Investment guru Jim Rogers advocates Free Public Transit

Investment guru Jim Rogers advocates Free Public Transit

Jim Rogers, well-known investment advisor, has moved to Singapore. In this article he advises the Singapore government to adopt fare-free public transportation. This link is a Google Translate link to the Chinese language Singapore newspaper zaobao.com

◆ Rogers proposed Singapore-wide free public transport

In order to effectively reduce carbon emissions, reducing air pollution, reducing the number of traffic accident injuries died to save open land, and so the benefits of the Government of Singapore can be considered to provide people with free public transport services.

Been an advocate of "anti-minority opposite direction," Rogers, to a reporter's question in this innovative proposal.

Rogers lived in the local two and a half, right here, many of the strict legal rules and regulations are agreed on the highway electronic toll gate system (ERP), also considered to be very intelligent traffic control measures.

He said: "ERP can be effective in reducing the road cars. To road users to pay more money, but also reasonable. This regard, the Government of Singapore can also be a higher level, to consider the use of any public transport to provide free services, This will further benefit the people. "

Singapore, although the area is small, but very high per capita carbon emissions, with some comparable European countries. According to the 2007/08 report, Singapore's carbon dioxide emissions account for 0.2% of the world, per capita annual emissions are 12.2 tonnes, is one of the highest emissions. The same reports that the United States, per capita carbon emissions are 20.6 tonnes, China 3.8 tonnes, 1.7 tonnes in Indonesia.

Rogers said: "If Singapore's bus, subway, light rail can free ride, it must attract a lot of the original drive their private cars out of people, abandoned the vehicle and switch to public transport. Road vehicles reduce carbon emissions immediately to solve the problem, also provide fresh air, to save and build roads, making highway land, the person died car accident injuries will be reduced, the many benefits is worthy of consideration by the Government.

Autos on Welfare - We can't afford it

Autos on Welfare - We can't afford it

In addition to the price paid by motorists at the pump, drivers and non-drivers alike spend additional money for each gallon of gas -- in the form of direct and indirect taxes and losses. Every year those subsidies cost America billions of dollars. The exact dollar amount is difficult to calculate, but every study done shows that it is at least twice the amount motorists pay at the pump.
...
1. Police, fire, ambulance; road construction & maintenance; other local government - paid for with taxes.
2. Property taxes lost from land cleared for freeways
3. Parking - free or cheaper parking is paid for with other taxes, or more expensive goods or services.
4. Air, water, land pollution - adds to medical expenses, loss of species and cleanup costs.
5. Noise, vibration damage to structures - adds to medical expenses and repair costs.
6. Global warming - adds to medical expenses, loss of species and other costs.
7. Petroleum supply line policing, security, petroleum production subsidies - increases taxes for defense.
8. Trade deficit, infrastructure deficit - increases costs of goods.
9. Sprawl, loss of transportation options - increases personal and corporate transportation costs.
10. Uncompensated auto accidents - increases personal costs.
11. Congestion- increases personal costs and losses.


Click on this link to read the rest of this US report: Sierra Club

23
Feb 10

Adam Butler & Free Public Transport

Adam Butler is an Australian blogger and advocate of Zero Fare Public Transport. Recently, Adam posted a column on his website called The Public Transport Bandwagon. It’s an excellent piece of writing with an interesting hook.
As Adam explains, the Victoria government in Australia has recently spent over $1 billion dollars on an automated ticketing system. The system will cost additional millions of dollars per year to operate.
As the transit system itself can only hope to generate less than a third of its revenue from the farebox, wouldn’t it make sense to simply eliminate fares entirely? Surely the savings realized from eliminating the cost and hassle of ticketing would more than offset the loss in fares.
A similar argument is made over at the Free Public Transit Blog.
Having just encountered this concept, I’ll admit I’m a bit skeptical. But I’m also intrigued. Very intrigued. I whole-heartedly concur that reducing fares is essential but feel that a Freemium model would be more appropriate than merely Free.
But who knows? A smallish city in Belgium seems to have adopted the free model, and they don’t seem to be turning back:

ShareThis

From the 'Gondola Project' website.

Well - who would believe it?

Bailouts for banks - fare hikes for us.

...And that’s the key. Instead of funding services for working people, provincial and federal governments have chosen to use taxpayer money to bail out big industries and banks. The auto industry got $4-billion loans so that they would not collapse—but the loans did not include provisions for preserving jobs. A $12-billion fund was created to encourage car sales—inefficient, polluting cars that few people want to buy...Noaman Ali BasicsNews

Costs of NOT HAVING free public transit

Costs of NOT HAVING free public transit

New York City – The average New York City driver loses $1,888 each year as a result of driving on roads that lack some desirable safety features, have poor pavement conditions or have inadequate capacity to meet travel demands. In total, New York State motorists lose $16.4 billion each year due to traffic crashes, additional vehicle operating costs and congestion-related delays, according to a new report released today by TRIP, a Washington, DC based national transportation organization.

Tripnet [PDF]

CARnivores

CARnivores

New study: "Motor vehicles- the greatest contributor to atmospheric warming"

Road Transport Key Driver In Global Warming In their analysis, motor vehicles emerged as the greatest contributor to atmospheric warming now and in the near term. Cars, buses, and trucks release pollutants and greenhouse gases that promote warming, while emitting few aerosols that counteract it. by Staff WritersGreenbelt MD (SPX) Feb 19, 2010For decades, climatologists have studied the gases and particles that have potential to alter Earth's climate. They have discovered and described certain airborne chemicals that can trap incoming sunlight and warm the climate, while others cool the planet by blocking the Sun's rays. Now a new study led by Nadine Unger of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City offers a more intuitive way to understand what's changing the Earth's climate. Rather than analyzing impacts by chemical species, scientists have analyzed the climate impacts by different economic sectors. Each part of the economy, such as ground transportation or agriculture, emits a unique portfolio of gases and aerosols that affect the climate in different ways and on different timescales. "We wanted to provide the information in a way that would be more helpful for policy makers," Unger said. "This approach will make it easier to identify sectors for which emission reductions will be most beneficial for climate and those which may produce unintended consequences." In a paper published online by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Unger and colleagues described how they used a climate model to estimate the impact of 13 sectors of the economy from 2000 to 2100. They based their calculations on real-world inventories of emissions collected by scientists around the world, and they assumed that those emissions would stay relatively constant in the future. Snapshots of the FutureIn their analysis, motor vehicles emerged as the greatest contributor to atmospheric warming now and in the near term. Cars, buses, and trucks release pollutants and greenhouse gases that promote warming, while emitting few aerosols that counteract it. The researchers found that the burning of household biofuels - primarily wood and animal dung for home heating and cooking - contribute the second most warming. And raising livestock, particularly methane-producing cattle, contribute the third most. On the other end of the spectrum, the industrial sector releases such a high proportion of sulfates and other cooling aerosols that it actually contributes a significant amount of cooling to the system. And biomass burning - which occurs mainly as a result of tropical forest fires, deforestation, savannah and shrub fires - emits large amounts of organic carbon particles that block solar radiation. The new analysis offers policy makers and the public a far more detailed and comprehensive understanding of how to mitigate climate change most effectively, Unger and colleagues assert. "Targeting on-road transportation is a win-win-win," she said. "It's good for the climate in the short term and long term, and it's good for our health." Due to the health problems caused by aerosols, many developed countries have been reducing aerosol emissions by industry. But such efforts are also eliminating some of the cooling effect of such pollution, eliminating a form of inadvertent geoengineering that has likely counteracted global warming in recent decades. "Warming should accelerate as we continue to remove the aerosols," said Unger. "We have no choice but to remove the aerosol particulate pollution to protect human and ecosystem health. That means we'll need to work even harder to reduce greenhouse gases and warming pollutants." By the year 2100, Unger's projections suggest that the impact of the various sectors will change significantly. By 2050, electric power generation overtakes road transportation as the biggest promoter of warming. The industrial sector likewise jumps from the smallest contribution in 2020 to the third largest by 2100. "The differences are because the impacts of greenhouse gases accumulate and intensify over time, and because they persist in the atmosphere for such long periods," said Unger. "In contrast, aerosols rain out after a few days and can only have a short-term impact." Factoring in CloudsFor each sector of the economy, Unger's team analyzed the effects of a wide range of chemical species, including carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, organic carbon, black carbon, nitrate, sulfate, and ozone. The team also considered how emissions from each part of the economy can impact clouds, which have an indirect effect on climate, explained Surabi Menon, a coauthor of the paper and scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, Calif. Some aerosols, particularly sulfates and organic carbon, can make clouds brighter and cause them to last longer, producing a cooling effect. At the same time, one type of aerosol called black carbon, or soot, actually absorbs incoming solar radiation, heats the atmosphere, and drives the evaporation of low-level clouds. This process, called the semi-direct aerosol effect, has a warming impact. The new analysis shows that emissions from the power, biomass burning, and industrial sectors of the economy promote aerosol-cloud interactions that exert a powerful cooling effect, while on-road transportation and household biofuels exacerbate cloud-related warming. More research on the effects of aerosols is still needed, Unger cautions. "Although our estimates of the aerosol forcing are consistent with those listed by the International Panel on Climate Change, a significant amount of uncertainty remains."

Students Say: ‘NO FARE!’

By John Tarleton
From the February 19, 2010 issue | Posted in John Tarleton , Local | Email this article

Under the MTA’s plan, students would be charged half-fares starting in September of this year and full fares beginning in September 2011. The fare hikes would cost families with children who use mass transit to travel to school about $800 per year, per student, and could reduce the opportunity for less well-off students to attend schools outside their neighborhood district.

The MTA faces an operating deficit of almost $800 million in 2010 due in part to cuts in state assistance.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has called the elimination of free student MetroCards “unconscionable.” However, others question the priorities of the mayor and the MTA, which is continuing to build the $2.1 billion extension of the 7 train to the far west side of Manhattan at the behest of Bloomberg. The city is providing much of the financing for the project.

“The MTA’s going belly up and the most important thing we can do is save the free student MetroCards,” Assemblymember Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester), chair of the Authorities Committee, told Metro Feb. 4. “And some of that money is now going to build half a train line.”

From 'The Indypendent', NYC Independent Media Center.

US students are planning mass demonstrations against education cuts (including cuts to student transport concessions) across the country on 4 March.

"Free public transport? - You know what: it works!"

Check out this 'TodayTonight' broadcast from Channel 7News ... a little city in Belgium, Hasselt, shows the way to overcome chronic traffic congestion.

FareFreeNZ editor

Free public transport on Yahoo!7 Video There are more trains, trams, buses, and ferries than ever before in our cities but traffic congestion is getting worse.

Durham, NC Mayor shows courage and common sense

Durham, NC Mayor shows courage and common sense

In his annual “State of the City” address, Bill Bell highlighted several of the same issues that were of top concern in last year’s update: transportation, jobs and crime reduction
...
1 cent - a property tax rate increase that could provide free bus transportation to Durham residents (This is under discussion.) Triangulator

Let's hope the people of Durham can see the elegance of free buses. They will get their money back 100 times over.