Mass transit, other than the NE USA and parts of california, has failed. People will never give up their cars. Politicians have been dreaming of converting the population to mass transit for as long as there have been cars. It hasn't worked yet.
I've been on the San Fran BART and it works very well. Then there is the Kong Kong Mass Transit Corp which is popular. Depends how you want to define "mass transit". Isn't it the same as public transport in it's conception? i.e. you don't own the transport you simply pay a fare to the operator use it. Every city and country has its buses and trains, what about the Paris Metro, London Underground, NY Subway system, Moscow Metro, they are all forms of Mass transit.
Most transit systems in the US are struggling financially. In addition, most transit systems are struggling to attract riders and if they get the much dreamed of ridership increase, say because of a new LRT line, the system can't handle the increase effectively until millions more dollars are spent to upgrade the infrastructure to support the new addition.
In the US, you pay for these transit systems at many levels through Federal, state and local taxes, even if you never use the system, as well as at the farebox.
Where I live at, I've seen my local transit system go from the top of the pack in the 1970's (ranked 3rd in the nation for ridership with a budget which was literally laughable) to a shell of its former self today (with a budget that is through the roof and they're still screaming for more).
In today's time conscious society, not all that many are really willing to give up a 20 minute commute from home to work in exchange for an hour long commute at a fare that is barely lower than the cost of driving and parking.
In addition, most transit systems are struggling to attract riders
In the UK we have the opposite problem with over-crowded trains and buses in the rush hours, and many people having to stand without a seat despite having paid the fare for one. Discounted fares for off-peak travel are offered to try to offset that. Generally our infrastructure is in good shape apart from weekend engineering maintenance or upgrade works which traditionally always spill over into Monday morning.
In the US, you pay for these transit systems at many levels through Federal, state and local taxes, even if you never use the system, as well as at the farebox.
Public travel in the UK has all been privatised with bus companies having franchises to run a route, the same with the railways with train operating companies awarded franchises to run a rail area. They in turn lease the rolling stock from Rolling stock leasing companies. However the infrastructure, tracks signalling, bridges, tunnels, stations, is run by Network Rail which is an "arms length public body" of the Government Department for Transport with no shareholders, which reinvests its income in the railways. It is overseen by the Office of Rail and Road.
Network Rail is funded by a mix of direct grants from the Government, charges levied on train operators that use the network, and income from commercial property estate. The London Underground system is operated by Transport for London (TfL) under chairmanship of the Mayor of London. Being over 60 I have a London Freedom Pass which gives me free travel on trains, buses, trams, DLR within the London Fare zones area, and buses only elsewhere in the country. It is funded jointly by all the London Councils.
Therefore you could say that national taxes i.e.income tax etc funds Network Rail, and that local London Council taxes pay for the Freedom pass. Other than that fares are a commercial matter for the TOC's and bus companies. As residents we pay indirectly for the infrastructure whether we use it or not, but only directly pay in fares when we do.
The USA is much larger of course and you can't really compare like for like. You have many more thousands of track miles to maintain which is difficult to justify if the passengers aren't there. Also you guys think nothing of driving 100 miles for a weekly shop, in London there will be a super market a couple of miles away, and not that far in rural England either. Living in the uSA you couldn't manage without a car, in the UK being so much smaller, we often can. Also to factor in is the ridiculously cheap cost of USA petrol at £0.54/litre, we pay £1.14 litre. If our cost was less than half price many more would use their cars I am sure, as being cheaper than fares.
But also to bear in mind is that Central London is a Congestion charge zone. The Congestion Charge is an £11.50 daily charge for driving a vehicle within the zone between 07:00 and 18:00, Monday to Friday. There is also a Low Emission zone, from 23 October 2017, cars, vans, minibuses, buses, coaches and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) in central London will need to meet minimum exhaust emission standards, or pay a daily £10 Emissions Surcharge in addition to the Congestion Charge. £100 for larger vans, minibuses, £200 for lorries, buses, coaches.
From 2019 the Ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week within the same area as the current Congestion Charging Zone. The ULEZ standards are in addition to the existing Congestion Charge and the Low Emission Zone requirements. £12.50 to drive through central London, while buses, coaches and HGVs will pay £100.
So drivers of private dirty diesels with pay £24 a day to enter central London. All three schemes are monitored by ANPR CCTV cameras, and you have to register and pay in advance, or you get a hefty fine.
But I digress, to get back to electric vehicles, of course they will not pay £24 a day as there are no emissions. It all ties in with these mini-Holland cycling schemes. It's designed to discourage commuters driving to work and either use public transport or go green and cycle in. It's all aimed at cleaning up the London air, and getting polluting vehicles off the streets. But it's a double edged sword if public transport is too congested to be attractive.
That is why many large firms have re-located outside London close to the M25 for access, for ease of staff getting to work, and a pleasanter living environment.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Then children are amongst the smartest of them all. My son has a shovel in his hands but in his imagination it's an aircraft!
Sadly it always crashes when he throws it.
But it does not consume any fossil fuels!
Maybe not in use, but it did when it was made! If it is metal then ore would have been smelted down to make it in a coke fired furnace. If it is plastic then crude oil would have been used to produce the material for it.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
In the UK we have the opposite problem with over-crowded trains and buses in the rush hours, and many people having to stand without a seat despite having paid the fare for one.
That's a common misconception among buss and subway riders, the price of a ticket enables you access, seats are a whole other story and are not guaranteed at any price on most systems. In Wash DC they would like to take out the seats altogether on their subway system but because of the designs of the cars it's not possible, some of the hardware needed to run the cars is under the seats and takes up almost every available inch under them.
It is true to say that when you buy your ticket you are paying for the journey and not a seat, although it is entirely reasonable to expect one. Flying you pay for the seat as well as the journey. It is also true that a ticket is not sold for any particular train on that journey. Off peak trains may well have seats available without playing sardines during rush hours. Although when booked with a seat reservation, it does refers to one particular train.
Of course for "shortish" journeys commuting to work, strap hanging or standing has had become the norm, for longer journeys you can pre-book a seat. But it also pays to be savvy. When both my parents were alive I used to regularly take the train from London Waterloo to Exeter in Devon.
At Waterloo they have a 30 minute turn round, so the incoming train arrived at 10 minutes to the hour and departed back at 20 minutes past the hour. I was always on the platform as it came in, waited until they all got off then found a nice window seat with a table for the 3 hour trip. No booking required.
Again it is a two edged sword, if they ran more trains so you always had a seat, the fares would be dearer.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
It is true to say that when you buy your ticket you are paying for the journey and not a seat, although it is entirely reasonable to expect one. Flying you pay for the seat as well as the journey. It is also true that a ticket is not sold for any particular train on that journey. Off peak trains may well have seats available without playing sardines during rush hours. Although when booked with a seat reservation, it does refers to one particular train.
Of course for "shortish" journeys commuting to work, strap hanging or standing has had become the norm, for longer journeys you can pre-book a seat. But it also pays to be savvy. When both my parents were alive I used to regularly take the train from London Waterloo to Exeter in Devon.
At Waterloo they have a 30 minute turn round, so the incoming train arrived at 10 minutes to the hour and departed back at 20 minutes past the hour. I was always on the platform as it came in, waited until they all got off then found a nice window seat with a table for the 3 hour trip. No booking required.
Again it is a two edged sword, if they ran more trains so you always had a seat, the fares would be dearer.
Yes it would cost more!! I have seen stories of Asian/Indian airlines floating the idea of standing room only sections for their very short hop planes, essentially take off at one place fly for 15 minutes and land some place else, but don't know if they actually happened or not.
I have seen stories of Asian/Indian airlines floating the idea of standing room only sections for their very short hop planes, essentially take off at one place fly for 15 minutes and land some place else, but don't know if they actually happened or not.
Well we all know about the Asian based budget airlines, but I doubt that Aviation authorities anywhere would allow flying with passengers not strapped into a seat for take off and landing. Then again you mentioned India, so who knows, look at their Passenger Conditions of Carriage policy!
I tell you mate, going South civilisation ends at Dover. They eat babies North of Watford, and anywhere East of Southend and your life assurance policy is invalid.
Q. Do you partake in any hazardous sports?
A. Yeah, I travel in Asia.
click brrrrrrrrrrr
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
"The true sign of
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination" Albert Einstein
Then children are amongst the
Then children are amongst the smartest of them all. My son has a shovel in his hands but in his imagination it's an aircraft!
Sadly it always crashes when he throws it.
But it does not consume any fossil fuels!
Green grants
Green grants
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Chris S_2 wrote: Mass
Most transit systems in the US are struggling financially. In addition, most transit systems are struggling to attract riders and if they get the much dreamed of ridership increase, say because of a new LRT line, the system can't handle the increase effectively until millions more dollars are spent to upgrade the infrastructure to support the new addition.
In the US, you pay for these transit systems at many levels through Federal, state and local taxes, even if you never use the system, as well as at the farebox.
Where I live at, I've seen my local transit system go from the top of the pack in the 1970's (ranked 3rd in the nation for ridership with a budget which was literally laughable) to a shell of its former self today (with a budget that is through the roof and they're still screaming for more).
In today's time conscious society, not all that many are really willing to give up a 20 minute commute from home to work in exchange for an hour long commute at a fare that is barely lower than the cost of driving and parking.
In addition, most transit
In the UK we have the opposite problem with over-crowded trains and buses in the rush hours, and many people having to stand without a seat despite having paid the fare for one. Discounted fares for off-peak travel are offered to try to offset that. Generally our infrastructure is in good shape apart from weekend engineering maintenance or upgrade works which traditionally always spill over into Monday morning.
Public travel in the UK has all been privatised with bus companies having franchises to run a route, the same with the railways with train operating companies awarded franchises to run a rail area. They in turn lease the rolling stock from Rolling stock leasing companies. However the infrastructure, tracks signalling, bridges, tunnels, stations, is run by Network Rail which is an "arms length public body" of the Government Department for Transport with no shareholders, which reinvests its income in the railways. It is overseen by the Office of Rail and Road.
Network Rail is funded by a mix of direct grants from the Government, charges levied on train operators that use the network, and income from commercial property estate. The London Underground system is operated by Transport for London (TfL) under chairmanship of the Mayor of London. Being over 60 I have a London Freedom Pass which gives me free travel on trains, buses, trams, DLR within the London Fare zones area, and buses only elsewhere in the country. It is funded jointly by all the London Councils.
Therefore you could say that national taxes i.e.income tax etc funds Network Rail, and that local London Council taxes pay for the Freedom pass. Other than that fares are a commercial matter for the TOC's and bus companies. As residents we pay indirectly for the infrastructure whether we use it or not, but only directly pay in fares when we do.
The USA is much larger of course and you can't really compare like for like. You have many more thousands of track miles to maintain which is difficult to justify if the passengers aren't there. Also you guys think nothing of driving 100 miles for a weekly shop, in London there will be a super market a couple of miles away, and not that far in rural England either. Living in the uSA you couldn't manage without a car, in the UK being so much smaller, we often can. Also to factor in is the ridiculously cheap cost of USA petrol at £0.54/litre, we pay £1.14 litre. If our cost was less than half price many more would use their cars I am sure, as being cheaper than fares.
But also to bear in mind is that Central London is a Congestion charge zone. The Congestion Charge is an £11.50 daily charge for driving a vehicle within the zone between 07:00 and 18:00, Monday to Friday. There is also a Low Emission zone, from 23 October 2017, cars, vans, minibuses, buses, coaches and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) in central London will need to meet minimum exhaust emission standards, or pay a daily £10 Emissions Surcharge in addition to the Congestion Charge. £100 for larger vans, minibuses, £200 for lorries, buses, coaches.
From 2019 the Ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week within the same area as the current Congestion Charging Zone. The ULEZ standards are in addition to the existing Congestion Charge and the Low Emission Zone requirements. £12.50 to drive through central London, while buses, coaches and HGVs will pay £100.
So drivers of private dirty diesels with pay £24 a day to enter central London. All three schemes are monitored by ANPR CCTV cameras, and you have to register and pay in advance, or you get a hefty fine.
But I digress, to get back to electric vehicles, of course they will not pay £24 a day as there are no emissions. It all ties in with these mini-Holland cycling schemes. It's designed to discourage commuters driving to work and either use public transport or go green and cycle in. It's all aimed at cleaning up the London air, and getting polluting vehicles off the streets. But it's a double edged sword if public transport is too congested to be attractive.
That is why many large firms have re-located outside London close to the M25 for access, for ease of staff getting to work, and a pleasanter living environment.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Then children are amongst the
Maybe not in use, but it did when it was made! If it is metal then ore would have been smelted down to make it in a coke fired furnace. If it is plastic then crude oil would have been used to produce the material for it.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Chris S_2 wrote: In the UK
That's a common misconception among buss and subway riders, the price of a ticket enables you access, seats are a whole other story and are not guaranteed at any price on most systems. In Wash DC they would like to take out the seats altogether on their subway system but because of the designs of the cars it's not possible, some of the hardware needed to run the cars is under the seats and takes up almost every available inch under them.
It is true to say that when
It is true to say that when you buy your ticket you are paying for the journey and not a seat, although it is entirely reasonable to expect one. Flying you pay for the seat as well as the journey. It is also true that a ticket is not sold for any particular train on that journey. Off peak trains may well have seats available without playing sardines during rush hours. Although when booked with a seat reservation, it does refers to one particular train.
Of course for "shortish" journeys commuting to work, strap hanging or standing has had become the norm, for longer journeys you can pre-book a seat. But it also pays to be savvy. When both my parents were alive I used to regularly take the train from London Waterloo to Exeter in Devon.
At Waterloo they have a 30 minute turn round, so the incoming train arrived at 10 minutes to the hour and departed back at 20 minutes past the hour. I was always on the platform as it came in, waited until they all got off then found a nice window seat with a table for the 3 hour trip. No booking required.
Again it is a two edged sword, if they ran more trains so you always had a seat, the fares would be dearer.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Chris S_2 wrote:It is true to
Yes it would cost more!! I have seen stories of Asian/Indian airlines floating the idea of standing room only sections for their very short hop planes, essentially take off at one place fly for 15 minutes and land some place else, but don't know if they actually happened or not.
I have seen stories of
Well we all know about the Asian based budget airlines, but I doubt that Aviation authorities anywhere would allow flying with passengers not strapped into a seat for take off and landing. Then again you mentioned India, so who knows, look at their Passenger Conditions of Carriage policy!
I tell you mate, going South civilisation ends at Dover. They eat babies North of Watford, and anywhere East of Southend and your life assurance policy is invalid.
Q. Do you partake in any hazardous sports?
A. Yeah, I travel in Asia.
click brrrrrrrrrrr
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now