Author Topic: Public transport should be free  (Read 6443 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Scotsgit

  • Is Reenacting Reality or Reality Reenacting?
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 814
  • Gender: Male
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #15 on: April 29, 2013, 11:58:51 am »
I'd prefer it if public transport was reliable, rather than anything else.  Having trains operate once an hour on Sundays, buses that stop running late at night (and whose idea of early morning is 7am) and which only stop at locations that were convenient about 20 years ago.  Improve how it works before changing anything else.
I am serious, and stop calling me Shirley!

Offline Canadian Mojo

  • Don't Steal Him. We Need Him. He Makes Us Cool!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • Gender: Male
  • Υπό σκιή
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #16 on: April 29, 2013, 12:10:37 pm »
I think the increase in taxes would be higher than you think. You also fail to appreciate that I, along with hundreds of millions of others, live and deal daily with a scarcity of resources and must choose where to allocate funds so we aren't going to pay for things that are useless to us. It is all well and good to say it will cost the same overall, but the fact is that it won't cost the same on the individual level and that is a problem.

How about we just implement electronic boarding pass systems and just give low income families free passes?

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #17 on: April 29, 2013, 12:20:49 pm »
Please forgive this wordy post, but I must indulge my inner LEED's geek mode, or I will 'splode  :P

This concept of free transport and roads is an excellent one as far as reducing air pollution, wear and tear on surface streets and highways, increasing commerce and employment, and taking a rather large budget strain off the shoulders of poor people, seniors, and students. But until a universal way of augmenting free or low cost energy into the running of trains and buses is implemented, it will be very difficult to pass the legislative process.

We have had the tech to do this for years, however;

As you know, the farther an electric charge travels down a wire or third rail, the more power is lost to impedance. Since we have lithium batteries, and even better - super capacitors - to hold and store generated electricity, just retrofit the trains and buses to have fuel cell based motors and super capacitors/batteries, or at least add in a compact fuel cell assist motor package at first , and install the new flexible, plastic coated, high efficiency solar panels on all the bus tops and roofs of train cars, including all freight containers.

There are literally millions of standard freight containers around the world. If they were all eventually fitted with panels and storage capacitors or batteries, it adds up to an incredible amount of power generation in total. Sure, the containers are shaded for periods while stacked aboard freight ships, but so what? Once fitted, these sheet-thin, super tough PV panels are just there generating and storing energy very often and for long periods. The way the containers are designed, the panel will not be in the way or damaged as they are sheet metal thin and lay flat on the roof, below the level of the stacking pins and channels. When the containers are linked and bolted down aboard ship, or hitched up in a train, wiring attached to the sides of the interlocking haul pins, struts and channels allows drawing of that electricity into the grid. Once linked into a train, the panels augment the trains diesel/electric engine, reducing the fuel costs very appreciably - making the rail road companies happy to oblige.

Commuter rail systems using PV car roof panels can then lower the voltage on the third rails, or better yet, install insulated power cabling with conduction patches every ten meters or so. That will save current loss. There are also incredible amounts of room for PV panels or HV compact turbines mounted on 4 meter tall masts along the right-of-ways and track ballast embankments. You may be aware that except for rush hour, most commuter rail cars are sidelined for the greater part of the day - so they would be collecting and generating power but not using it. The same goes for buses - most are sidelined at depots in between rush hours. Adding in solar convection turbine generator towers and/or lots of compact spiral vane HV wind turbines on flat roofs all over the facility buildings in the depots, and along the railway overpasses...well, only during windless nights will the diesel or propane or biofuel assist motors that back up the fuel cells be in full use.

This is just a start, and it could easily cut fuel use down to 30% or less of what is required now.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 5680
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #18 on: April 29, 2013, 12:49:50 pm »
It costs the same. There's no problem with tax bases, you're just shifting costs around.

It does not cost the same. Make transit free and transit use will jump, which means increased costs in purchasing vehicles and keeping them running.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline Witchyjoshy

  • SHITLORD THUNDERBASTARD!!
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 9044
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinks he's a bard
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2013, 01:23:59 pm »
It costs the same. There's no problem with tax bases, you're just shifting costs around.

No, Fred, you're not just shifting costs around, that's the point.  Free public transport = MUCH more people using it = MUCH higher costs.

Especially since in order to accommodate everyone, more buses would have to be bought, more gas bought, more everything.
Mockery of ideas you don't comprehend or understand is the surest mark of unintelligence.

Even the worst union is better than the best Walmart.

Caladur's Active Character Sheet

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #20 on: April 29, 2013, 01:59:19 pm »
With energy cost reduction through all the green geek porn I posted earlier, or just the simplest, cheapest available alternatives, fares can be shrunk to near zero. Also, all that stuff isn't just my pipe dream, it's one of several concepts being discussed by experts around the world. Most local electric power companies and co-ops offer reverse metering for people and businesses whose PV panels and turbines produce a net gain of power, and link it back into the grid: they pay You for that.

The exact same principal applies in the uber green transit system retrofit I posted before. There is plenty enough PV surface area and room for compact spiral turbines to crank out a net gain, especially from the right-of-ways, over passes, plus the sidelined train cars and buses during mid day. Fortunately, revenue from adverts plastered on the additional buses and rail cars also augments transit authorities' income sources, and defrays the costs of buying and maintaining them.


Quote
3. FUNDING MECHANISMS


Passenger fares pay a small percentage of the operating budget for transit—31.5 percent. They pay an even smaller percentage of the total transit budget across the country—21.5 percent.

States pay 21.8 percent of total transit funding, including 25.3 percent of operating expenses and 25.3 percent of capital expenses. The federal government provides 42.2 percent of capital expenses; its contribution to overall transit funding is 19.1 percent. The rest is provided by local governments and directly generated funds, which can include advertising, in addition to passenger fares.
http://www.csg.org/pubs/capitolideas/Mar_Apr_2012/10thingsaboutmasstransit.aspx

BTW, the Council has no association to ALEC, don't worry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_State_Governments
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline MadCatTLX

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2095
  • Gender: Male
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #21 on: April 29, 2013, 02:37:54 pm »
*snip*

Those sound like good ideas, but how much would they cost to implement? How long would it take for those ideas to pay for themselves and start turning profit?
History is full of maniacs, my friend, men and women of intelect, highly perceptive individuals, who's brilliant minds know neither restraint nor taboo. Such notions are the devils we must slay for the edification of pony-kind. Even if said edification means violating the rules of decency, society, and rightousness itself.
                                                                                                                                                             -Twilight Sparkle, MAGIC.mov

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2013, 06:21:25 pm »
Here, they all tie in with Obama's campaign to improve infrastructure and the smart electric grid, plus continuance and expansion of Dept. of Energy and EPA grant programs and tax breaks, plus yada yada...it's mixed jelly bean can of funding sources from federal to state level, and some charitable foundations may kick start some pilot programs for feasibility demos.

On computer emulations, which are sophisticated now, it's very doable, and can be phased in affordably over ten years at most. The big shipping companies and rail freight companies are down right eager to comply - they hurt bad when fuel prices go up. For the idea to really work well, standardization of; PV panel, HV turbine, and power storage devices, container power couplings - for both ease of use and for economies of scale (bulk purchase) are key.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2013, 06:54:51 pm by mellenORL »
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2013, 06:49:39 pm »
I think the increase in taxes would be higher than you think.

Assuming no increase in usage beyond capacity* the increase in taxes would be 0%. Or even negative. People currently pay for public transport, paying the same cost in a different way would not increase costs. Furthermore, you'd be eliminating a bunch of inefficiencies and reducing costs that way.

* Something I'll talk about later; a bit busy right now.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline dpareja

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 5680
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2013, 06:58:12 pm »
I think the increase in taxes would be higher than you think.

Assuming no increase in usage beyond capacity* the increase in taxes would be 0%. Or even negative. People currently pay for public transport, paying the same cost in a different way would not increase costs. Furthermore, you'd be eliminating a bunch of inefficiencies and reducing costs that way.

* Something I'll talk about later; a bit busy right now.

At least in my home city, the public transit system was overtaxed during rush hour. Capacity already needs to be increased, and making transit free would destroy the system without an increase in capacity, and making up for both the loss of fares and the necessity for higher capacity would require a hefty tax hike.
Quote from: Jordan Duram
It doesn't concern you, Sister, that kind of absolutist view of the universe? Right and wrong determined solely by a single all-knowing, all powerful being whose judgment cannot be questioned and in whose name the most horrendous acts can be sanctioned without appeal?

Quote from: Supreme Court of Canada
Being required by someone else’s religious beliefs to behave contrary to one’s sexual identity is degrading and disrespectful.

Offline Canadian Mojo

  • Don't Steal Him. We Need Him. He Makes Us Cool!
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • Gender: Male
  • Υπό σκιή
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2013, 08:48:08 pm »
I think the increase in taxes would be higher than you think.

Assuming no increase in usage beyond capacity* the increase in taxes would be 0%. Or even negative. People currently pay for public transport, paying the same cost in a different way would not increase costs. Furthermore, you'd be eliminating a bunch of inefficiencies and reducing costs that way.

* Something I'll talk about later; a bit busy right now.
If we accept that the net cost to run the system is essentially fixed regardless of its source then the money generated by the charging of fares is an integral part of the funding equation. You cannot remove that sizable chunk of revenue without making it up somewhere else, i.e. taxes. Unless you can demonstrate that the process of charging fares actually costs more money than it brings in you are wrong.

Offline Auri-El

  • Raxacoricofallapatorian
  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2013, 09:13:39 pm »
So in this hypothetical scenario, would everyone have to pay this tax increase, or only people in cities with public transit? Would people in the middle of nowhere, where public transit is completely impractical, also have to pay for a service they can never use?

Offline Kit Walker

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
  • Gender: Male
  • Grand Master Brain Wizard*
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #27 on: April 29, 2013, 10:09:08 pm »
So in this hypothetical scenario, would everyone have to pay this tax increase, or only people in cities with public transit? Would people in the middle of nowhere, where public transit is completely impractical, also have to pay for a service they can never use?

Moreover, how would it be decided what communities contribute what? The aforementioned Rapid has routes that go in to numerous nearby communities (Casscade Township, Walker, Wyoming, Grandville, Standale...just to name a few). However, most of those routes amount to one circle along some major roads - you can hardly say that they're served by public transit, but at the same time their citizens do get some benefit.
"Well believe me, Mike, I calculated the odds of this succeeding versus the odds I was doing something incredibly stupid... and I went ahead anyway." - Crow T. Robot

*Actual title from the Universal Life Church Monastery, the outfit that ordained me as a wedding officiant.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3615
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #28 on: April 29, 2013, 10:14:48 pm »
I will now use examples which are completely local and may not apply anywhere else. I feel justified in doing so, since the original post said this should be implemented in every country.

For instance, the buses I take every day travel partly in the city of Buenos Aires, and partly in one or more municipalities belonging to the province of Buenos Aires, which is jurisdictionally separate. Coordination between the multiple jurisdictions is difficult at best; the people running them are political opponents and they will try to make the others pay the cost if at all possible. (For a recent related example, this is mostly what happened when the federal government transferred the administration of the subway to the city government).

Without some sort of coordination, either my taxes will end up paying for people in the city, or vice-versa. Not an easy scheme to implement, and that's without taking into account all the people who don't take public transport and are already protesting how their money is paying for the transportation of other people. A stupid complaint, I think, but stupid people have a fair bit of political power and making them angry carries its costs.

Comparatively, the disadvantages of paying at point of use are minimal. (Used to be worse, but we have a smart card system that made the whole thing much faster).

This is not to say I am against the idea of tax-supported transport, properly implemented. I suspect the higher costs of more people using transport are offset by the societal advantages. But the part where you actually implement it is non-trivial.
Σא

Offline Cerim Treascair

  • My Love Is Lunar
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Gender: Male
  • Get me my arbalest... explosive bolts, please.
Re: Public transport should be free
« Reply #29 on: April 30, 2013, 03:37:47 am »
Honestly, in my case, I wouldn't mind my car registration being bumped (currently $39 every two years) up to $50 or something.  Do that state-wide here in NY? that's only $11 extra, base-cost, but considering the state population is somewhere around 20 million, even if only 2/3 of the state (12 million) drives, that's still 600 million a year, compared to 468 million right now.  Throw in extras like vanity plates and new plate variants (like the gold and black look now), and that's even more.  Nudge those up a dollar or three and that's even better.  If these changes meant that I wouldn't have to pay tolls anymore? I'd be perfectly fine with that.  Hell, bump my annual state inspection cost up from $27 to $30, that wouldn't hurt me too bad either!

In short, I'm just fine with paying a little more, if it eases things overall.
There is light and darkness in the world, to be sure.  However, there's no harm to be had in walking in the shade or shadows.

Formerly Priestling

"I don't give a fuck about race...I'm white, I'm American, but that shit don't matter.  I'm human."