anyone, not just Tucker Carlson, wonder why America can’t do better than Russia? Why do most Americans accept that their big cities are dangerous, third world shitholes? Why aren’t our cities better governed? Is moving out the price that has to be paid for cleanliness?

Because dirty subways aren’t the price of freedom, Jon. They’re the price of corruption, priorities, and belligerence.