Taxes would pay for it.
It is not an entirely stupid proposition. They built roads, and we all can use them, for the most part, without paying. Instead, we pay tax on the gas we buy, which sometimes gets used to pay for roadwork.
We have police, and fire and rescue, available whenever we need them, and for the most part, we don’t pay for those services.
We have bike paths, we have parks, and often they are free, and our taxes pay for them.
Sidewalks make it easier for us to walk places; we have crossing lights to protect us from cars, and we don’t pay a user fee for either of them.
And often times, it is free to park on the streets, while other times the meters are turned on and you pay — which means sometimes, we are getting a free service paid for with our taxes.
Yes, the bus service costs money to operate, but if the city residents decide that the ability to move freely about the city is valuable enough to pay for with their tax dollars, why not? Not having to collect money should make things more efficient, lead to less crime because people won’t be stealing the money.
And if this makes it more likely people won’t own a car, that takes cars off the streets, which is a good thing in congested cities, IF IT IS THE CHOICE OF THE OWNERS, rather than dictated by the government.
We do pay for those services through taxes so its not free. Public transit it already paid for through taxes so eliminating fares would increase ridership.
A pubic good should be freely available. If its private transit, like taxis and shuttle vans then one ought to pay for the service provided.
A public service should always be universally accessible.
Thanks for a sensible response.