Free and Accessible Transit Now

252 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
My week in the hospital prevents seven other people from spending the night in that room (if they space out their injuries carefully), but Canadians have decided that health care should be allocated based on individual need, not equal time allocation.

Well, what we decided was that we'd pool our resources into some state-administered health insurance.  Having bought that insurance, we don't pay out of pocket, but the government certainly does pay more for your seven-day stay than for a one-day stay.

But if paying more when you travel further is a backwards and antiquated idea, why is it part of just about every other form of paid-for transportation?  Why can't I just pay $50 to ViaRail for a trip to wherever I need to go, whether that's Toronto to Hamilton, or Toronto to Vancouver?  As you say, that train's going all the way, with or without me.

I suppose my main opposition to free municipal transit is that it's not really like health care at all.  I don't think many people go their whole lives never using health care, nor do I think that there are many people who will use health care every day of their lives.  I'm not averse to it remaining subsidized, for various reasons, but it seems a bit illogical to expect those who don't intend to use it to actually pay MORE than those who do.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The list of Polish municipalities with full or partial free public transport is long.

No automatic alt text available.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Cities

Here is a list of cities that currently provide public transport for free. If you know any city which isn’t represented in the list, please contribute to the site with that information and we will ad it to the list.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

This thread is titled wrong. Or everyone commenting here is engaged in slight thread drift.

..i have no problem, so far, with how this thread is going. as the thread creator i can say that free transit is a specific struggle which is why it is in the activist forum. for the most part i report on this struggle though it does spill over to other issues from time to time.

cco

Mr. Magoo wrote:

But if paying more when you travel further is a backwards and antiquated idea, why is it part of just about every other form of paid-for transportation?  Why can't I just pay $50 to ViaRail for a trip to wherever I need to go, whether that's Toronto to Hamilton, or Toronto to Vancouver?  As you say, that train's going all the way, with or without me.

Out of curiosity, I ran Via fares for two trips on identical dates: Montréal to Toronto ($44) and Montréal to Kingston ($41). Kingston to Toronto was also $41, so it's not like that half of the line is really cheap to operate. The other big fare difference (doubling it) was what time of day the train was. Similarly, a flight from Montréal to Paris is less than half the cost of a flight from Montréal to Saint Pierre, which is less than a quarter of the distance. So then, I'd say that airfares and intercity rail fares, like local transit fares, aren't directly determined by distance, but a mixture of factors including subsidies, destination popularity, arbitrary zone grouping, and most of all, competition.

The competition for subway systems is, overwhelmingly, the car. Those who don't use cars still pay a lot for automotive infrastructure, not to mention climate effects. I'm not necessarily on board with pay-by-plate to subsidize transit (hiking the gas tax, so less efficient vehicles pay more and electric cars pay nothing, seems like a better alternative to me), but the taxes of non-drivers still help pay for those who own cars. We have good reasons to get people off cars and onto transit, and a distance-based fare system that makes it more expensive for people living in the suburbs to take transit would both hurt people in poorer suburbs and discourage transit use by people in richer ones.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Those who don't use cars still pay a lot for automotive infrastructure, not to mention climate effects.

If highways and roads existed solely for the convenience of car drivers then I'd be among the first to say that those car drivers should be the only ones paying for them.  But they're also there for shipping trucks, inter-city buses, etc.  And if I'm not mistaken, even progressives seem mostly opposed to toll roads and toll bridges, even as these charge only those who directly benefit from them -- namely, those car drivers.  If it's wrongheaded to charge them to use a highway or to use a bridge, how does it make sense to charge them for something they DON'T use?

Quote:
a distance-based fare system that makes it more expensive for people living in the suburbs to take transit would both hurt people in poorer suburbs and discourage transit use by people in richer ones.

The hurt that people would feel living in the boonies and commuting to work would presumably be offset by the much lower shelter costs that they're paying in those suburbs.  Or else why choose those suburbs?

As for the rich, if the plainly cheaper cost of using public transit over driving a car isn't wooing them then what does the cost of transit really have to do with it?  Clearly there's something more going on than just a bottom-line analysis.

WWWTT

epaulo13 wrote:

This thread is titled wrong. Or everyone commenting here is engaged in slight thread drift.

..i have no problem, so far, with how this thread is going. as the thread creator i can say that free transit is a specific struggle which is why it is in the activist forum. for the most part i report on this struggle though it does spill over to other issues from time to time.

thanks brother understood

point I’m making is that everyone is ignoring long distance commuting and I’m known for being over dramatic to bring attention to a concern I feel is important.  I must add that I have not read every comment here so other posters may have touched on long distance 

WWWTT

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
My week in the hospital prevents seven other people from spending the night in that room (if they space out their injuries carefully), but Canadians have decided that health care should be allocated based on individual need, not equal time allocation.

Well, what we decided was that we'd pool our resources into some state-administered health insurance.  Having bought that insurance, we don't pay out of pocket, but the government certainly does pay more for your seven-day stay than for a one-day stay.

But if paying more when you travel further is a backwards and antiquated idea, why is it part of just about every other form of paid-for transportation?  Why can't I just pay $50 to ViaRail for a trip to wherever I need to go, whether that's Toronto to Hamilton, or Toronto to Vancouver?  As you say, that train's going all the way, with or without me.

I suppose my main opposition to free municipal transit is that it's not really like health care at all.  I don't think many people go their whole lives never using health care, nor do I think that there are many people who will use health care every day of their lives.  I'm not averse to it remaining subsidized, for various reasons, but it seems a bit illogical to expect those who don't intend to use it to actually pay MORE than those who do.

 

your points are logical and have merit from my perspective. 

I don’t want to compare health care to transportation! This is a no no! 

our human bodies are not similar. We are different and there’s no shame in being different! 

WWWTT

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

This thread is titled wrong. Or everyone commenting here is engaged in slight thread drift. 

Let me explain. Title of thread is free and accessible transit right. But everyone seems concerned only with LOCAL transit? What about commuting from Hamilton to downtown TO? Or Peterborough to downtown TO. Or the equivalent for other Canadian cities. 

As well, what about Toronto to Montreal? Does free and/or transit debate apply with these longer commutes? And if not, than why?

I think this is an important part of the debate and can not be brushed aside. Especially in a large country like Canada (but perhaps the size of Canada is irrelevant?)

I believe transit cannot be pulled apart in terms of distance and addressed in separate parts, ignoring long distance travel. 

 

Excellent point. When it comes to getting cars ofthe road in some cases critical. I agree.

so then where do we bring our debate to address the concerns of distance I raised?

i believe a huge advantage for the car is speed and convenience. How does public transit address these?

first speed. Public transit reply is high speed rail. Canada’s answer-crickets chirping 

where’s the Montreal Toronto or Windsor 400km/hr bullet train for 50$ a shot? I guess Canada isn’t going to see it in the 21 century. 

Now how about convenience. I guess more trains more times more routes would address this. Now can we apply this for longer distance commutes?  What about 2am travel?

for me it’s becoming clear that this is all about investment. And where’s the corporations that benefit the most from this? Ya I know, those fuckin crickets again are getting louder and louder. Maybe if the corporate tax rate was closer to 20% than some of the stuff mentioned in this thread could actually materialize 

WWWTT

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

This thread is titled wrong. Or everyone commenting here is engaged in slight thread drift. 

Let me explain. Title of thread is free and accessible transit right. But everyone seems concerned only with LOCAL transit? What about commuting from Hamilton to downtown TO? Or Peterborough to downtown TO. Or the equivalent for other Canadian cities. 

As well, what about Toronto to Montreal? Does free and/or transit debate apply with these longer commutes? And if not, than why?

I think this is an important part of the debate and can not be brushed aside. Especially in a large country like Canada (but perhaps the size of Canada is irrelevant?)

I believe transit cannot be pulled apart in terms of distance and addressed in separate parts, ignoring long distance travel. 

 

Excellent point. When it comes to getting cars ofthe road in some cases critical. I agree.

so then where do we bring our debate to address the concerns of distance I raised?

i believe a huge advantage for the car is speed and convenience. How does public transit address these?

first speed. Public transit reply is high speed rail. Canada’s answer-crickets chirping 

where’s the Montreal Toronto or Windsor 400km/hr bullet train for 50$ a shot? I guess Canada isn’t going to see it in the 21 century. 

Now how about convenience. I guess more trains more times more routes would address this. Now can we apply this for longer distance commutes?  What about 2am travel?

for me it’s becoming clear that this is all about investment. And where’s the corporations that benefit the most from this? Ya I know, those fuckin crickets again are getting louder and louder. Maybe if the corporate tax rate was closer to 20% than some of the stuff mentioned in this thread could actually materialize 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

WWWTT wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

This thread is titled wrong. Or everyone commenting here is engaged in slight thread drift.

..i have no problem, so far, with how this thread is going. as the thread creator i can say that free transit is a specific struggle which is why it is in the activist forum. for the most part i report on this struggle though it does spill over to other issues from time to time.

thanks brother understood

point I’m making is that everyone is ignoring long distance commuting and I’m known for being over dramatic to bring attention to a concern I feel is important.  I must add that I have not read every comment here so other posters may have touched on long distance 

..i am not ignoring long distance commuting and i don't believe anyone else is. maybe you can make the case on how it connects to the free transit struggles. otherwise, howerever important, it belongs in a different thread.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from #121

The Case for Free Public Transit

The TTC's goal should be to help Torontonians get around. So why do fares keep rising?

quote:

Reducing TTC fares to zero for everyone, not just kids, would increase ridership significantly.

Many cities already have some degree of free transit. Merced County in California offers free transit every August, and their ridership jumps by over 30 per cent. Columbus, Ohio, did a pilot study over the last two years, providing free bus passes to workers at four companies, and saw the share of workers using buses double.

The increased economic participation pays dividends, as do the positive environmental and health impacts from fewer cars.

Studies regularly show that the cost of travel is one of the highest-rated concerns for transit riders, along with accessibility and frequency/reliability. The sensitivity to cost comes through consistently across gender, race, age groups, and even income groups. Not surprisingly, lower-income households rank transit fares as a more important issue than those in the top 5 per cent, but even about half of the wealthy rank it as an issue.

As soon as anyone starts talking about managing congestion with tolls or congestion charges in the absence of good alternatives, they are arguing for less movement or less efficient movement. Neither is good for a city.

We want people to choose better modes, not to choose to stay home. Transit surveys often ask people what they would do if the mode they use were not available. As many as 20 to 25 per cent say they wouldn’t make the trip—perhaps giving up a job, or a class, or a social contact, or a hobby they like. None of those is a good outcome.

It’s not just about direct economic participation. We should not underestimate the cost of people foregoing recreation or social contact. Some researchers believe the costs and health impacts of loneliness are as high or higher than for smoking or obesity.

There’s a common concern that saving the environment shouldn’t come at the cost of the economy. That’s a valid aspiration. But it turns out moving people more efficiently also helps the environment, because private cars are the least efficient and highest-polluting mode of transit available.

The great advantage of cities is that their built form enables all kinds of efficiencies. Private cars undo that advantage. If we were serious about getting this city moving, we would be doing everything possible to give as many people as we can a reliable alternative to driving. Instead, we keep raising transit fares, and we have extended battles over bike lanes and sidewalks.

WWWTT

epaulo13 wrote:

..i am not ignoring long distance commuting and i don't believe anyone else is. maybe you can make the case on how it connects to the free transit struggles. otherwise, howerever important, it belongs in a different thread.

What's the difference between long distance commuting and transit?

Here are a couple definitions I found

Commuting is periodically recurring travel between one's place of residence and place of work, or study, and in doing so exceed the boundary of their residential community. It sometimes refers to any regular or often repeated traveling between locations, even when not work-related. A distinction is also often made between commuters who commute daily or weekly between their residence to work place, and are therefore considered respectively local or long-distance commuters.

1.

the act or fact of passing across or through; passage from one placeto another.

2.conveyance or transportation from one place to another, as of personsor goods, especially, local public transportation:

city transit.

1.

a system of large-scale public transportation in a given metropolitan area, typically comprising buses, subways, and elevated trains.

So from the definitions I have found "mass transit" appears to be commonly used term refering to local transportation. Makes sence to me.

As well, I have already made my case of why my concerns belong in this thread. I'll give other posters a chance to reply. 

lagatta4

This article from Ricochet isn't about free-of-charge public transport, but about increasing accessibility for many neighbourhoods via the pink line Projet Montréal advocates. The pink line would also reduce the saturation of the orange line and make it more viable to extend the blue line much farther east.

https://ricochet.media/en/1992/the-pink-metro-line-and-a-paradigm-shift-...

But I agree that the woman worker in Mtl-Nord also needs lower and ideally NO fares; she will commute to work even with existing fares, but her social contacts and even ability to comparison shop will be severely curtailed.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

What's the difference between long distance commuting and transit?

..it takes a different campaign i believe. but you can talk to the folks in to, ottawa or montreal that are pushing for free transit. i doubt they are against addressing long distance commute or even ignoring it.  

Sean in Ottawa

I won't be able to answer all the posts right now but would like to point out a couple things:

1) Everyone benefits from public transit whether you use it or not. It reduces congestion which saves al taxpayers; it reduces pollution which affects the health of everyone (including those living far away in the country). It spurs mobility and the spending of money that helpd the entire economy. It is socially progressive providing more access to people who need it and this leads to a more civilized society (I hope I do not have to explain this one here) Public transit is a public good.

2) one of the arguments against fares by users and especially fares by distance is that this process of collecting revenue is very inefficient.

3) The bulk of road costs are based on areas public transit can mitigate:

-- Overuse of the infrastructure requiring more building and more public land dedicated to it

-- Overuse requiring greater maintenance costs

 

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Seoul to provide free public transport, depending on fine dust level

Seoul Metropolitan Government will be providing free public transportation to citizens starting in November amid rising health concerns due to heavy fine dust saturation within the metropolitan area.

Free public transportation during commuting hours will be provided starting on Nov. 20, depending on the fine dust level in the city.....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Big transportation investments needed now in Metro Vancouver: Budget 2018

Whether enduring a long wait to cross a bridge or get on a bus, everyone can relate to the additional time and stress caused by a transportation system under strain. Metro Vancouver is, for all intents and purposes, at “peak car”: the mobility of a growing regional population cannot be accommodated with more private cars. A 2015 study put the costs of congestion in Metro Vancouver at between $500 million and $1.2 billion per year.

It is widely agreed that major new investments are needed for Vancouver’s public transit system to alleviate crowded conditions for transit users and congestion for drivers. Special arrangements—like priority lanes and increased services—during the 2010 Winter Olympics provided a taste of what an expanded transit system could look like. Public investment in convenient, high-quality transit can reduce costs for many households, improve air quality, boost public health and help reduce greenhouse gas pollution that causes climate change.

Stable, long-term funding for public transit is the missing ingredient.....

Pondering

Nobody in my family will give up their cars but with free transit they would use it for coming into Montreal. People with cars that live in Montreal would use transit more as well. I was on the bus today and at rush hour the traffic was bumper to bumper with horns blaring. People who must use their cars for one reason or another would benefit greatly with less competition for parking spaces as well as lower traffic.

When my sister and family come into town they aways drive because public transit is so expensive. They have to pay for parking at the metro station. Then each has to pay full price round trip. It's not worth it. If transit were free that would change the equation.

Concerning longer distance travel. Within a city there is a critical mass of population that is ever growing further choking highways and requiring big investments in repairs and new roads. Economically it makes sense to institute free transit in lieu of expanding the infrastructure for car use. It helps attract families. Big companies evaluate public transit systems when deciding where to locate.

Long distance travel in general can't be free because there is no critical mass to tax to pay for it. Having said that I believe any highways not served by commercial transit should be considered for some limited free transit. The highway of tears comes to mind.

cco
lagatta4

For many cities, free public transport simply makes sense. Projet Montréal had promised to make it free for youth, seniors, and I believe full-time students, but it seems that fares aren't a municipal responsibility. It will be important to press for it.

I also think Richard Bergeron was right about the need for a tram along Mont-Royal from the mountain to Iberville in the east, as traffic is pretty much a constant snarl there.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Nobody in my family will give up their cars but with free transit they would use it for coming into Montreal.

How much is a fare in Montreal?  Here in Toronto, a TTC fare is $3.25 if you pay cash.  I'm not sure how many drivers can reasonably say that their cost for ownership, insurance, maintenance and fuel for their vehicle is a whole lot less.

Why do you feel that "free" would convince your family, but less than the cost of a Starbucks would be too much?

Pondering

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Nobody in my family will give up their cars but with free transit they would use it for coming into Montreal.

How much is a fare in Montreal?  Here in Toronto, a TTC fare is $3.25 if you pay cash.  I'm not sure how many drivers can reasonably say that their cost for ownership, insurance, maintenance and fuel for their vehicle is a whole lot less.

Why do you feel that "free" would convince your family, but less than the cost of a Starbucks would be too much?

Because many/most will not give up car ownership and take public transit 100% of the time. They will still have the costs of a car to deal with. I don't see people living outside of major cities giving up cars. Chateauguay has a population of 46,000 and the local transit system is extremely limited. The Montreal/Chateauguay bus at times is only 1 an hour on Sundays. 

For 1 adult from Chateauguay to Montreal is 4.50 plus 3.25 to wherever in Montreal so 7.75. Round trip is 15.50. If my sister and her husband go to town pubic transit would be 31.00. They could take the car and pay for parking at the metro station then pay 6.50 each round trip, so 13.00 plus the cost of parking say 10$, so 23.00. They might as well just take the car and pay for downtown parking. 

Even if they were on island the 13$ for the round trip makes taking the car more appealing. Gas plus parking would still be more than 13$ but the difference isn't enough to give up the comfort of car travel and it is possible to find cheap or free parking. 

If, however, transit were free, all of a sudden it begins to make sense to give up the convenience of the car to save money. It also changes the equation for buying a car in the first place. 

NDPP

Thanks for posting this. Not only is the price of transit in TO too high for poor people, but aside from the glitzy new subway construction, the service is atrocious. Buses don't connect on transfer points, they are unbelievably crowded and unsafe and TTC staff are outrageously rude and unhelpful in far too many cases. Big changes need to happen and soon!

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Jeremy Corbyn pledges free bus travel for under-25s

Labour says it would give under-25s in England free bus travel in areas where local councils bring services back into public ownership as the party wants.

The £1.4bn policy would be paid for by cash from vehicle excise duty currently earmarked for building new roads.

Leader Jeremy Corbyn will say "young people deserve a break" as he launches the policy in Derby on Thursday.

quote:

Providing government funding to councils for free bus travel could help up to 13 million young people save as much as £1,000 a year, according to Labour.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The Case for Free Public Transport

The Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) is a proud advocate of a world-class, fare-free public transport system for Scotland.

Transport has undergone enormous changes in recent decades, both in Scotland and across the world. Some have been cyclical: in Scotland’s capital, trams were built, dismantled, and then reintroduced. In other areas, we have seen consistent trends like the steady deregulation and privatization of services, which has left Edinburgh as the sole city in Scotland with a municipal bus operator.

quote:

The Scottish Socialist Party is brave enough to identify these changes. We call unashamedly for the integration of services – whether bus, rail, ferry, underground or tram – under publicly-owned and democratically-run operators.
But the bravest step we can take as a nation to totally transform the way we travel is to support the international movement for free public transport and become pioneers of true freedom of movement for working class people.
There is a strong economic, social, and environmental case for adopting this policy throughout the country. There is also precedent from successful fare-free public transport schemes in parts of France, Germany, Belgium, and Estonia as well as far-flung cities in China and the United States. [Ed.: see wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transport, and FreeTransitToronto.org.] We have evidence of the policy’s affordability and benefit.

lagatta4

Absolutely. That would also mean less conflict between transport "police", fare collectors, and youth, especially minority youth.

If carshare services were expanded alongside public transport improvements, far fewer households would actually have to own a car. They would use the carshare vehicle less, and there would be far less wasteful need for parking.

The pink line proposal is brilliant, as it would drastically cut the commute for manypeople living in northeastern Montréal, where there are many immigrant workers with relatively low incomes, and parts of the southwest ill-served by the métro. Transfer would also not be at Jean-Talon - the orange line into the downtown area is now saturated southbound from there, due to the expansion up into Laval - far more popular with Lavallois than predicted.  The changes would be at Mont-Royal, and then somewhere on the green line - McGill, I believe? Many orange line commuters get off at Laurier, so there is a little more leeway a station south.

Unfortunately, while the REM fulfils a real need, it seems "overbuilt" to many in terms of the needs of commuters from the West Island area. A metro in that area would remove many cars and improve commutes, but I'm unsure of the best route for it as I don't travel there much. There are a huge number of commuters to and from the industrial parks in Ville St-Laurent for example, and of course there should be a métro line to the airport.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..not a good stream going on including gaps.

Jason Prince – Free Public Transport

The Montreal book launch of Free Public Transit: And Why We Don’t Pay to Ride Elevators, co-edited by Jason Prince and Judith Dellheim.

Moderated by Dimitri Roussopoulos (Black Rose Books). Presentations by:

  • Jason Prince – co-editor.
  • Bertrand Schepper – L’Institut de recherche des informatiques socioeconomiques (IRIS).
  • Amir Khadir – Québec Solidaire.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

U of T students recently voted no to a plan that would have seen all students receive an unlimited travel monthly TTC pass for the deeply discounted price of $70.  The only catch was that to get the deal, it had to be "universal" -- all students would pay for and receive the pass, including the ones who didn't want it or didn't need it.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..here in wpg high school students 17-21yrs..$70.10 mon pass. post secondary $80.10.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Mobility pricing in Metro Vancouver must be fair for drivers and public transit commuters, says new report

quote:

In examining real world mobility pricing systems in London, Stockholm and Singapore, Lee also found expansion of public transit is essential to ensuring accessible mobility.

“The need to invest in public transit is a central lesson from case studies of mobility pricing in other jurisdictions because the availability of reliable and fast transit options greatly reduces the need to own a car or multiple cars,” he said.

Using mobility pricing revenues to expand public transit can further address congestion by getting more people out of their vehicles and would significantly benefit low-income households that tend to be more reliant on public transit.

Lee anticipates that many drivers will balk at additional charges, at least at first.

“Getting car drivers and passengers on board is not impossible, but a pricing scheme must be perceived to be effective and fair,” Lee said. “Ultimately, drivers may prefer to pay with their time by queuing at regional choke points rather than paying more to relieve that congestion.”

The perception that drivers fully pay for their trips is false, he added.

“Most of the costs of driving are private: buying and maintaining a vehicle and paying for insurance and gas. But there are substantial public costs for vehicle infrastructure and services including road and bridge construction and maintenance, policing and public subsidies to fuel production industries. There are also external costs imposed on society as a whole through carbon emissions, air pollution, urban sprawl, noise and the environmental costs of upstream fuel extraction and processing.”

Getting these details right is important because, inevitably, new ride-hailing services and autonomous vehicles will be available in Metro Vancouver and will further clog up streets in the absence of mobility pricing.

An independent commission appointed by Translink and the Mayors’ Council, which are responsible for Metro Vancouver’s transportation network, is currently considering two broad mobility pricing models for Metro Vancouver that are influenced by politics and local geography:

  1. Congestion point charges, which could result in tolls on most regional bridges and other key choke points on highways.
  2. Distance-based charges, which could vary by time and location.

The commission is expected to issue its final report in the coming weeks.

“If the political hurdles can be overcome, well-designed mobility pricing could be an important part of the solution to manage congestion and accelerate the shift away from vehicle dependency in Metro Vancouver,” Lee said.

Lee argues that a fair mobility pricing system must:

  • address low income with a credit to assist people who have no option other than to drive. It is also a matter of transportation justice to invest in mobility for disadvantaged groups.
  • expand public transit first because investing in public transit is the only way to guarantee accessible mobility for all residents over the long-term.
  • level the playing field with other modes of transportation by applying mobility pricing to ride-hailing and car-sharing services.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..here's a new video posted apr 17. well worth the almost 30min watch. the site is also a hub for free transit.

Free Public Transport Europe

eta..it includes an example of a bus program being run in the country side.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from the video. there's a place in germany where, many years ago, no one was taking the bus. the city was still paying for the buses to run but there were no passangers. so in 1998 they made the bus free. it became so popular that it caused problems. the bus was always packed, with mostly young people. a bus driver said they wouldn't get off..especially in bad weather. and it was fun for young folk.

..further the city had to buy more buses and pay more drivers. so where they began free and it paid for itself turned into something that cost money. so they raised money by bring back fares. today 2018 the fares are 46 euros per year to raise the difference so that it paid for itself. awesome!

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
further the city had to buy more buses and pay more drivers. so where they began free and it paid for itself turned into something that cost money. so they raised money by bring back fares. today 2018 the fares are 46 euros per year to raise the difference so that it paid for itself. awesome!

That's super.  But doesn't (for example) the TTC basically run on a similar cost-recovery model?

In other words, when we pay our TTC fare, isn't that revenue going toward upkeep and expansion of services, maintenance, worker's salaries, etc.?  It would be great if the TTC could do it all for 46 Euros (72 Canadian dollars) per year, but maybe we have other challenges?  At any rate, it's not going to Montgomery Burns.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i don't know how the ttc works magoo. i knew how the transit worked in vancouver and while they claimed it was cost recovery it wasn't. but you can get that info from free bus to. 

..things i believe change when the goal is free transit or close. ideas come forth as seen in the video.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..look here maggo. how is this possible there and not in canada?

ZERO - FARE PUBLIC RAIL TRANSPORT SERVICES IN SLOVAKIA

1.Who is entitled for zero-fare transport services?

  • Children under 15 years of age and seniors over 62 years of age without limitation by EU citizenship or residence
  • Students under 26 years of age and pensioners under 62 years of age who are citizens or permanent residents of EU member states:

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Netherlands, Italy, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Luxemburg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom

2.Terms and Conditions

  • Passengers entitled to zero-fare transport services are required to register at ZSSK ticket desks (children under 6 years of age are exception, they do not need any registration).
  • Upon registration, they will obtain their rail customer cards that will allow them to get zero-fare tickets for travelling by trains.
  • Zero-fare tickets are passenger-specific, i.e. the tickets are non-transferable.
  • Passengers with the zero-fare tickets can board any Os or REX train for the route specified on the ticket within the period of validity.
  • Zero-fare tickets are bound to trains of R, RR, Ex, EN, EC, SC category. In this case – the passengers can only board the specific train the number of which is printed on the ticket.
  • If a passenger chooses to travel by a train from category SC or EC, they will pay an extra fee: 1€ for EC train and mandatory reservation fee 5€ for SC train.
  • The zero-fare transport is not available on IC trains.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
..i don't know how the ttc works magoo. i knew how the transit worked in vancouver and while they claimed it was cost recovery it wasn't. but you can get that info from free bus to.

My understanding of the TTC is just that the revenues collected at the fare box don't go to the rich owner.  They don't quite cover their operating costs, so the municipal and provincial governments subsidize them.

My only point was that if some other municipality can run a transit system for a fare of only about $100 CAD per year, good on them, but if the TTC could, I would have to ask why they need those subsidies.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..hey magoo, i believe you've said that you don't have a car so i assume you ride the bus. why don't you go check out a meeting and report back on what you find?

Email us:
FreetransitToronto(at)gmail.com

We are always happy to meet new volunteers. We hold regular meetings in downtown Toronto. Please get in touch if you’d like to get involved in our campaigns committee.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i'm not a biodeisel fan. that aside i checked out one of the bus schedule and they ran every 20 min to a 1/2 hr. like some european towns park city uses free transit to attract. one city in germany that i spoke about re the 46 euro yearly bus pass attracted 25,000 new residents who's taxes helped fund their transit.

Free Park City Transit System

The Environmentally Friendly and Easiest Way to Get Around

Park City's free bus system, fueled by biodeisel, will take you wherever you want to go in town. Historic Main Street, Kimball Junction, North of Main, Quarry Village, Deer Valley ResortPark City Mountain, or the Utah Olympic Park for a day of fun-filled activities, shopping and great food.

Park City Transit Makes Your Vacation Even More Pleasant

The free transit system is the easiest way to get around Park City. Bus routes connect Historic Main Street, lodgingshopping,restaurants, our two world class resorts and residential neighborhoods.  Save time, energy and money by riding the free Park City bus system.

Main Street Trolley Service 

The Trolley operates along Main Street daily from 10:00 am until 11:00 pm. It will stop just about anywhere along the street. Stand at any of the trolley stop signs or just give a wave to the driver indicating you would like to ride. The Trolley also serves as a connection between Main Street and the Old Town Transit Center where connections can be made to all other routes in the system.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Electric Buses Are Hurting the Oil Industry

Electric buses were seen as a joke at an industry conference in Belgium seven years ago when the Chinese manufacturer BYD Co. showed an early model.

“Everyone was laughing at BYD for making a toy,” recalled Isbrand Ho, the Shenzhen-based company’s managing director in Europe. “And look now. Everyone has one.”

Suddenly, buses with battery-powered motors are a serious matter with the potential to revolutionize city transport—and add to the forces reshaping the energy industry. With China leading the way, making the traditional smog-belching diesel behemoth run on electricity is starting to eat away at fossil fuel demand.

The numbers are staggering. China had about 99 percent of the 385,000 electric buses on the roads worldwide in 2017, accounting for 17 percent of the country’s entire fleet. Every five weeks, Chinese cities add 9,500 of the zero-emissions transporters—the equivalent of London’s entire working fleet, according Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

In 1900, 30% of the cars on the road in North America were electric. Back to the future!

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Ste-Catherine Street and the reconquest of public space

Last week Montreal’s city government led by Valérie Plante hailed a “paradigm shift” as Projet Montréal unveiled their long-awaited vision for a transformed downtown core around Ste-Catherine Street, the city’s main commercial artery.

For the paradigm shift to become a reality, the reimagining of Montreal’s most emblematic thoroughfare — to be reborn as a pedestrian-first promenade — must usher in a new way of thinking about how we share our streets in Montreal. On that score, the Plante administration’s push to recast Ste-Catherine Street as the spine of a greener and more people-friendly downtown raises hopes that Montreal might finally join the global movement to reconquer our city spaces from cars.

This first phase of the Ste-Catherine Street revamp will see cars limited to one lane that will be shared with bikes and occupy a mere 30 per cent of the street space, thus flipping the usual car dominance on its head. All on-street parking for this 670-metre stretch will be removed, with the space given over to pedestrians, restaurant terraces, trees and vegetation, street furniture, and public art. Importantly, the design will also allow the street to become fully pedestrian when desired, so that these periods, be they summers, evenings, or weekends, could grow longer with time.

The surrounding public places, including Phillips Square and Dorchester Square, will be enlarged and embellished. And at the beating heart of this new downtown, a pedestrianized McGill College Avenue, with its magnificent vista towards Mont-Royal, will begin life anew as one of the largest and most iconic public squares in North America.....

progressive17 progressive17's picture

I hope they get it finished soon, as it is pretty terrible down there with all the construction and everything.

lagatta4

Yes, the opposition is attacking Projet Montréal for "hating cars".

I do wish they'd had brought back the tramline on Ste-Catherine though. It is sad to see the tracks emerge when there are big potholes. We really notice them when there are demos along that street.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

I saw an old colour picture of the corner of Union at St. Catherine's when it was the other store before La Baie. There seems to have been a streetcar turn at the intersection. All of the people were in uniform clothing, very much not like today. Although back then, I suppose that corner was still very much British territory, as the attire looks much like that of the old British middle classes of the day. The Anglican cathedral is just out of sight.
 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Book launch: Free Public Transit

Thursday, June 21 at 6 PM - 9 PM

Different Booklist, 777 Bathurst St, Toronto

Join us for the Toronto launch of a unique book: Free Public Transit – And Why We Don’t Pay to Ride Elevators. Edited by Judith Dellheim of Germany’s Rosa Luxemburg Foundation and Jason Prince, of Concordia University in Montreal. It is a collaborative result of an international network of scholars and activists working for fare-free public transit.

The book includes overall analysis of public transportation and describes and discusses various efforts in cities around the world to build movements for decommodified and accessible public transport. Examples include Toronto, Montreal, Bologna, Hasselt, Tallinn Stockholm and others.

The launch will feature a discussion about the promises, challenges and social underpinnings of free public transit and will include co-editor Jason Prince, author Herman Rosenfeld, and transit activists in Toronto.

Co-sponsored by Free Transit Toronto, Centre for Social Justice, Socialist Project.

lagatta4

Wonderful! Like the expression fare-free public transit. Of course it isn't "free", but not only hospitals and schools, but roads and motorways are anything but "free" as they are all paid by some form of taxation or fee.

Are there any new tram or light-rail lines in the GTA or southern Ontario in general?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..yes wonderful! another step forward for toronto i believe.

lagatta4

As opposed to Dug Ford who wants people without motor vehicles to subsidize petrol for the latter... And I'm not referring to farmers or resource workers in remote areas.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

TTC riders should expect more policing, less accountability

In the aftermath of multiple assaults by TTC Transit Enforcement, the TTC Board has voted to use $2.2 million of its budget to hire 20 more fare inspectors despite widespread public criticism.

The Transit Enforcement Unit and the Toronto Police Service are facing a multimillion dollar lawsuit after several fare inspectors dragged a teenager out of a streetcar and assaulted him, causing traumatic brain injury. A similar $4 million lawsuit against two transit officers was launched last year by a father and son who were brutally beaten at Union Station in 2015. 

In 2016, a staggering 116 official complaints were filed against the Transit Enforcement program, which employs 69 fare inspectors and an unknown number of Special Constables. But TTC riders have documented many more incidents of harassment, particularly against vulnerable people, on a dedicated Facebook group:

quote:

Special Constables, meanwhile, are fare inspectors who have received 54 days of training, which grants them the powers of a police officer while they are on TTC property, including enforcement of TTC By-laws and the Criminal Code of Canada.

The full legal text of their description is available on the TTC website, but in essence it states that they:

  • have all the powers of a police officer to arrest and detain;
  • can determine on the spot if someone is suffering from a mental illness, and arrest them by force or commit them into a crisis ward;
  • can confiscate alcohol, and arrest or place people into short-term psychiatric care for alcohol-related reasons.

Pages