Advice & Dissent

On Monday, we argued that the MBTA’s proposal for stiff fare increases was only an outgrowth of a much larger problem in the state transportation system - heavy debt costs push tolls and fares upward, but the money coming into the relevant agencies isn’t enough to keep roads and rails in good working order. The T proposal, we suggested, offers a key test of a transportation reform effort aimed at comprehensive planning - and deserves a skeptical hearing.

► One Boston.com reader said the proposed commuter rail hikes are even more severe than we let on: “Fares on commuter lines that are going to jump to $5.50 aren’t just close to Boston, they are in Boston,’’ seanhooley wrote. “West Roxbury, Roslindale, Hyde Park and others pay three times more than Green Line passengers all the way out at 128 at the Riverside T. Same for passengers on the Red Line in Quincy. And the T is asking Boston residents to pay more?’’

► Lorna said the transit agency didn’t cause its own woes: “Unfortunately the state Legislature and lawsuits from the Big Dig have consistently saddled the MBTA with the debt for new construction and given it nothing to operate these new lines. These were not bad management decisions. They were forced on the T.’’

► While many readers were dead-set against giving the agency more money, others would do so under certain circumstances. “If the T needs money to fix its debts,’’ declared redbarchetta88, “raise the gas tax by 25 cents. But only in the towns served by the T. It makes more sense to spread the pain to people who have access to the T. It does not make sense to subject people in Greenfield, Holyoke, New Bedford, or the Cape to a tax for a service they have no access to and does not benefit them.’’

► SGoettle warned against taking such reasoning too far. “For all the people who say, ‘I don’t live near the T so I don’t want to pay higher taxes for it’ - well, I don’t live near any farms, but I still have to pay massive farm subsidies to people who grow crops. I don’t have any kids but I still have to pay for public schools. . . . If you’re suggesting a fee-for-service government, I’m all for it, but it extends to all areas, not just those selective taxes you don’t want to pay.’’

Budgets and zoos

On Tuesday, we criticized a public-relations offensive by Zoo New England, which operates the Franklin Park Zoo in Boston and the Stone Zoo in Stoneham with considerable help from state taxpayers. In a package of budget vetoes intended in part to make room in the budget for some healthcare coverage for legal immigrants, Governor Patrick sought a $4 million cut in the zoos’ public subsidy. The nonprofit responded by threatening to close the zoos and hinted that animals might be euthanized. We questioned whether the group was making the best use of its money and said services to humans are a higher priority.

► BostonKathy asked, “Why are we providing healthcare for legal immigrants? . . . We have American citizens that need assistance, and they are left to fend for themselves.’’

► Another reader said the zoos deserve some money. “So, we’ve taken all the planet’s resources, all the animals’ habitats, driven nearly every other creature except the cockroach and the mosquito to extinction,’’ wrote environerd, “and we can’t spare a few million a year to maintain a small zoo?’’

► Reader JoeyGeneva suggested cost savings in a different form: “Why don’t we consolidate the two other zoos, the House and the Senate, into a single unicameral legislative body with 100 members? We might have to euthanize a few political careers.’’

Loud bikers

Also on Tuesday, we applauded efforts by cities to crack down on motorcyclists who replace factory-issue sound controls with loud exhaust systems. We dismissed the notion - an article of faith among some bikers - that inflicting ear-splitting noise on others is a reasonable way to guarantee safety on the road.

► Reader lwstarr, who described herself as a Harley rider and a white-collar worker and business owner in her 50s, took issue with stereotypes of motorcyclists. “Dirtbags? Motley crew? Sorry, my friends. But you can bet when I’m riding around on two wheels without the stopping capacity of a 4-wheel vehicle when there are elderly people that can barely hear or see on the road, I’m going to rev my throttle so that I can be heard.’’

► But readers such as harleyhoho were skeptical. “If it really mattered, they would turn the pipes around and point them straight ahead so they could be really heard. Seems to be a childish need to make noise, much like we did when we put baseball cards on the spokes of our bikes.’’

Visit boston.com/opinion to read these and other Globe editorials.