Should all public transport be free?

Question

I cannot think of one GOOD reason why not. Can you?

This question was asked a year ago but I think it should be aired again.

So no good reason then.

Of course it would be paid for by taxes.

In the UK we already pay huge subsidies to bus and train companies - most of which is syphoned off for profit.

For those pedants - I obviously mean free at the point of use.

Still no good reason!

Answer 1

It's never "free." If the users don't pay, the cost is subsidized and all taxpayers fund their use. The benefit here would be less traffic on the roads and people able to make their commutes in less time. Not to mention if it was "free" more people would use public transportation.

But that would be a hard sell, and a lot of people who feel they're taxed to the max wouldn't go for it. The only way to sidestep that is for major employers to fund routes most heavily travelled by commuters. Another hard sell, but it could happen!

Answer 2

My answer concerns my country.
Public transport is free here( Mauritius) for students , people 60 years old over and disabled persons.
I find ok enough that if someone who does not fit in the exceptions above do pay for this service.
There are a few private companies which run fleets of vehicles for public transport.
Being private companies , it's their right to make profit and at the same time give the same facilities to the exceptions i mentioned above.
PS.
Mauritius area is smaller than London UK.

Answer 3

Sure, I really want the government to run all public transportation. Ever seen how efficient the government is? Despite what you socialists think, nothing is free. Private companies make small profits which are reinvested in improvements due to competition. and pay the owners for risking their money. The government operates in a perpetual Situation Normal All F----d Up [SNAFU] so why operate the transport services that way.

Answer 4

There is no such thing as a free lunch, or free public transportation either. You really answered your own question when you admitted that this "free" public transportation would be paid for by taxes. And who pays taxes? You and I of course, so it would not really be free. Besides this obvious problem, consider the fact that government subsidized programs are always wasteful and you soon realize that the cost of this "free" service would be greater that a privately run system.

Answer 5

No, it shouldn't. Because it CAN'Tbe.

A public (mass) transit system requires the committment of a lot of resources. Granted, it is far more efficient, done properly, than having umteen zillion cars trying to cram into a constricted urban area.

But--someone has to pay for it. Which means either the taxpayers, the customers, or a combination of the two. In addition, there's another issue--"public" can either mean a state-owned system or a privatized "common carrier" system. By and large, the private carrier systems tend to be more efficient.

Either way--why should taxpayers have to bear the entire burden and the users none at all? Keep in mind--no matter WHAT you do--its not free. Someone has to pay the bills.

Here's what I think makes more sense: a public/private partnership that provides elements of privatization and thus an incentive to operate the system efficiently, combined with a program that will allow low-income users access at reduced (or even zero) cost--but one in which the majority of riders do pay some of the cost.

Answer 6

If public delivery became 'unfastened', the place would the investment for right here come from, thinking the budgets of the community government are already overstreched:- gasoline MOT coverage for the vehicles in touch Maintance costs (new tyres, areas for the engines, replacemenmt coverings for the seats) Wages for the Drivers, Mechanics, etc in one day parking for the vehicles and the homes used to 'domicile' the help team Making the timetable tips available and stored as much as this component I remember specifically on public delivery to get everywhere - paintings, guidance, necessary procuring (foodstuff, clothing), entertainment - as i don't force, and possessing/making use of your very own motor vehicle is a lot to high priced. I stay in England, i recognize first hand what a mind-blowing provider the Bus Drivers in this section grant, not in elementary terms transporting human beings from A to B, yet in addition they provide the only 'friendly' face that some human beings - exceptionally the elderly - see for days. the subsequent time you come back in the time of a Bus driving force, smile at him/her and say please and thank you - it will make their day a splash brighter.

Answer 7

Here is a good reason. How is public transport going to be paid for if it is free? It would have to be paid for with tax dollars. Public transport only exists is larger cities. Why should people that don't have access to public transport have to support it for the benefit of the people in the cities? They will still have to pay for a car and gas and still pay for public transportation so others can get around for free.

Answer 8

I don't think it should be free but it should certainly be much cheaper. If the government were serious about environmental issues they would at least subsidise it in someway, especially for those people who used it as their sole mode of transport.

The reason why people stick to their cars is because public transport is expensive, infrequent and often dirty. If public transport was more convenient more people would use it.

I don't drive and use both the train and buses to get to work. If it was safer to ride a bike on the roads I would probably substitute that for the bus.

Answer 9

Don't know about you but I'm already fed up with paying for all the illegals here and the British who can't be bothered to get off their lazy behinds and get a job, don't see why i should have to pay for their transport too! I'm a single mum of two i go to work and pay for myself and kids.oh and the above!

Answer 10

Public transport is already heavily subsidized.

Where I live, in Santa Clara County, according to County figures, the cost of a bus ride is over $5.00, yet the ticket price for full fare is only $1.75. Then there are lots of discounted fares for people who are disabled, on welfare and etc.

The taxpayers make up the difference.