@Ding-Dang: Yes! If only I had the same powers of argumentation - coupled with an acidic smirk of giant proportion! That man is a LEGEND.

But ads are just an annoying and pointless way of generating that revenue. In my opinion we are already drowning in ads - why not keep them out of public transportation, when the benefit is so low? Hell put some real art there instead - circulate it, let the users decide what to show, create positive feedback which…

Of course it does. Ads are under "Other" in the revenue section. If you dig a little deeper, you would find the Master budget with goes into greater detail. [www.mta.info]

So you take a spoken statement from an official, who is extremely vague by the way, at face value? And not only that - I've just given you official numbers that show, the ads account for almost nothing in the total budget. We are talking 1-2 cents max this could be lowering fares - and I doubt it's even that. Ads are…

Jesus. He looks like a lovechild between Bill Pullman and Jon Hamm!

How is it legit? Let's see some sources. Here's one that shows the opposite: [www.mta.info]

I'm not even from the US. But the MTA is a good model for many reasons. I still haven't seen any sources that indicate the opposite: Ads actually contributing to lower fares.

I would like to see just one source that proves ads help lower fares. Ads increase revenue - very slighty - but this doesn't affect the cost of fares. Actually I would like to see an example of fares going down where it isn't as a result of public subsidies. Anybody?

"Most public transportation systems" is pretty general. In the US? The world? I would very much like to see a source documenting that. MTA is funded almost solely by fares and state subsidies: [www.mta.info]

See the last sentence in my post. Or use Google? It's easy if you try. Page seven: [www.mta.info] Ad-revenue is a part of "Other". Also - Find me one shred of proof that ads help lower fares. They don't. They are there to increase profits.

@tylerbrainerd: Because ads are everywhere you look? And sometimes, maybe just sometimes, you would like to avoid being force fed corporate lies about shit you don't need and don't want?

@tylerbrainerd: Because ads are everywhere you look? And sometimes, maybe just sometimes, you would like to avoid being force fed corporate lies about shit you don't need and don't want?

@tylerbrainerd: Because ads are everywhere you look? And sometimes, maybe just sometimes, you would like to avoid being force fed corporate lies about shit you don't need and don't want?

@4n7h0ny: Not true. Ads make up so little of the budget that it would

@TendoMentis: This was written by badasscat just above this post:

@badasscat: Now that was an informative post. Thank you!

@montymitch: You wouldn't incidentally be an engineer would you? :) Maybe they made them like this to swap the hideous ads with something they thought looked nice - like these kaleidoscopic projections.

Flashblock for the real world? I like it.

@John Milleker: Or public funding could be increased and the increased cost could be covered by taxing the shit out of cars.

@Settings: Woooosh...