Stuff the commuter

[pdq1]

With the 6.5% rise in train fares from next January how is the ordinary commuter expected to find this increase? Should the increase be shared out amongst road users as well? Is it towards HS2 which has been given the go-ahead?

And what is Virgin expected to do with all those luscious carriages now he has lost the contract for the west coast mainline?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19264614

[emmie]

don't know quite honestly to both points, glad no longer have to commute anywhere. I begrudge the money i do spend when go to visit relatives, the tier structures of fares would baffle Einstein.

[Old_Geezer]

I guess he either sells or stores them.

The problem with rail is that in a modern age when such travel is not the premium priced privilege of the wealthy but something the masses need to do, the ability to manage it to make profit seems a pipe dream. A business should either be viable in itself, in which case private investors will fill the demand, or it is not, in which case society needs to decide whether to fund it out of the public purse as a service. We seem to have the worst of both at present with money being handed over from the public purse to companies interested in profits for shareholders/owners. Effectively the public forks out for the shareholders dividend.

I don't think the public can afford the true cost of such travel, it should be run as a publicly owned service at price that benefit society as a whole as well as those who need to use the train on a daily basis. That said if employment was distributed properly commuting needs would be minimal anyway, and the environmental cost, not to mention the individual time wasted, getting in to and out from work, saved.

Oh and no, I don't see how you can justify milking the car user yet again when they are already way over subscribing simply because they are an easy target. That's an evil suggestion, to pick on the convenient scapegoat again. Those in cars are helping the odds of you finding that seat the train company likes to claim it doesn't sell you.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph....-fares-in-Europe.html

Why are our train fares the most expensive in Europe?

These statistics were taken from a Telegraph report dated '19 Feb 2009' that's three and a half years ago, so what must they be like now?

• A commuter travelling between 10.6 miles (17km) and 25 miles (41km) each morning to London spent an average £1,859.96 on an annual season ticket, compared with £990 in the next most expensive country, France, and £443,69 in the cheapest country, Italy.

• A passenger travelling between 25 miles (41km) and 50 miles (80km) to London faced an average annual ticket cost of £3,188.68 compared with £1934.89 in the second most expensive country, Holland, and £683.20 in the cheapest, Italy.

• Unrestricted day returns to London for a trip of between 10.6 miles (17km) and 25 miles (41km) cost an average £11.57 but a similar journey was £6.88 in Germany and £3.63 in France.

• A walk-up day return to London, from up to 50 miles (80km) away, could cost more than £250, whereas no similar fare in France would exceed £100.

[Baldric]

Why on earth should car drivers subsidise rail travel?
If you choose to live in a 'nice' bit of the Country and commute miles by train stick your hand in your pocket and pay for it, or work outside of the Cities for less dosh but no rail fare to pay.

[jake-the-peg]

Why are our trains so expensive

Depends on the level of subsidy

It would cost taxpayers an extra half a billion a year to bring them into line with European fares.

Given that HS2 is going to be 32 Billion (or £500 per person in the UK) you can draw your own conclusions

[Mirandajane]

Hi Baldric

My friend was made redundant and could only get a job in London after being out of work for 6 months.
Oddly she has just retired and is now getting a higher pension as a result but she had to pay high train fare for 30 years.

Miranda

[anotheoldgit]

jake-the-peg

/// It would cost taxpayers an extra half a billion a year to bring them into line with European fares. ///

Since we are spending £9.1bn in 2012, £12bn by 2013 and £12.6bn by 2014 in overseas aid, perhaps a mere half a billion syphoned off this so as to get a reasonable rail service would not go amiss?

[mushroom25]

in the UK, only 1% of passenger journeys are by rail, representing just 6% of all passenger-miles. most of these journeys are in the south-east, and undertaken by the well off. half of all rail journeys are of 25 miles or less, and 90% are of 80 miles or less.

rail fares in the uk are the highest in europe, despite an overall government subsidy running to billions per year.

passenger carrying rail vehicles cost up to 4 times more than an equivalent road vehicle, are much heavier and consequently need a great deal more energy to move them.

the space occupied by the railway infrastructure can move just one quarter of passengers as could be moved using an equivalent amount of road space, and maintaining the rail network costs a great deal more, per mile, than the cost of a much larger road network.

so why is the government continuing to make us fork out ever larger sums of money for such an uneconomic transport undertaking?

[grffindoor2011]

pdq1 - Why not bring motorized wheelchair users in on the act too?

Let's go the whole hog, make anyone that walks on a path pay a tax too. The old woman struggling with her walking stick I can see out of my window must pay for the railways!