.....free....free....free....free.......free.......


Luxembourg is first country to make all public transport free

Country is first to implement measure nationwide in attempt to reduce congestion

.....Luxembourg is to become the first country to offer a free public transport system, as the government tries to reduce particularly dense car traffic.

Some cities have taken similar partial measures but the transport ministry said it was the only time such a decision had encompassed an entire country.

Public transport will be free from Saturday in a move that will affect approximately 40% of households and save each one about €100 per year. The measure is part of a wider plan to reduce congestion.

Private cars are the most used form of transport in the country. According to a 2018 survey by TNS Ilres, cars accounted for 47% of business travel and 71% of leisure.

Buses are used for only 32% of trips to work, followed by trains, which account for 19%. In comparison, in Paris, 69% of workers use public transport, according to Insee, the French statistics institute.

Luxembourg City, the capital, where a tramway has been under construction for several years, is notoriously bad for traffic jams. The first section of the tramway has been operational since the end of 2017, but work will continue for several years to link the southern outskirts of the city to the north, where the airport is located.

The transport minister, François Bausch, said: “Systematic and continuous investment is a sine qua non-essential condition for promoting the attractiveness of public transport.”

Sales from the existing €2 tickets amount to €41m a year, which the authorities said represented just 8% of the annual budget of €500m. This will now be met by the Treasury.

The exception to the free-for-all public transport system will be first-class travel on trains and certain night bus services.


Lux......be a lady tonight...........?!

---

_____________________________________

I reject your reality and substitute my own!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2020 12:21PM by NewtonMP2100.

It's amazing how little revenue is generated by paying customers, so why not make it free?

In Sacramento, "fare evaders", are one of the largest categories of "users" of public transportation, so our public transportation system hires boatloads of transit agents to catch them, which has to be very expensive. Furthermore, those who are caught have to make a court appearance, which also costs the taxpayers money.

A lot of people look at the money used to pay for public transportation, and think it's a waste. I disagree with this. If most people used public transportation for their daily commute, it would greatly reduce the need for building and maintaining highway infrastructure. I bet that over the long run, that most people would actually save money on taxes. A bonus side effect would be that the existing infrastructure would actually become usable for those who for various reasons can't use public transportation.

This, unlike California's high speed rail boondoggle, seems like a win-win.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Correction; it's not "free"... they just shifted the cost from the people that use it, to everyone, via tax revenue's, minus the inherent overhead of using the tax system.

Not saying it's a bad use of those funds, just making sure everyone doesn't think "free" mean free.

---

Paul F.
-----
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca c. 5 BC - 65 AD
----
Good is the enemy of Excellent. Talent is not necessary for Excellence.
Persistence is necessary for Excellence. And Persistence is a Decision.
--

--

--
Eureka, CA

In a vast place like New York City, which runs on a public transportation infrastructure, the economics are tough to deal with.

There are doubts that the tax base could support free fares. Given that, the number of riders would increase by incredible numbers aiding economic activity and drastically lowering emissions. The extra new equipment, maintaining and running this sized-up new system also would have to be paid for.

In major transport areas, there are lots of considerations. This is no tiny little trolley system we're talking about.

Quote
Paul F.
Correction; it's not "free"... they just shifted the cost from the people that use it, to everyone, via tax revenue's, minus the inherent overhead of using the tax system.

Not saying it's a bad use of those funds, just making sure everyone doesn't think "free" mean free.

Access to transit is a gift the nation gives its residents and visitors. Good for them.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Another potential benefit to free public transportation for Californian's, would be that it might mean an end to our smog check system if enough people started using public transportation so that our air quality improved enough to meet federal air standards. That would mean not paying for smog checks, or even worse, having to pay mechanics to get our cars into compliance if they fail a smog check.

What, for all 63 people in Luxembourg?

---

Disclaimer: This post is checked for correct spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Any attempts at humor are solely the responsibility of the author and bear no claim that any and all readers will approve or appreciate said attempt at humor.
My name is DP, and I approve this message.

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
Paul F.
Correction; it's not "free"... they just shifted the cost from the people that use it, to everyone, via tax revenue's, minus the inherent overhead of using the tax system.

Not saying it's a bad use of those funds, just making sure everyone doesn't think "free" mean free.

Access to transit is a gift the nation gives its residents and visitors. Good for them.

Excepting the folks in the sticks who feel put upon from all the Big City spending and attention hogging.

That said, I have supported this since I was a kid. I've never understood how getting people out of cars and onto buses (and trains where applicable) should be a monetary proposition. There are still lots of buses with few riders that are currently subsidized by those full buses. But knocking off those empty buses cuts off people from jobs, etc.

A secondary (and really primary) consideration is to reduce the ballooning amount of hired cars roaming the streets. Something up to 40% of car share traffic are roaming around without a fare on board, creating stupid amounts of extra traffic in already congested areas.

Quote
DP
What, for all 63 people in Luxembourg?

Exactly!

< 1000 sq miles of area and a whopping population of 614,000.
Most populous city is Luxembourg City, population 76,420.



"public transportation" could be a fleet of stolen shopping carts.

---

39°36'17"N 75°44'43"W

The search engine that doesn't track you.

Quote
freeradical
Another potential benefit to free public transportation for Californian's, would be that it might mean an end to our smog check system if enough people started using public transportation so that our air quality improved enough to meet federal air standards. That would mean not paying for smog checks, or even worse, having to pay mechanics to get our cars into compliance if they fail a smog check.

You think California is going to REMOVE a regulation? That's adorable...
We'll see a "per mile" TAX on every vehicle before we ever see smog checks removed. That will be in addition to more rise in gas-taxes. And rise in electricity taxes. And the creation of a special sales tax on vehicles.

And public transportation in California won't get better, despite the additional billions in revenue.

---

Paul F.
-----
A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand. - Lucius Annaeus Seneca c. 5 BC - 65 AD
----
Good is the enemy of Excellent. Talent is not necessary for Excellence.
Persistence is necessary for Excellence. And Persistence is a Decision.
--

--

--
Eureka, CA

The reason California switched from buses and trains to cars was due to GM buying off politicians so they could push car sales.

---

In tha 360. MRF User Map

Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
The reason California switched from buses and trains to cars was due to GM buying off politicians so they could push car sales.

And that was what, 70 or 80 years ago? I guess when you buy a California politician, they really stay bought.

A couple of big cities in the US have tried free transit over the decades: Austin did in the 1980s. They generally found the headaches from not being able to kick the mentally ill and homeless off outweighed any ridership gains. Free transit isn't uncommon in small college towns.

Kansas City recently decided to give it a try, though. Transit advocates like me think it would be much better to use the money to increase service instead. That's the only thing with a proven record of increasing ridership.

Quote
Mr Downtown
Transit advocates like me think it would be much better to use the money to increase service instead. That's the only thing with a proven record of increasing ridership.

It's always a chicken and egg thing with transit.

Sacramento recently overhauled their entire system by eliminating a number of routes, while increasing service frequency to at least every half hour with the remaining routes. This has made the service at least somewhat usable.