Yes, because it’s the fare evaders who also disproportionately damage the facilities, commit crimes, and make public transit unpleasant for everyone else.
Also we should compare like with like, a yearly salary vs losses per week isn’t the same time period. I do agree that enforcement is more expensive than the fare-only losses though.
> Yes, because it’s the fare evaders who also disproportionately damage the facilities, commit crimes, and make public transit unpleasant for everyone else.
This comes from a "Broken Windows" philosophy; and I would argue it's far more important to go after the damage and crime than it is wasting money gating at the door.
> a yearly salary vs losses per week isn’t the same time period.
Correct, but it can be extrapolated. It would take a single employee catching $1000/week worth (at what, $2.50 to $5 per ticket?) to meet that single employee's salary, minus benefits, on average. That doesn't seem like a good investment, to me.
Also we should compare like with like, a yearly salary vs losses per week isn’t the same time period. I do agree that enforcement is more expensive than the fare-only losses though.