Free public transport for all...
- Thread starter soulman
- Start date
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
all under sixteens currently have free transport within the greater london area
Yes, you can make public transport cheaper and cheaper at the point of use, towards the point where it is is free, at the the point of use.
There have been cases of that happening in Britain classic examples being South Yorkshire and London. Though there other examples with such schemes as park and rides, supermarket buses and city centre shuttles that are politically less controversial.
You need an agreed decision making and financial framework to embark on such a scheme that at the moment is sadly lacking.
There have been cases of that happening in Britain classic examples being South Yorkshire and London. Though there other examples with such schemes as park and rides, supermarket buses and city centre shuttles that are politically less controversial.
You need an agreed decision making and financial framework to embark on such a scheme that at the moment is sadly lacking.
Baboonking
Registered Baboon
I think it would also be quite redestributive. As a generality, free public transport will benefit the less loaded out there
untethered
For industry & decency
I'd love this to be a workable idea but I fear the practicalities might argue against the principle.
First, you have to examine your motivation. What are you trying to achieve?
Obvious ones are:
- wealth redistribution
- environmental benefits
Perhaps less obvious ones are:
- economic benefits (more flexible workforce, etc.)
- social/cultural benefits
Demand for transport is reasonably inelastic with respect to price, but nonetheless we can expect such a dramatic change in price would have a major effect on travel patterns. The problem is, we have no idea how.
A massive modal shift from roads to rail or from driving private cars to using buses would be good environmentally, but those services are already at capacity and increasing capacity (especially on the railways) is difficult and expensive.
Another factor is the way in which variable pricing is used by public transport operators to shift customers away from the weekday morning rush hour. With an entirely free service, leisure/non-work travellers might choose to travel earlier, adding to the morning crush.
So without arguing over the principle, I'd be interested to hear how anyone thinks this could actually work. What might happen and how would we deal with it?
First, you have to examine your motivation. What are you trying to achieve?
Obvious ones are:
- wealth redistribution
- environmental benefits
Perhaps less obvious ones are:
- economic benefits (more flexible workforce, etc.)
- social/cultural benefits
Demand for transport is reasonably inelastic with respect to price, but nonetheless we can expect such a dramatic change in price would have a major effect on travel patterns. The problem is, we have no idea how.
A massive modal shift from roads to rail or from driving private cars to using buses would be good environmentally, but those services are already at capacity and increasing capacity (especially on the railways) is difficult and expensive.
Another factor is the way in which variable pricing is used by public transport operators to shift customers away from the weekday morning rush hour. With an entirely free service, leisure/non-work travellers might choose to travel earlier, adding to the morning crush.
So without arguing over the principle, I'd be interested to hear how anyone thinks this could actually work. What might happen and how would we deal with it?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Seems like a nice idea in principle.
Aside from the obvious question of cost, surely you would have to think about fact that you'd probably have a sudden jump in numbers of people travelling.
This would put a big strain on a network that is already suffering from capacity problems.
Also - I'm a supporter of public transport and one of the reasons for this is its environmental friendliness compared to private transport. But it has to be borne in mind that every journey by public transport has an environmental impact, too. So by removing the financial disincentive to travel excessively, you could actually end up with a huge increase in number of people travelling in general that would wipe out the benefits created by the change from one mode of transport to the other.
Aside from the obvious question of cost, surely you would have to think about fact that you'd probably have a sudden jump in numbers of people travelling.
This would put a big strain on a network that is already suffering from capacity problems.
Also - I'm a supporter of public transport and one of the reasons for this is its environmental friendliness compared to private transport. But it has to be borne in mind that every journey by public transport has an environmental impact, too. So by removing the financial disincentive to travel excessively, you could actually end up with a huge increase in number of people travelling in general that would wipe out the benefits created by the change from one mode of transport to the other.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Or you could simply consider the savings that would occur from reducing the bureaucratic multi-million pound costs of tickets, ticketing security, hardware, theft and fraud, managing the whole damn farrago better and you could begin to see that free public transport would benefit from having money to invest on the infrastructure to properly serve the people it is intended to serve.
Sudden jump in numbers? I doubt it very much, many people seem to have a pathological addiction to their need not to use public transport for any number of reasons, despite the fact that London is actually quite well served for many, but also importantly not all, people.
But for many people, it would help with low-paid work, studying, caring, all sorts. More importantly, its public transport so its good for the community, brings people together a bit doesn't it?
Sudden jump in numbers? I doubt it very much, many people seem to have a pathological addiction to their need not to use public transport for any number of reasons, despite the fact that London is actually quite well served for many, but also importantly not all, people.
But for many people, it would help with low-paid work, studying, caring, all sorts. More importantly, its public transport so its good for the community, brings people together a bit doesn't it?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Paulie Tandoori said:
This is true.
Paulie Tandoori said:
i'm just thinking that if public transport were suddenly to be free, I would be very tempted to hop on a train to the other end of the country every other weekend. But you might be right that not enough people would do this often enough for it to be a major issue.
And how would you distribute demand ... wouldn't it be mayhem at peak times? On the other hand maybe the overcrowding would serve to discourage people from travelling at these times just as much as ticket pricing would.
Paulie Tandoori said:
All very true.
scifisam said:
Because lots of teenagers treat buses as mobile youth clubs - ride on them all evening making a racket with their mobile phones, taking up seats, swearing, spitting, drinking, smoking, paying no heed to admonitions and generally being aggressive. Before free travel they behaved much the same, but only if they were travelling somewhere, so it was for a limited period. Many drivers I've spoken to are driven to despair by the goings-on.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
teuchter said:
i would imagine there will remain a basic ticketing system of some description and i do think demand linked to that price would make sense ie peak time prices and services. but flat rate simple prices across the board generally, that are within the reach of the people who use public transport.
if there is no ticket system, then people will take the piss obviously, but beyond a need to use tickets to manage demand as well as ensuring a basic respect for the vehicle, i can't see the need for the current system whereby profits, and the need to make them, overrides the need to serve the public who pay for the service, both through direct taxes as well as fares.
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
Yossarian said:
snort
Totally impractical, imagine all 352 buses that pass through brixton at 8.30 in teh morning being bendy.
as for free teen-travel I notice the bus drivers don't bother getting them to press their passes so how can we know which ones have had the privelige withdrawn.
Ah the farmyard scented smell of utopia...
What is meant by free public transport?
Would it include all buses throughout the land or only those currently owned by local authorities?
What a bout trains?; Taxis?
How much would it cost? - if the concept of an extra 1p in the pound on imcome tax is enough to keep voters away from the Liberal Democtrats in hordes then the idea of shelling out hundreds more per annum to pay for someone else sitting on a bus would be enough to disenfranchise any party stupid enough to come up with such a scheme.
What is meant by free public transport?
Would it include all buses throughout the land or only those currently owned by local authorities?
What a bout trains?; Taxis?
How much would it cost? - if the concept of an extra 1p in the pound on imcome tax is enough to keep voters away from the Liberal Democtrats in hordes then the idea of shelling out hundreds more per annum to pay for someone else sitting on a bus would be enough to disenfranchise any party stupid enough to come up with such a scheme.
Cobbles with an arse and an elbow on a thread about public transport.
Now there's a surprise!
Funilly enough the 2 mass experiments in this direction in modern times, notably South Yorkshire and London during the 1980s were well received by voters.
Britain doesn't have an honest discussion on taxation as everything is couched in terms of the headline income tax rate.
People could pay several hundred pounds more in income tax and still save money if public transport were free at the point of use.
It is harder to switch from tomorrow to local public transport free at the point of use. What you do is start to reduce the ammount of revenue for the service that is raised via the farebox and move those costs to a FAIR scheme of taxation.
As the cost of public transport at the point of use begins to fall the use will begin to increase. Enabling steady increases in capacity for public transport.
There are arguments about fares in London nowadays and oyster but you can see the concept working now. That the system will work out the best deal for you, that subsequent journeys are "free" due to fare capping etc etc.
Now there's a surprise!
Funilly enough the 2 mass experiments in this direction in modern times, notably South Yorkshire and London during the 1980s were well received by voters.
Britain doesn't have an honest discussion on taxation as everything is couched in terms of the headline income tax rate.
People could pay several hundred pounds more in income tax and still save money if public transport were free at the point of use.
It is harder to switch from tomorrow to local public transport free at the point of use. What you do is start to reduce the ammount of revenue for the service that is raised via the farebox and move those costs to a FAIR scheme of taxation.
As the cost of public transport at the point of use begins to fall the use will begin to increase. Enabling steady increases in capacity for public transport.
There are arguments about fares in London nowadays and oyster but you can see the concept working now. That the system will work out the best deal for you, that subsequent journeys are "free" due to fare capping etc etc.
Listen very closely Cobbles cos I've only said it about half a dozen times:
Free, at the point of use.
You reduce the cost at the point of use (wth zero being a possible potential target) and transfer those costs to a fair taxation system.
A few hundred quid more on income tax a year for free public transport? Where do I sign?
Based for individuals, on their ability to pay eg local income tax instead of council tax.
There's not necessarily a burden for business rates either. Becasuse staff and customers will be able to get to the business more easily and there would be less congestion hampering the flow of goods.
Free, at the point of use.
You reduce the cost at the point of use (wth zero being a possible potential target) and transfer those costs to a fair taxation system.
A few hundred quid more on income tax a year for free public transport? Where do I sign?
Based for individuals, on their ability to pay eg local income tax instead of council tax.
There's not necessarily a burden for business rates either. Becasuse staff and customers will be able to get to the business more easily and there would be less congestion hampering the flow of goods.
fredfelt
Mostly unknown member
I’m all for public transport, but free at the point of use. No.
Every government policy should consider its impact on the environment. Most forms of transport are energy intensive, be it private or public. By comparison though, journeys by private vehicles should be much more expensive then journeys on public transport.
Better spend money reducing the need to travel by car, by planning and investment in safe and efficient routes for those who choose not to drive.
Every government policy should consider its impact on the environment. Most forms of transport are energy intensive, be it private or public. By comparison though, journeys by private vehicles should be much more expensive then journeys on public transport.
Better spend money reducing the need to travel by car, by planning and investment in safe and efficient routes for those who choose not to drive.
Similar threads
