That will increase ridership up until the point where you reach the limit of the existing infrastructure, or you exhaust the supply of price-sensitive riders. After that, the only way to continue increasing ridership is to expand service, which requires money.
Yes. Is that a point you're trying to make? That things cost money?
The point I’m trying to make is that there are downsides to making transit free, maybe the pros still outweigh the cons, but it’s not simple and there are certainly reasons not to besides “not wanting to be around poor people”.
It's incredibly simple. The only "downside" is that we pay for it through taxes instead of at point of service.
And I have spent several posts explaining that there are important functional differences between paying at the point of service and through taxes. I guess you aren’t open to listening after all.
I hear what you're saying. I don't agree that it functions as a downside as you said. Especially when compared to the upside, both financially, and in quality of use.