Rapid transit has been a quirky fascination of mine since I was a little kid. Back then, the only form of transportation I ever really took was the back of my mother’s minivan, and the thought of a train that ran underground piqued both my terror and my curiosity.

I was therefore fairly surprised when I came to Harvard and started hearing scores of disgruntled New Yorkers complaining about the MBTA’s dearth of late-night service. Being from Massachusetts and thus having grown up making New York the frequent object of a half-joking derision, I chalked up the complaints as mere snobbery and a lack of appreciation.

But then I realized that those New Yorkers were right, and not just because the lack of late night service makes travel more difficult for fun-seeking college students. As it stands today, Boston is a fairly large city that—for all intents and purposes—shuts down after midnight. Compare our sleeping city at 2 in the morning to the hustle and bustle of downtown Manhattan. In New York City, businesses stay open, people are out and about, and the subway system is running.

Of course, our early-closing T service is far from the only cause of Boston’s lack of late night activity. Rather, the opposite is more likely: true to its Puritan heritage, our city has traditionally been inactive at night. When the MBTA opened and as such became the first American subway system, those traditions were still in effect. It wouldn’t have made any sense to keep the T running late at night—there wouldn’t have been any people up to use it.

Nowadays, the benefits to extending late night service are clear. According to a recent Boston Globe survey, large numbers of Bostonians and Boston area college students believe that late night T service would improve the city’s nightlife, which would be a boon to the economy. Commuters working late night shifts—such as nurses—would be able to get home in a safer and easier manner. The increased activity could attract more start-ups and other businesses, and make the city less desolate (and thus, safer) at night.

Realistically, these benefits would come at some cost. Later service on the T, for example, would facilitate the travels of late-night party-goers. This possibility is problematic on several levels: intoxicated people could present security problems at night, or businesses could see an increasing number of hung over workers on early Monday mornings, leading to unforeseen costs.

Later hours would also mean increased operational costs, including costs related to running the actual vehicles, paying conductors and other staff, and providing security. But the Globe’s recent survey should assure the city that keeping the T open later would mean increased ridership, which could defray the costs and even turn a profit.

The claim that the T cannot afford to extend late night service is also questionable considering the number of expensive projects in the pipeline. These include the recently-opened commuter rail service to Hyannis on Cape Cod, lines to New Bedford and Fall River, and a physical extension of the Green Line into Somerville and Medford.

All of these projects are compelling on paper. They’re also expensive—running commuter rail trains requires using diesel, and an extension of the Green Line means all the costs of building news rails and stations.

These projects come after significant cuts in service and hikes in rider fares, as well as at a time when the MBTA could vastly improve service on existing lines. Late-night service would be a sound investment choice that wouldn’t require costs associated with building rails and lines, and which could actually bring some much needed revenue into the system.

At least some Massachusetts politicians seem to be on board with this sort of idea. Governor Deval Patrick ’78 JD ’82 proposed in January that the legislature pass a transportation bill containing provisions for late-night service and much-needed upgrades to existing services as well as several capital projects. In the political battle that ensued, however, the Legislature passed a bill that prioritizes capital projects, despite Governor Patrick’s veto. The new bill contains provisions for exploring the possibilities of late night service, but does not guarantee its implementation.

Perhaps the best hope for smart investments in the MBTA is the current mayoral race in Boston. Most mayoral candidates have embraced the notion of expanding and improving service on existing lines, including late-night service. Mayoral candidate and City Councilor John Connolly ’95, for example, asserted that “we ought to be focused on extending the T hours” and that Boston should become a “24-hour city” to unlock its “economic potential.”

In order to fully unlock that potential, Boston must maximize the benefits it reaps from its existing rapid transit system. Extending late night-night hours, making necessary repairs, and improving service on existing lines are surefire ways to do so.

John A. Griffin ’16 is a Crimson editorial writer in Lowell House.