🚲Feb 26, 2023

“The reason most public transportation is seen as ‘losing’ money is precisely because it charges for trips. If you don't charge fares, suddenly it can't ‘lose’ money. It just costs money, the same as the roads.”

This random comment has given me my new favourite argument for removing fares from public transit.

Show thread🚲Feb 26, 2023

If you want to see what a road looks like when it doesn’t lose money, look at the 407 in Toronto, which costs $0.50 per kilometre to drive along (about $0.58 USD per mile in freedom units)

(And that has a lot of mitigating factors even so)

Show threadDaniel GibsonFeb 27, 2023

@dx
to be fair, you have to pay taxes on your car and on gasoline, so it's not like cars are necessarily a net negative from an "income for state vs its spending on roads etc" point of view..

(I'm all for free public transit, I just think that this particular argument seems a bit.. simplicistic?)

Show thread🚲
@Doomed_Daniel @dx I think you’ll find any rigorous accounting of the cost of cars on society to not be in cars’ favour. Smarter people than us have already crunched the numbers.
Feb 27, 2023 at 1:13amWeb
Show threadDaniel GibsonFeb 27, 2023

@dx
that's possible, but if you try to take all factors into account, the calculation is gonna get incredibly complex and thus easier to disregard..
I think there's also calculations that say that free public transportation would be a net-benefit even financially, but those too seem to be too complex to convince anyone in charge :-/

Yes, this sucks: Simplistic arguments don't work well (when their gaps are easily spotted), but neither do complex ones

Show threadNemoFeb 27, 2023
@Doomed_Daniel @dx I don't think we should assume that an argument is too complex for "the people in charge". But simply that having something not privatized and commodified goes against the hegemonic believe that the market economy improves everyone's living standards and thus should rule over all.
Show threadHatbringerFeb 27, 2023

@tagtraeumernemo @Doomed_Daniel @dx
I would argue that it is primarily policy that leads to the market valuing automobiles, not the other way around. Most roads, after all, are publicly owned as are automobile insurance companies. People drive cars because our environments are car centric.

I think the first step to reducing car dependency has to come from up top. People will value cars less when the alternatives are better.

Show threadNemoFeb 27, 2023
@Hatbringer @Doomed_Daniel @dx well, yes and no. Policies are mostly done in favour of those who provide the best incentives. To the policy makers. I think the technical term is lobbying. And it's a self-replicating power dynamic that the automobile industrialists profit the most from current transport policies and use their profits to incentivize current/further policies in their favour.
Show threadNemoFeb 27, 2023
@Hatbringer @Doomed_Daniel @dx also reducing car dependency doesn't *have* to come from the top and tbh probably won't.
Show threadJoeChipFeb 27, 2023
@tagtraeumernemo
Reducing car dependency will necessarily involve state action, just as increasing it did.
Show threadKneworldodorAug 3, 2023
@JoeChip @tagtraeumernemo increasing car centric society was government and corporations working together. There is a long history of this while government direction seems to follow representing the citizens just enough to avoid revolt and provide the illusion of democracy.
Show threadHatbringerFeb 27, 2023
@tagtraeumernemo @Doomed_Daniel @dx While lobbying undoubtedly plays a factor in the automobile's success, I suspect it primarily targets things like oil exploration and vehicle emission standards. I believe that if real changes are to come, it will be from more local levels of governance, which are more resistant to corporate influence. A mayor who closes motorways in favor of a subway station will do far more than anything at a federal level, I think.
Show threadbemmesrNov 15, 2024
@tagtraeumernemo @Doomed_Daniel @dx
The thing is that a market economy really is best for everyone, IF you're willing to wait decades or centuries for your particular problem to be solved. The market moves too slowly and in the meantime people are dealing with problems that can't wait. This is exactly the type of situation that government intervention is for.
Show threadテンセイ ・ tensei Feb 27, 2023
@Doomed_Daniel @dx What's their kickback, though? Public benefit is not always personal benefit (which is why we should require those in charge to divest their investments/stakes in private sector)
Show threadBen AvelingAug 2, 2023
@Doomed_Daniel @dx We don't need an exactly correct answer. A roughly good enough one is enough.
Show threadhschmaleFeb 27, 2023

@dx @Doomed_Daniel cars are an unnecessary evil. Let's build the world we want to live in for tomorrow.

Free public transit funded by a massive toll on drivers and parking. In fact all paid parking should be owned by the government. Your parking garage is dead weight loss and only necessary due to the failure of cars.