Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
I began my new career last night as a cabbie. No tears, please. It's not a step down from the classroom in terms of salary, and it's a lot less stress than teaching. But that's not what I came here to talk about.
Santa Fe has an interesting program which is subsidized by taxpayers. It's called Safe Ride. The city will pay for your cab on Friday and Saturday nights after a five dollar deductible for any ride within the city limits. The only rule is that you can't use the service to hop from one bar to another. The idea is to keep drunks off the road by subsidizing their transportation. Sounds innocuous enough, right? Before we answer the question, let me tell you about my first night on the job.
The night began with all traffic inbound from hotels and neighborhoods to bars and clubs. Things changed around 11:00 PM when bartenders and bouncers began calling us for service. My first call turned out to be a pair of drunken old broads in their sixties. Aside from the stench (all drunks reek after a binge) they were compliant and they tipped well. My second fare consisted of rowdy college kids. I had to use my classroom voice to quiet them down and they stiffed me. As the night proceeded my passengers became increasingly inebriated. I turned down one fare when the client decided to have a chunder in the gutter before boarding. Not in my cab, buddy, you're on your own. By the end of the night my riders were fully debauched. On my last run a young "lady" attempted to perform a carnal maneuver on her boyfriend. I told them to stay belted or I would drop them on the side of the road and eat the fare.
Drunks are nasty, obnoxious, and malodorous. So, are we encouraging debauchery or providing a valuable service in the name of public safety? I don't think there's any right or wrong answer. What say you, brothers and sisters?
BTW, I won't be working the drunk shift again. It's daytime driving for me from here on.
- Comment (45)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Does your company have any other openings? Such good stories... I've always thought it would be hoot to be a New Orleans Cabbie. But it always seemed dangerous given the crime rate. Is that a concern in Santa Fe?
Feb '11
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Can you get porcelain lining for the back seat of your cab?
Definite public benefits if there are decreased number of drinking-related accidents and particularly deaths. Bars benefit more by being able to keep selling over-priced drinks. There are some pretty easy metrics to tell if the program is of benefit, e.g., is there a reduction in the amount of drunk driving accidents and deaths.
Jul '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
A classic example of failed government. Politicians so desperate to achieve some sort of relevance and a resume stuffer for election day, the career politicians find another foolish way to drain the tax payers to marginal benefit.
The politicians solved this problem with the Eighteenth Amendment and the Volstead Act.
I'm looking forward to the political campaign where a career politician can point and accurately say, I did nothing stupid or harmful my last term.
Jun '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Violent crime against taxi drivers is rare to non-existent in Santa Fe. The cops view as partners; we get quick service from the police if a passenger gets obnoxious.
Feb '11
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Sisyphus:
I'm looking forward to the political campaign where a career politician can point and accurately say, I did nothing stupid or harmful my last term. · Jun 25 at 11:48am
During one of his terms as acting governor, New Jersey State Senator Richard Codey, addressing a faculty convocation at Farleigh Dickinson University, quipped that he had been acting governor for six months and, so far, hadn't been indicted. According to my wife, who was in attendance, he got a standing ovation.
Edited on June 25, 2011 at 9:15pmJun '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Hang On: Can you get porcelain lining for the back seat of your cab?
Definite public benefits if there are decreased number of drinking-related accidents and particularly deaths. Bars benefit more by being able to keep selling over-priced drinks. There are some pretty easy metrics to tell if the program is of benefit, e.g., is there a reduction in the amount of drunk driving accidents and deaths. · Jun 25 at 11:28am
I don't know if anyone keeps local statistics, but statewide New Mexico has made major progress against alcohol related accidents and fatalities.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
~Paules
Hang On: Can you get porcelain lining for the back seat of your cab?
Definite public benefits if there are decreased number of drinking-related accidents and particularly deaths. Bars benefit more by being able to keep selling over-priced drinks. There are some pretty easy metrics to tell if the program is of benefit, e.g., is there a reduction in the amount of drunk driving accidents and deaths. · Jun 25 at 11:28am
I don't know if anyone keeps local statistics, but statewide New Mexico has made major progress against alcohol related accidents and fatalities. · Jun 25 at 12:15pm
Yeah, the businesses need patrons to come into the business districts to eat, drink and be merry -- which the patrons will do somewhere anyway -- and it's certainly good to keep the patrons out from behind the wheel on their way home. The economic question is whether the program helps the city collect sufficient tax revenue from the watering holes (and/or avoids sufficient enforcement costs) to pay for the program.
Oct '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
IF Santa Fe believes that tax money is required to keep drunks from behind the wheel on party nights, then the watering holes can meet the expense. A liquor tax, perhaps as stiff as the drinks, would appear to be the appropriate measure for dealing with the drunk driving issue.
Heavy taxes to cover the cost of taxi services, and perhaps really severe fines for drivers who insist on only themselves behind the wheel will do for getting home.
Mar '11
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Seems to me a cheaper way of dealing with drunk drivers than subsidizing their debauchery is to hammer them when they are caught driving drunk. In many countries the blood alcohol limit is much lower than in the US and the penalties are much stiffer, both for the driver, the passengers and whoever served the drink.
Jun '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
I don't know if the gross receipts tax of 8.2% covers the cost of this program or not. It's a good question. I'll have to research it. I suppose if we assume the bars pay for the program, the service is well worth the cost.
But what about the debauchery side of the issue? "People are going to drink anyway; we might as well see to it that they get home safely." Well, men higher prostitutes, too. Should we legalize it in the name of public safety? It seems to me that DUI threatens the public at large in ways that prostitution does not. I think perhaps the Safe Ride program is actually, for once, taxpayer money well spent.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
But what about the debauchery side of the issue? It's a great question and is, perhaps, answered by another conservative fact of life: If you want more of something, subsidize it; If you want less, tax it. Is public drunkenness on the rise because of the policy? Should we mitigate the risk of DUI injuries and fatalities by encouraging debauchery? I'm not sure.
Jul '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Ah, the obnoxious bar crowd. Welcome to my world, Mr. Paules.
Very glad to hear this. You make life easier for the cops, too, as you take potential drunken problems away so that they don't have to be arrested and processed, at considerable time for the cops, trouble for the arrestee, and expense for the taxpayer.
Cabbies keep more people out of jail than defense attorneys.
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Whether a public program designed to ease the negative consequences of a problem ends up encouraging the problem, or not, can turn into quite an interesting thread here on Ricochet.
I'm reminded of the old adage - where you stand on an issue depends on where you sit.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Not relevant, but I see some irony in how zoning laws often keep bars and other such establishments out of neighborhoods. Wouldn't it perhaps be cheaper and more efficient just to have neighborhood bars from which the drunks can crawl home?
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
I wish I could LIKE this again! I had similar thoughts about drunkenness being less public, perhaps, without a subsidy from the taxpayers.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
~Paules
But what about the debauchery side of the issue? "People are going to drink anyway; we might as well see to it that they get home safely." Well, men higher prostitutes, too. Should we legalize it in the name of public safety? It seems to me that DUI threatens the public at large in ways that prostitution does not. I think perhaps the Safe Ride program is actually, for once, taxpayer money well spent. · Jun 25 at 1:11pm
Incomplete analogy.
Public drinking is not illegal; public drunkenness is. The issue isn't with prohibiting alcohol consumption, but dealing with the consequences of overconsumption.
The analogy would be to the line between strip clubs and prostitution. Public arousal isn't illegal, but public fornication is. Men can pay women in drinking establishments to behave in lots of ways that induce arousal, but can't cross the line into actual sex acts. The difference between this and alcohol consumption is that the over-aroused strip club patron is assumed not to be impaired in operating a motor vehicle due to his over-arousal, and so isn't a public safety risk.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Stuart Creque
The difference between this and alcohol consumption is that the over-aroused strip club patron is assumed not to be impaired in operating a motor vehicle due to his over-arousal, and so isn't a public safety risk. · Jun 25 at 2:21pm
That's quite an assumption...lol.
Oct '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
And terrible for the property values of those who live nearby. Even apart from the home value issue, there's the annoyance of being woken up at 2am every Friday and Saturday night by the riotous departing of drunken revelers. 100 times worse if motorcyclists make an appearance.
Dec '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
Isn't this another European idea who's time has come in America? Like nuclear power? There's very little to learn from the European model, but let's give credit where it's due.
Sep '10
Re: Public Subsidized Debauchery or Good Public Policy?
I don't think that a subsidized cab ride would "drive" (so to speak) anyone to drink in excess. I suspect that they can do that on their own and do so. What is being subsidized here are cab rides rather than drinking itself. This sounds like a pretty good deal, at least for the drunk. I think that the program could, however, cost a little more than anticipated as bar patrons slowly adjust their behavior toward subsidized cab rides and away from whatever else they were doing to get home without a DUI.