🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: uk.transport
Article #155

Re: City Traffic

#155
From: Dr A. N. Walker
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:18
43 lines
2694 bytes
In article <SM.93Jan22163103@suns2.cel.co.uk> sm@cel.co.uk (salim mehta)
writes:
>If 50 people make journey A-B by bus they each pay UKLx. If they now repeat
>that journey by private transport they also incur the cost (to all of us)
>of the increased congestion (journey time) and pollution (journey quality).

	Yes, and they also save on the cost of road repairs [damage goes
up as a high power of axle loading], the cost of employing a bus driver
[and possibly also a conductor, and other personnel costs], and the cost
of building bus shelters and other street furniture [itself a cause of
congestion on the pavements and of accidents].

	Meanwhile, if buses were to be scrapped, traffic would not always
be being held up by buses stopping to pick up and set down passengers,
and bus lanes would become available to other traffic.

	Meanwhile, if 1 person makes journey A-B by bus, it is perfectly
clear that it would benefit us all [except the redundant driver] if the
journey were made by car instead.

	The balance simply isn't all that clear cut.  Buses work well in
situations where batching up lots of people makes sense, and not where
it doesn't.  In a free society, we should not be forcing people into
batches when it isn't appropriate.

	One of my more interesting relevant experiences was working in
Liverpool in 1968 [give or take a year] when there was a bus strike.
People continued to queue at bus stops, and passing motorists gave them
lifts.  It worked extremely well -- the congestion was much reduced, and
everyone got to work much faster.  There were social benefits too;  I
got to know Liverpool rather well, and I met some interesting people.
Pity this scheme couldn't be formalised!

>Someone has to pay for these, it should be the motorist.

	It *is* the motorist!  "Road Fund" licence, fuel tax, VAT, not
to mention insurance, depreciation, etc.  In addition, motorists, of
their nature, pay hugely more on average in income tax and other general
taxation than those who can't afford cars.

-- 
Andy Walker, Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1993Jan27.171858.14579@maths.nott.ac.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!rtech!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ibmpcug!pipex!unipalm!uknet!inmos!fulcrum!warwick!nott-cs!piaggio!anw
References: <935820125829@ibm3090.bham.ac.uk> <1993Jan20.133858@cs.bham.ac.uk> <SM.93Jan22163103@suns2.cel.co.uk>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!rtech!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ibmpcug!pipex!unipalm!uknet!inmos!fulcrum!warwick!nott-cs!piaggio!anw
From: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Newsgroups: uk.transport
Subject: Re: City Traffic
Message-ID: <1993Jan27.171858.14579@maths.nott.ac.uk>
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:18:58 GMT
References: <935820125829@ibm3090.bham.ac.uk> <1993Jan20.133858@cs.bham.ac.uk> <SM.93Jan22163103@suns2.cel.co.uk>
Reply-To: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Organization: Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
Lines: 43