The primary purpose and function of public transport is to convey consumers and “human resources” to and from places of business. It serves the needs of the businesses and yet the passengers have top pay for it.
This is fundamentally perverse.
2006-06-19
05:46:59
·
53 answers
·
asked by
Frog Five
5
in
Society & Culture
➔ Community Service
I have extended the expiration of this question
to give people a chance to, perhaps, reconsider their, perhaps, rather hasty answers in the light of a little more rhetoric and information.
First: There's the question of MY nationality which several people have mentioned in one way or another. I am NOT American. I am British. I don't know if that makes such a difference, but there you go.
Second: I do not use public transport myself. I walk and I cycle. Who thought of that?
2006-06-23
16:09:51 ·
update #1
Third: The rhetoric.
I might consider using public transport if it were free, but I actually quite like cycling and I do object to paying directly for a service that is provided for the direct benefit of places of business.
Also, I believe the idea that public transport can somehow magically pay for itself isn't really that far fetched.
The reason for a lot of business investments sometimes seem obscure or even bizarre but when you get the accountants on to it, it makes a lot of sense. Public Transport is one of these things that make a lot of sense and is a lot more valuable than it appears. The fare charging system is a horribly crude and inefficient way of funding public transport. The investment should be direct. It would be cheaper, for one thing. I have no doubt it would be used far more by the public making the service itself far more efficient and of even greater value to the businesses it serves than it has ever been.
2006-06-23
16:11:53 ·
update #2
I think it could be argued that business investment in public transport chould effectively appear in the national assets column and taxes could actually fall as a result.
2006-06-23
16:14:09 ·
update #3
You've got a very valid point there. When you see all the advertising on buses and trains you can see that the companies probably pay to put their ads on them, so that's where they could make their money. I know it's odd that a lot of people look at me as though I've got two heads when I say I WALK to places and I go walking for enjoyment, if public transport were free, I'm sure it would cut down on traffic, cut down on pollution, ah but, I've just realised, less traffic means less speeding fines and less road tax for the government, therefore free public transport for all would probably never happen!
2006-06-25 21:41:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
If public transport was 'free', where would the funding for the following come from, considering the budgets of the local authorities are already overstreched:-
Fuel
MOT
Insurance for the vehicles involved
Maintance costs (new tyres, parts for the engines, replacemenmt coverings for the seats)
Wages for the Drivers, Mechanics, etc
Overnight parking for the vehicles and the buildings used to 'house' the support staff
Making the timetable information available and kept up to date
I rely TOTALLY on public transport to get everywhere - work, education, essential shopping (food, clothes), leisure - as I do NOT drive, and owning/using your own vehicle is far to expensive.
I live in England, I know first hand what a wonderful service the Bus Drivers in this area provide, not only transporting people from A to B, but also they provide the only 'friendly' face that some people - especially the elderly - see for days.
The next time you come across a Bus Driver, smile at him/her and say please and thank you - it will make their day a little bit brighter.
2006-06-26 23:15:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by k 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. How could there be more improvements in transportation system thru higher technologies if we won't be paying anymore for a public transport? Maintenance needs money as well which we could only get in collecting fares from paying passengers unless the government would declare additional tax for that so public transport would be free which would be another burden for the people. We really have to pay for our public transport.
2006-07-01 05:27:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by boots 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I kinda have mixed feelings on this issue because I never looked at it as an aid to businesses. Wow!! I used to think that it should be something that we pay for because If it were free, it would be run down and not maintained. On second thought, most public transportation systems are not maintained and run down. After seeing this question, I think my opinion has changed. There should be a tax of some sort that businesses contribute a small fee to the public transportation system. It takes money to make money. Not only that, but consumers would have more money to contribute to the economy if they had free transportation to spend their money. Everyone wins!! That is an excellent question!! Totally changed my point of view.
2006-06-29 19:30:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by amyiswaykoo 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
You do have a point! Indeed public transport does erve bussines interests considering that the vast majority of commuters are people travelling to and from work. You're in the UK i lived in teh UK too until i moved to Ireland.
In Ireland people pay a fare for public transport but anyone unemployed, on the sick, and elderly people do not pay. They travel for free.
I used public transports to go to and from work and used to go crazy as fares increased while the service proved quite poor. Then i started to frive and got a mileage allowance for work. Now!!! That in tself tell you that something's not quite right! Don't get me wrong i enjoyed my allowance but thinking back of all these years when i had spent so much on bus and taxi fares! You see as a nurse i'd have to go to work when rostered to! It didn't matter! Came Christmas, new year, Easter week-end etc... I ahd to make my way to work and back with a taxi, charged double fare and as i worked 16 miles away from gome ... You can imagine how much it cost me!
So i do believe that people using public transport to and from work should get either an allowance (Same as i got for driving to work) or else a tax rebate of some sort because they have no other measn of commuting to and from work. Finally ... We're told how we shouldn't take our cars to work (Pollution) but most people still drive because
1. Public transport is a sham
2. Fares are always going up!
So indeed you are right and the whole thing is fundamentally flawed
2006-06-25 21:20:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Only if the transportation stops at the places where people are consuming goods and services. Take the subway in NY or the MARTA in Atlanta. They stop at stations, not at malls and not at the Wal-Mart or Target. Many people take the metro transit to see friends, go to the park, things that do not do anything for the economy. The purpose of public transportation is to relieve traffic congestion and give people with no other options (like... a car) a way to travel safely to their destinations at an affordable price.
Transportation designed specifically for consumers is free to the consumer, an example being the Monorail at Disney or the airport to hotel shuttle busses.
2006-06-19 05:52:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by anniewalker 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As it is, taxes cover most of the expenses. If passengers didn't pay for it, then taxes would cover the whole thing. In Seattle, public transportation is free within the city, yet people in South King County (where public transportation doesn't go) are paying for it. That is fundamentally perverse.
2006-06-19 05:56:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Beardog 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes ! Public transportation says it all............. private transportation has the corner on the 'people moving' biz. So I am in favor of public transportation, with clean, frequent, connecting to other public services available for the public at a resonable price, subsidized by taxes. (If so called third world countries can offer reasonable transportation, why can't the richest county in the world?? We need leaders with global vision to make this happen.
2006-06-19 07:41:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sophia B 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I rely TOTALLY on public transport to get everywhere - work, education, essential shopping (food, clothes), leisure - as I do NOT drive, and owning/using your own vehicle is far to expensive.
I live in England, I know first hand what a wonderful service the Bus Drivers in this area provide, not only transporting people from A to B, but also they provide the only 'friendly' face that some people - especially the elderly - see for days.
The next time you come across a Bus Driver, smile at him/her and say please and thank you - it will make their day a little bit brighter.
2014-10-14 10:07:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that many things should be free and provided by the government. This includes public transportation and health care. The only problem is taxes. Americans hate to pay taxes, even if it will benefit them. If public transportation were free of charge then taxes would rise to pay for upkeep, gas, etc. These are already partially paid for in taxes but the fact that we pay 40 cents to ride the bus helps.
2006-06-19 05:52:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Molly R 2
·
0⤊
0⤋