(Getty)

Reports from the scene indicate a man struck by the N train in Midtown on Monday may have been pushed. The incident occurred in the 49th Street and 7th Avenue subway station around 12:30 p.m., after the victim fell from the platform. He tried to climb to safety but didn't make it. He was transported to Roosevelt Hospital, where he later died from his injuries.

The station was evacuated after the incident and N, Q and R trains from all directions directed to bypass the 49th Street Station.

Witnesses say the man may have fallen onto the tracks during a confrontation. According to Gothamist, some witnesses "were so traumatized by what they saw" that they too were taken to the hospital.

CBS New York reports police are studying security video from the scene in addition to interviewing witnesses.

They are seeking a 20-something person of interest the CBS affiliate describes as "a black male, who was wearing a white t-shirt, a down coat and a beanie-style cap."

Though 84 percent of subway riders reported they were satisfied with the overall comfort and convenience of using the subway, the number of satisfied customers only increased six percent since last year. Overall satisfaction with local bus service also slightly increased from 62 percent last year to 70 percent.

Our suburban brethren did not have it so good.Overall customer satisfaction decreased to 78 percent on the Long Island Rail Road from 89 percent last year and Metro-North Railroad satisfaction also decreased, from 93 to 89 percent. However, as the M.T.A. explains in a press release, "Satisfaction in the railroads was adversely impacted by weather-related disruptions and other external factors." Yeah, yeah, blame it on the weather.

The agency actually got a little lucky in that regard, considering the annual survey was conducted in June, well before the disruptions from Tropical Storm Irene or the city's summer construction projects began. There was still that cursed blizzard that caught everyone flat-footed, though.

So when we all complain about the subways, are we just kvetzing out usual frustrations, or is it actually somehow better than we like to complain about?

Subway to hell.

The weekend is supposed to be a time of respite and relaxation. But it's not, because if you live in a rather large section of Brooklyn and try to see friends and relatives or go eat a taco in Park Slope, the MTA will actively thwart you at every attempt you make to remove yourself from your immediate surroundings.

Take the G Train. A lot of people in New York City do not care about the G Train, the maligned crosstown line that's so short you can miss it even if you're on the platform (readers, it's an awful thing to see, particularly early in the morning).  But to those who happen to live on the G Train, who live on the G Train precisely because they're too broke to leave the city on the weekends, including what The New York Times just called "the growing pool of whites" in Bedford-Stuyvesant, the weekends have lately been nothing short of hell. We're not talking one or two L train weekends; we're talking weeks and weeks of bad transportation, with no end in sight.

A weekend G train trip for a person in north Brooklyn traveling to Park Slope, for example, typically only involves one train. But lately on weekends, it has required no fewer than four: one G to Bedford-Nostrand, a different G "shuttle" from there to Hoyt-Schermerhorn (which only runs every 20 minutes), the A train one stop to Jay Street, and then the F train south.

"No, it will not be forever," said an MTA spokesperson when we called, frantic almost to the point of tears at G Train purgatory. "Let’s see... Some changes on the G throughout the rest of August. Last weekend there will be a shuttle bus to Court Square."

But what are they doing!!!??

"Track work," she said matter of factly. "They gotta chip out the concrete, take out the tracks, pour new concrete. It’s a big job."

Mayor Bloomberg apparently caused a spot of bother in London today when a severe “media scrum” crowded his tour of the city’s subway. 

Bloomberg wanted to see the Tube’s “ring of steel,” a network of over 12,000 security cameras that monitors the underground train system, in the hopes of emulating it in Manhattan. This may be worthy cause, given our city's track record, but the situation became hectic when too many reporters attempted to crowd a small room. The Independent reports that “officers grappled with photographers” in the commotion.

Witnesses told how a row erupted with security officers and members of the media as the two mayors were ushered into a small room.

The onlooker, who did not want to be named, said: "There were extra security officers for Mr Bloomberg and there was also more media than had been expected.

"As a result there was a lot of pushing and shoving. It was chaotic."

At least the mayor can take comfort in knowing the whole thing was probably captured on video.

Visitors to the site can choose one of seven transportation options (bus, car, hybrid car, taxi, subway/train, bike, walk) and calculate the daily carbon emissions of their commute. According to the site, a 10-mile train ride emits 5 pounds of carbon dioxide, while a car commute of the same distance emits 24.4 pounds.

In addition to calculating daily emissions, the site also has a few transportation factoids (did you know that one out of four transit trips in the U.S. is made in New York City?) and a neat little feature that shows car, SUV, hybrid car and taxi commuters how many trees they would have to plant to counterbalance their yearly commuter emissions. An SUV driver with a 10-mile commute would have to plant 46 trees annually to offset their carbon production.

Better start repenting (and planting).

State and local tax collections are in decline, and the MTA bears the burden of the Pataki philosophy of borrowing to fund transit infrastructure. As a result, the MTA is about to raise mass transit fares for the second time in two years. Gene Russianoff of NYPIRG's Straphanger's Campaign argued the other night that the city contributes too little to the cost of transit-providing only 4% of the MTA's budget. Mayor Bloomberg expressed no interest in raising the city's subsidy and pushed the MTA to do more with less. Former Mayor Ed Koch made the point that fare payers should pay about 50% of the cost of their ride and Russianoff maintained that riders now pay 58% of the cost of each ride.

In Wednesday's Daily News, Pete Donahue wrote that:

"City bus and subway riders pay a bigger share of transit operating expenses than straphangers across the nation... MTA bus riders pay 40% of NYC Transit division expenses through fares while subway riders cover 72%, federal transit data show. Riders in other major cities or metropolitan areas like Chicago, Los Angeles, Boston and San Francisco pay significantly less. MTA officials say comparisons are unfair because riders here have a system unlike any other - with 468 subway stations and 24-hour service."

The MTA response misses the point. New York's larger system also includes larger ridership, and higher revenues to go along with higher expenses. The issue actually has nothing to do with the MTA-and everything to do with our elected officials in Albany who during the Pataki years steadily reduced subsidies for mass transportation. The issue is one of public policy priorities, not the management practices of the MTA. The goals of an effective transportation system are to move people from place to place at the least possible cost and the highest possible speed in as pleasant a way as possible. In this region that means mass transit. Our high population density requires us to reduce the use of autos. We all know that mass transit is more energy efficient and less destructive of the environment than the auto. Currently we use a variety of sources, including bridge tolls, to subsidize mass transit. Obviously, these subsidies are insufficient.

Keeping the fare low requires greater efficiency at the MTA, but no matter how efficient the agency is, public subsidies are still needed. One source of revenue for mass transportation is the real estate transfer tax which has been declining at the same time that energy costs have been rising. Debt service for the MTA is also growing and will total 20% of their budget by 2012. Mass transit is caught in a cost squeeze and new forms of revenue are needed. Some of the capital needs of the agency should be borne by the state and city and not be part of the MTA's budget. Former MTA Chairman Richard Ravitch and his state-appointed Commission are looking at transit financing and hopefully will develop a realistic long-term plan. The plan needs to take another look at congestion pricing and on raising the other taxes now charged on autos, trucks and taxis.

We need to get away from the idea that mass transit can be funded on the cheap. Capital finance-or borrowing for infrastructure-is appropriate, if the revenue sources are removed from the fare box. If a facility is being used for a decade, it makes sense to pay it off in ten years. One of the best potential sources of revenue for mass transit remains congestion pricing. Maybe, if the choice is between higher fares or high auto use fees, our courageous leaders will reconsider congestion charges. I wouldn't make any bets...

"Whereever the subways have blazed a trail, the people have followed,” Bloomberg said.

“The city’s growth has mirrored the subway’s growth,” Spitzer said. “That is a fact. It is a historic reality."

When asked about Chuck Schumer’s criticism of the funding mechanism of the extension (which the city is paying for by selling bonds, not in partnership with the MTA) and the elimination of one proposed subway stop on the extension, Bloomberg jokingly replied, “Senator Schumer is never critical about anything. You must have confused him with someone else.”

Then, he called on Dan Doctoroff to answer the question. “This really is an economic development of the subway system,” and “we have an option to build out” in that area, he said.

The visuals are kind of essential to a) show how really bad an idea this is, and b) prove that it really happened.

So, here you go, courtesy of a well-informed reader.

The barricades, according to Olshan's story, have been removed. But still, how did they get there?

Hearings, anyone?