Andrew:

The generic problem is one identified by Hume as "proximal" versus "long term" incentives. In many cases no matter how much resolve you have for a long term gain, a short term gain that scuttles your long term objective may be impossible to turn down. That's especially true when the short term gain is individual and the long term consequences are collective. Essentially it's Hardin's "tragedy of the commons" dilemma. There are, however, ways of organizing markets so that they better reflect these long term objectives.

Most public transit advocates presume that the public really wants the benefits of public transit but simply can't abide the short term costs. That's not entirely unreasonable, since it's rare that the public even perceives long term costs very accurately. (Take a look at the "edge cities" that surround Washington, DC and tell me if those places are really where you'd like to live.)

I actually wrote a paper on this in a previous lifetime, with Jonathan Gifford. I don't really know what the public wants, but it's quite possible that the long term goals conflict with the short term desires, and it's precisely situations like this that are the justification for "constitutional clauses" that restrict the behavior of individuals. But the solution is constitutional rather than some jacking of the price regime, because people are allowed to constrain themselves just as Ullyses directed his crew to tie him to the mast so that he could enjoy the Siren's song without paying the ultimate cost of his life. Constitutions can meddle in markets without violating the principles of Public Choice.

They don't charge for elevators, either. Mass transit is usually a mechanism for businesses to bring workers and customers into their buildings without the businesses having to invest in provisions for private cars. Manhattan businesses should pay for their horizontal elevators, Washington buildings should incorporate the cost of their horizontal elevators into their cost structure. I would not work for a company that charged me for parking nor shop where I was charged for parking and entering the store. It is becoming less and less necessary to mass up to do business. The mall and the internet are where it is at.

to me, this is another case where the democracy fails. In this case, the majority in cities can outvote the suburban people and cause everyones taxes to go up for a system that only the urban taxpayers get to use. Reminds me of D'Toqueville's quote that Democracies survive only until the majority realizes it can vote itself major benefits at little or no cost to themselves.