[betterunix2]

If the MTA provided service to more than the NYC metro region, this would be less of a problem. Half the population the state is paying for a system they never use, so they are understandably upset. If the MTA operated commuter systems around Albany, Buffalo, and other towns and cities in New York, people would be less apt to cut their budget.

[maxerickson]

State funds are not a major portion of the budget:

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-funding/

(the Petroleum tax and State & Local operating assistance combined are less than 10%)

[betterunix2]

The MMTOA is 10% on its own, so I am not sure I see your point.

[maxerickson]

The way I read

Metropolitan Mass Transportation Operating Assistance Fund: This is a pot of tax money collected for the MTA and other downstate transportation systems. It’s made up of revenue, such as statewide tax on petroleum companies, a sales tax in the 12-county MTA region and corporate franchise taxes and fees both statewide and in the MTA region. MMTOA this year will collect a total of $2.3 billion - 72% of which goes to the MTA.

That fund isn't "purely" statewide.

But the broader point still holds if statewide taxes are contributing all of 20%, the MTA is quite locally funded.

[twobyfour]

Not to mention that the MTA-served regions of the state already put in a lot more money in state taxes than they get back from the state in services. The opposite is true of the rest of the state.

Upstate depends on the MTA region's economic engine for its tax base. Making sure that economy runs smoothly (and that the employees and consumers necessary to that economy can get to and from their jobs and stores) should be a priority for rational, well-informed actors.

I would guess, though, that only a tiny percentage are well informed about what percentage of state taxes come from vs go to various regions. Can't comment on rationality, but with the wrong assumptions, rationality can be counterproductive and irrationality is no better.