As per TJ You need to learn the difference between want and need!
Christ almighty you are worse than me!
Are we only morally allowed to want the bare essentials? Anyway this is about public transport, why is this thread the second today to be hijacked for the same philosophical purtiannical purpose?
Its OK, I send an enormous amount to landfill to make up for my otherwise meagre existence 
TribalChief: I still can't find anything more expensive than £15.80, but my main point is that a 7-day LM travel card is £44, (£51 less than you quoted). If you were working for a month at the same location, you'd get a monthly card for £169 (£210 less than you quoted).
Still cheap.
You will find that a weekly ticket works out less, around £75 I'm betting. a monthly and yearly less again. Its because the price of season tickets are regulated but regular tickets are not.
I would say the £30 a month for the car is a little optimistic to say the least
Molgrips - you miss the point. You can want whatever you do want - its just wrong to say you need a car - it is always a choice unlike food or shelter.
No one said you cannot have a car - just be clear it is not s nessesity but a luxury
Well yeah, because supply's fixed more or less. I mean increasing network capacity is mostly prohibitively expensive, is it not?
Not entirely... extra carriages would help in many cases but even that level of investment seems hard to come by. Road pricing is being proposed for the same "demand management" reason - it grinds my gears, 'cos it's not really reducing demand, it's just keeping a lid on it 'cos they will not invest in increasing supply.
And a car can be a necessity, if you want to have any sort of reasonable life outside of a city or have other reasons to need to travel. This the problem, no-one's prepared to do anything about the reasons why people need to travel (sorry, wish to have the luxury of travelling to work), only to bash people verbally and financially when they do. It sucks.
porterclough - Member.....................
And a car can be a necessity, if you want to have any sort of reasonable life outside of a city
Point proven - its a want not a need. You only "need" a car because of choices you have made
i commuted by train into london for a while and it was hardly pleasant.
Immensely cramped and uncomfortable, frequent delays, incredibly expensive. Loads of pushing and shoving to get a space on the carriage. Tube was a nightmare at the other end, frequently felt like i'd get pushed onto the tracks!
don't think i saw anyone outside 1st class relaxing and enjoying a coffee!
The network in the south east is at capacity. Trains can't get longer as the stations can't cope.
Point proven - its a want not a need. You only "need" a car because of choices you have made
If I want to do X then I will need Y...
at TJ
Crazy prices - I commute for an hour an half (nearly) each way, in Aus, up the sunshine coast. Cost has just gone up to $8.30 each way. Far less than petrol, and parking is at least $18 a day if one can find it. So a bargain.
Oh and
No one NEEDS a car
No one NEEDS a car
But if that were the case I doubt you'd have entered this thread.
if everyone chose a lifetstyle/location where a car wasn't necessary we'd be in the shit
back to my original post, i will most likely commute by bike 3 x week
You car will cost more than you think - it always does. Sitting down drinking a coffee reading the paper or cursing in traffic in a car?
You always say that, but none of my commutes have ever made sense via public transport, on either a financial or time basis, especially not if you consider the car essential for other parts of your life and so effectively swallow the cost of everything but wear and parking of the commute. And remember, not everyone dislikes driving even if it's in a queue, and most train journeys are not the sort that come with a coffee and enough room to breath, let alone read the paper.
Cycling, yes, often a big improvement financially, but usually similar timewise. And in a car you can share with someone else.
Public transport simply isn't a viable option for most of the people I speak to about the matter, who have lives to lead instead of being sat on the platform drinking coffee or stuck standing in a train for 30 mins.
You only "need" a car because of choices you have made
What's that, the choice to live away from his work? What if he couldn't afford to live near or move to near his work, I know I can't. Not really a choice at all then is it, unless you suggest he gets a different job. We could all do admin work from home I suppose.
Point proven - its a want not a need. You only "need" a car because of choices you have made
djglover - Member
No one NEEDS a car
I NEED my vehicle for work. Don't fancy lugging around 3 or 4 20kg gas bottles, 3 tool bags, ladders, 3 large boxes of spares, 60m of hose, and all my other work related bits on public transport!
Even when I go to college once a week (which is about 12 miles way), it takes me well over an hour if I use public transport, 15 minute walk to the station, about 45 minutes on the train and then another 15 minute walk after that to get there, and the train costs near £5. Plus the wear and tear to my trainers and my jeans, then I buy a paper and a coffee which is another few quid I may aswell drive. It takes about 30 minutes (so I actually get there ontime without getting up early), costs about 20p a mile in diesel, secure parking is free, and I get my own stress free space, listening to music I want to, not what the idiot next to me decides to play on his ipod. I hate public transport.
Please explain what those choices are, then.
He will simply explain that you chose that career and that location, so you chose to need a car. Life's black and white to some people and shades of grey to others, the greeny in me sees in black and white, the rational person in me sees in full colour, I think TJ has the greyscale/colour view too, but likes to wind people up by downgrading to B&W just for the forum 
.
I personally love the ideology behind public transport, unfortunately it never ever lives up to it in reality, partly due to costs and partly due to the "rolling stock" available and partly due to the fact that I find the habits and lack of thought (ipods on deafeningly loud, mobile phones shouted down your ear, drunks, people refusing to budge over, ipod stealers etc) of a large portion of the general public quite remarkably repugnant. Fix those things and I'll gladly play along.
TJ steadfastly refuses to recognise that there are a great many people who live in places where public transport is almost non-existent, not because they chose to, but because they were born there, job opportunities nearby are again almost non-existent, so in order to actually have a job they have to travel significant distances, and before TJ comes in with the predictable “why don't they move then", that presupposes they could actually afford a house elsewhere.
A case in point: a close friend of mine lives in Colerne, Wilts. It's a small village with a military base/former airfield attached. The nearest town is Chippenham, ten miles, or Bath, around five or six.
She works part-time in the Pump Room kitchen while doing a one day a week catering course in Chippenham. She doesn't own a car, there is one bus to Chippenham at 7am, and one to Bath around the same time. That's it. The one to Chippenham doesn't even go right into town anymore, or to the station, close to the college. No, it stops over a mile from there on the edge of town, so she has another twenty minute walk to college. This isn't a ‘lifestyle choice', it's called 'living at home', because living elsewhere is too expensive. Every time a bus service is set up to outlying villages, it gets withdrawn after a while, because there are only relatively small numbers from each place using it, and grants get withdrawn that would keep the service running, because country people aren't among Labour's 'core voters', so don't matter, and don't get nice regular transport provided. Even transport to nearby cities is crap; if I wanted to go to Bristol for a concert, most gigs finish at 11.00pm, but the last train back is 10.30. What frackin' use is that? Another friend of mine owns a small country hotel. It's a mile from the nearest main road and bus stop. When it snowed, a Japanese guest arriving at the station was turned down by all the taxi drivers because they were afraid to chance the 1:4 hill to the hotel in the snow. She managed it, just, in her little Polo. Unless you're in a city or large town, public transport in this country blows goats.
Got to admit though, as trolling goes it was an excellent one liner...
I'm always amused by a couple of friends of mine. Both live about the same distance from work (both within the congestion zone). One earns about £30k but insists that he has to drive because public transport is for poor people, the other earns £1.5m+ and gets the train because driving into town is for idiots.
No one said you cannot have a car - just be clear it is not s nessesity but a luxury
Why, purely to keep you and djglover happy? Everyone else sees it as being pretty obvious that we aren't going to keel over and die without access to a car...
Ride in 5x a week.
(wheres the job- Prince of India ? :P)
I used to live in Kielder, without a car - 17 miles to nearest bank and butchers, four buses a day - Trip to the supermarket was 35 miles and two buses each way, a whole day out, and your frozen food was defrosted by the time you got back. Very limited employment options, unable to go to any pub but the stranglers, as the nearest other one was eight miles away.
The local butchers van came round once a week, and there was a small village shop with massively inflated prices - could you live there without a car? course you could! could you live there and have a job and any form of life without a car? just about! - was it pleasant living there without a car? yes, but it was a fooking sight more practical, comfortable and realistic to own a car than not!
The question for those who say you dont need a car, is could you live your life without a car and not have to rely on neighbour's and friends who do have a car when there's a problem (ill child, doctors appointments, things to move/and or carry, late night flights landing? ) - through the vast majority of the UK's landmass, I'd say the answer is no.
Errrmm - everyone needs shelter and clothing and food.
I didn't say people don't need shelter. I said people don't need houses (as proven by that guy on here that lived in a tent for a year or whatever). And I never said people don't need food - you made that bit up all by yourself Jeremy.
And why do we need clothes (other than to protect any absurd modesty civilization has brought about)?
Point proven - its a want not a need. You only "need" a car because of choices you have made
(wheres the job- Prince of India ? :P)
yes, cleaning their windows, open mouth style
I'm a bus mechanic.
I have to be at work to open up before the first bus goes out, or lock up after the last bus comes in, so I can't use my free bus pass to travel to or from work both ways by bus.
Another thing I would add - I think people need cars now much more than they needed them 20 years ago because the public transport system has been dismantled bit by bit. Where I grew up the buses ran every 20 minutes as a child, now they run every hour on a reduced route. The last buses run at around 9pm except on one main route.
Perhaps the public transport links have eroded because more people are using cars, but how long ago was it now that the Labour Government promised to improve things, and how can people be expected to use a public service that doesn't match their requirements?
If the government wanted to really make a difference, they'd allow Public transport vehicles to use red diesel. the way to encourage public transport is to reduce the cost, not to increase the cost of motoring.
The government (all governments!) are hooked on the use of the motorist as a cash cow - between road tax, fuel tax and vat on cars and fuel tax, the government bring in far more than they ever spend on roads, its all tied up in the classic socialist position seen on this thread earlier
Personally I'd use govt money to put in more train lines, but that's just me And probably TJ.
EDIT: If the govt had any money these days.
The thing is people can't be expected to switch to public transport until that transport is fixed. You can't tax one to death and attempt to remove it until you provide a reliable and regular solution FIRST. It just won't happen, it cant happen, but successive governments seem to attempt it on green grounds.
No one said you cannot have a car - just be clear it is not s nessesity but a luxury
Reductio ad absurdum. It's patently obvious that survival is possible without a car so there literally is NO POINT in passing on this amazing insight.
The word 'need' in this concept is an abbreviation for 'need to support the lifestyle to which I aspire', such as is commonly used by many people. I think TJ is being needlessly pedantic. The discussion of how to reduce our car dependence is another thing entirely.
grants get withdrawn that would keep the service running, because country people aren't among Labour's 'core voters', so don't matter, and don't get nice regular transport provided
That's such bullcrap. When the money is tight, you have to cut services taht affect the fewest people. It's got nothing to do with politics really. What DOES have to do with politics is that the government can't ever make enough money from taxation to pay for all the things we whinge about, because if they try and tax us more we just whinge again.
The electorate are like a bunch of bloody children on the whole, and it really gets my goat.
I NEED my vehicle for work. Don't fancy lugging around 3 or 4 20kg gas bottles, 3 tool bags, ladders, 3 large boxes of spares, 60m of hose, and all my other work related bits on public transport!
People who need a motorised vehicle for work are being stopped from doing their jobs by all the people who have chosen to use a car when they could use public transport, walk or cycle.
People who need a motorised vehicle for work are being stopped from doing their jobs
No they're not, they can still do their job with their car.
TandemJeremy - Member
Molgrips - you miss the point. You can want whatever you do want - its just wrong to say you need a car - it is always a choice unlike food or shelter.
No one said you cannot have a car - just be clear it is not s nessesity but a luxury
Now normally I agree with your point of view but im afraid having a car IS a nessesity, theres no way I could get the kids to school and get to work on time any other from of non car based transport just wouldnt work
No they're not, they can still do their job with their car.
Not stopped then, but delayed.
When you're waiting in for a plumber who's stuck in traffic, or they charge you more because of the time it'll take them to get to you, it's because of people using cars when they don't need to.
A skip company here was complaining that some new traffic lights were making it take longer to get to pick ups and drop offs. It was costing them money. But the problem isn't the traffic lights, it's the unecessary traffic on the roads.
Apparently when the M25 was opened you could speed along as you pleased; last night I crawled along the west side and wondered why we all needed to be on there. I work as a consultant at different client sites; to get to my current one I'd have to go in and out of London including a tube trip between London stations so that would be expensive and time consuming. I need a car for my job in that realistically I couldn't do it without one.
As for train ticket prices. My wife goes from Bookham to Woking which is 12 miles by car but can't drive so goes by train; as there is no direct line between the 2 she has to go via Guildford which I assume is why the cost is about £13 return - pretty much what it costs to go all the way into London which is about 25 miles.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
