Discussion
Why the h*ll should motorists pay for reduced rail fares.
Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
I have to say my own self-interest comes into play. When I lived in the SE I was more than happy for the subsidies to be in place. Now I live in an area where public transport is useless (i.e. not the SE) and have to drive to work I resent any subsidy that comes from general taxation.
Rail users should pay the cost of their own fares and I won't expect them to subsidize my car.
Rail users should pay the cost of their own fares and I won't expect them to subsidize my car.
Storer said:
Live closer to your work.
Think about how many people work in city centres.Now think about how expensive and family-unfriendly property is in city centres.
If you want to reduce commuting costs, then either businesses need to relocate to places their employees can afford to live, or businesses need to pay their employees more.
Stop being so unrealistic.
Twincam16 said:
Storer said:
Live closer to your work.
Think about how many people work in city centres.Now think about how expensive and family-unfriendly property is in city centres.
If you want to reduce commuting costs, then either businesses need to relocate to places their employees can afford to live, or businesses need to pay their employees more.
Stop being so unrealistic.
i pay £475 road tax on one car that i only drive evenings and weekends, £140 on the other that i drove less than 20 miles last year, i get the train to work everyday its £3.80 a day for 2 stops. if the roads were tip top and all RFL went on the roads that would be great. but seeing as they arnt and it doesnt.. yeah im quite happy for it to be spent on public transport
Storer said:
Why the h*ll should motorists pay for reduced rail fares.
Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
Why should I pay taxes and NI for other people to use the NHS, I've never used it? Why should I pay taxes for people to sit on their arses at home watching Jeremy Kyle when I have to work for a living? Why should people who don't have a car pay for road maintenance, (you don't honestly think it just comes from motorists do you)?Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
It's the way it is so suck it up and stop moaning.
Edit: ^^^ that sounds more harsh than I meant, here's the missing smiley
Edited by Dixie68 on Thursday 3rd January 19:34
Storer said:
Why the h*ll should motorists pay for reduced rail fares.
Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
While I have no time for people who moved out of London and then moan about the commute I really don't think you have a lot to complain about. What are your motoring costs? How much do you subsidise commuters? Your car is a hobby, surely.Many of us don't need to travel by rail to work as we work locally to our homes (in my case 50 yards).
Many of these commuters have chosen to move away from their places of work for "a better lifestyle" so why should those of us that live near our work subsidise their "better lifestyle".
If they want the bloated salary that work in the smokes pays then let them spend it on travelling to work. It doesn't matter if the journey is 5 miles or 100 miles. It is their choice to live that far from their employment.
As you can tell, this make my blood boil.
I moved out of London nearly 15 years ago. Far bigger house for far less money, cleaner air, less noise, green fields, trees, grass, etc - all attractive. Didn't actually think I would still be commuting to the job in London but I am - doesn't bother me too much if the train fares rise (which they have); I saved loads by moving out of London, so I can afford to pay the fares; still better off than if I was struggling with a mortgage in London.
I do object to the trains having smaller seats (and more of them) crammed in the carriages but one can't have everything... At least I live far enough away from London that I always get a seat ok. It would really tick me off if I lived closer, still paid thousands a year and never got to sit down...
I do object to the trains having smaller seats (and more of them) crammed in the carriages but one can't have everything... At least I live far enough away from London that I always get a seat ok. It would really tick me off if I lived closer, still paid thousands a year and never got to sit down...
thinfourth2 said:
I'd be perfectly happy if they spent 50% of my motoring taxes on maintaining the roads
and the other 50% went towards public transport
Exactly. I'd far rather see the tax extorted from fuel, road tax, etc spent on providing an integrated transport system, as opposed to financing wars and putting on jollies like the Olympics. Fits better with the 'greener than thou' message touted by all main parties.and the other 50% went towards public transport
Remove journeys from the roads and it will improve things immensely for those of us that need to use them. This along with the required improvements to bad road junctions and other bottlenecks.
Why are we so rubbish at providing a basic public service like transport, when many of our European neighbours seem to manage it with considerable aplomb?
Funkateer said:
Why are we so rubbish at providing a basic public service like transport, when many of our European neighbours seem to manage it with considerable aplomb?
Do they really do it better?I've used public transport in France, Spain and Italy for prolonged periods of time (i.e. not a two week holiday) and quite frankly it's been no better in my experience.
The trains in Italy were like sitting on a plastic school chair with no suspension... and no air con. However, they were cheap. Didn't run to time very often either.
The buses in Spain were a nightmare - half of them never turned up...
Using the Metro and the RER in Paris, was pretty poor too. Reasonable prices, but packed at rush hour and frankly no better than the tube. The RER would often be late by 30 mins or more.
Podie said:
Funkateer said:
Why are we so rubbish at providing a basic public service like transport, when many of our European neighbours seem to manage it with considerable aplomb?
Do they really do it better?I've used public transport in France, Spain and Italy for prolonged periods of time (i.e. not a two week holiday) and quite frankly it's been no better in my experience.
The trains in Italy were like sitting on a plastic school chair with no suspension... and no air con. However, they were cheap. Didn't run to time very often either.
The buses in Spain were a nightmare - half of them never turned up...
Using the Metro and the RER in Paris, was pretty poor too. Reasonable prices, but packed at rush hour and frankly no better than the tube. The RER would often be late by 30 mins or more.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff