Buses should be free

[AshleyLawsonEire]

No no no, i don't believe this but, i knew i'd get a few looks :) In fact, i'm about to debate this with some friends, i need some extra ammo, any advice ?

[GBurr]

No such thing as a free lunch. Someone has to pay.

[angelatc]

Yes, and people should voluntarily drive them, service them and pass the hat to buy them. Nobody should be forced to pay for any part of them.

[LibertyEagle]

Where do your friends think the money to pay for the buses, the bus driver, the maintenance, the gas, the government bureaucracy, etc., is going to come from? It will come from our pockets; that's where. Why doesn't it make more sense to have those who USE the buses, pay for them?

Nothing comes for free. They are confusing holding their neighbors up and forcibly taking their money to use on someone else's whims, as "free". Call it what it is. It's theft.

[JeNNiF00F00]

No no no, i don't believe this but, i knew i'd get a few looks :) In fact, i'm about to debate this with some friends, i need some extra ammo, any advice ?

lol They even pay for buses in Europe. You pay via taxes, and via a ticket. No pay, no ride. This is where you have the police showing up from now and then asking for your tickets. No tickets = arrest. No papers = arrest.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

A few years back, I had this debate. Some dude tried to convince me that it would be feasible to convince the entire country to ride buses.

[AshleyLawsonEire]

They have an understanding that the system wouln't be totally free, that everybody would have to pay taxes. They're liberals so i don't think they have a problem with others paying :) I'm going to need more.

[AshleyLawsonEire]

Dude i am in Europe lol

[SwordOfShannarah]

In the end the health care issue, ideas like this one.. they are all just different means for people trying to force their version of morality onto others.

"The world would be better if we could make everyone do X".

Then consider that many religions think the world would be better if everyone shared their faith.

We should not use force to enforce morality beyond that of protecting an individuals liberty and private property.

[Oyate]

It's a classic debate. A liberal/progressive would say that busses are better for the environment, more efficient and therefore all of society benefits from their implimentation. Therefore it's a "social investment" that would repay itself to all in terms of enhanced quality of life, equal opportunity, etc. etc. We would argue that this is involuntary coercion pure and simple.

[0zzy]

A few years back, I had this debate. Some dude tried to convince me that it would be feasible to convince the entire country to ride buses.

your friend is wetarded.

I rode buses, and they suck the big one.

[Dunedain]

If the Mexican government wanted to subsidize all the buses in Southern California I would praise them for doing their part.

[Brian4Liberty]

Buses are such fun. Crowded, unreliable, full of drunks, crazies and sick people, fights, stabbings, shootings. The limousine liberals love to push public transit, but they won't actually use it.

[JeNNiF00F00]

Dude i am in Europe lol

LOL im sorry!

[Dr.3D]

Buses are such fun. Crowded, unreliable, full of drunks, crazies and sick people, fights, stabbings, shootings. The limousine liberals love to push public transit, but they won't actually use it.

But it would reduce traffic congestion so their limo's would be able to get them around faster.

[AshleyLawsonEire]

LOL im sorry!

No Problem, i used to have the same idea as most Europeans. Public healthcare, School, etc etc more government. During the 2008 elections i started getting into politics, and thats how i came across Ron Paul, i didn't really agree with everything he was saying at first, but the more i listened the more he made sense. Since then I've come to believe that your founding fathers had the right idea.

I'm starting debate this more with myself and others, Ii've started going to Marxest gatherings (so i know the enemy, lol) now I'm going to make a few Youtube videos, and get involved in an Irish libertarian radio show.



The script so far for youtube video on Free Public Buses

OK my argument against public transport owned by the state and providing 'free' transport, is that like all government run programs, they're inefficient, they cost more and there is no incentive to provide a better service.
As it stands at the moment Bus Éireann is subsidiary of CIE along with Iarnród Éireann, I was going to base my argument around Bus Éireann being in competition with Irish Rail, taxi's and other public transport but unfortunately i can't go down that route as CIA is state owned.
Now as a Libertarian I'm obviously for low taxes and against Ireland being a welfare state but before i go any further i should clear something up. I'm against Government braking promises, therefore, If government promises free transport for pensioners and those on disability, they should not go back on that.
To enable free bus trips for everybody in the country, its quite obvious that taxes would rise, for everybody, that means that Dolores who lives in the back arse of nowhere, never go on the bus, has to start paying for bus rides she never uses. To add insult to injury the bus doesn't even come by her way, so she can't make use of the service.
Now let's say Dolores doesn't drive, in fact she gets a taxi to the local village where she gets the bus to town, this is where we bump into our first problem. You see when government made buses up and down the country free for everybody, what kind of effect do you think this had on taxi's ?
It's actually hard to tell, and this is the problem, since economics as a science, fails to predict human nature. The most likely thing to happen, is that people using taxi's and trains would migrate to the 'free' transport. Now if this was a free-market, these services might quickly adjust, but free isn't exactly easy to compete with free, and your thinking now there's nothing wrong with taxi's lowering prices. But see the knock on effect this is starting to have ! Ok now for the sake of argument let's take the Irish rail, who in their right mind is going to pay the €72 return, from Dublin to Cork when you can get a bus there and back for free. As the majority have moved from trains to buses, Irish rail may have to pump up the cost of their service to the public and private business' to pay for their overheads.
But transport in Ireland isn't a free-market no, no. It's pretty safe to say Irish Rail as a public service may just fail if buses where free, so the nanny state may have to make train rides free too, raising taxes further and deciding what to do with your money.
I believe you know best where to spend your money, and a free-market will respond to that and provide services that suits you.







Its not finished, but I'd greatly appreciate some help.

[AshleyLawsonEire]

Any suggestions, i corrected a few mistakes, tell me if you think im wrong in some areas etc. thanks

My girlfriend thinks buses should be free wtf !!!


Why Buses should not be free

OK my argument against public transport owned by the state and providing 'free' transport, is that like all government run programs, they're inefficient, they cost more and there is no incentive to provide a better service.
As it stands at the moment Bus Éireann is subsidiary of CIE along with Iarnród Éireann, I was going to base my argument around Bus Éireann being in competition with Irish Rail, taxi's and other public transport but unfortunately i can't go down that route as CIE is state owned.
Now as a Libertarian I'm obviously for low taxes and against Ireland being a welfare state but before i go any further i should clear something up. I'm against Government braking promises, therefore, If government promises free transport for pensioners and those on disability, they should not go back on that.
To enable free bus trips for everybody in the country, its quite obvious that taxes would rise, for everybody, that means that Dolores who lives in the back arse of nowhere, never goes on the bus, has to start paying for bus rides she never uses. To add insult to injury the bus doesn't even come by her way, so she can't make use of the service.
Now let's say Dolores doesn't drive, in fact she gets a taxi to the local village where she gets the bus to town, this is where we bump into our first problem. You see when government made buses up and down the country free for everybody, what kind of effect do you think this had on taxi's ?
It's actually hard to tell, and this is the problem, since economics as a science, fails to predict human nature. The most likely thing to happen, is that people using taxi's and trains would migrate to the 'free' transport. Now if this was a free-market, these services might quickly adjust, but free isn't exactly easy to compete with free, and your thinking now there's nothing wrong with taxi's lowering prices. But see the knock on effect this is starting to have !
Ok now for the sake of argument let's take the Irish rail. Who in their right mind is going to pay the €72 return, from Dublin to Cork when you can get a bus there and back for free. As the majority of people have moved from trains to buses, Irish rail may have to pump up the cost of their service to the public and private business' to cover their overheads.
But transport in Ireland isn't a free-market no, no. It's pretty safe to say Irish Rail as a public service may just fail if buses where free, so the nanny state may have to make train rides free too, raising taxes further and deciding what to do with your money. I believe you know best where to spend your money, and a free-market will respond to that and provide better services that suits you.
Now let's move on to the issue of workers rights, At them moment I believe the drivers, engineers and general staff are payed differently. They negotiated a contract at the start of employment, if this contract wasn't agreeable, they wouldn't of taken the job. Paddy is an experienced driver, the other day he successfully negotiated a pay rise which will help pay for his 3rd child, on the other hand Jim is the new trainee engineer, he doesn't have any children and lives it up on the weekends, this is his first real job and he's getting some good experience. They're contracts suit them and they're employers, they all benefit.
Now let's stick some socialism in there (in the mix). The government decides a suitable wage for drivers, a suitable wage for engineers etc, etc... Everything is running fine as it usually doesn't in a socialist society, until the inevitable happens, the cost of living rises. The drivers aren't happy, they demand higher pay, threatening to strike. The Government has three options. One, it raises taxes further. Two, they cut Jim and few more of the newer staff, there isn't any competing employer so they can't look for work. Three, accept strike action, people don't make it to work in time, parts of the country come to a stand still.
There is also the issue of environment, and nothing protects the environment better then the free-market. So the Government decides it own policy on emissions, the people have the power to change that, every four years. There is no real incentive to upgrade to better, cleaner more fuel efficient equipment the buses they have are fine, new vehicle's would mean more taxes and that won't go down too well anymore. People can't spend or won't spend they're money on alternative transport, now nobody has a choice.
I'll end by quoting some advice I got when writing this "Where do your friends think the money to pay for the buses, the bus driver, the maintenance, the gas, the government bureaucracy, etc., is going to come from? It will come from our pockets; that's where. Why doesn't it make more sense to have those who USE the buses, pay for them ? Nothing comes for free. They are confusing holding their neighbours up and forcibly taking their money to use on someone else's whims, as "free". Call it what it is. It's theft."
That really is the heart of it, government should stay where it belongs, to protect individual rights to life, liberty and property, power must be used only to protect the individual from the use of force or fraud by others. There are no free Mars bars !

[noxagol]

Simple, if buses were a good idea to do, we would have private businesses already running buses around everywhere without government subsidies.

[tangent4ronpaul]

Submersible buses should be free! - Luxury submarines for everyone!

-t

[Brian4Liberty]

An eleven year old was stabbed repeatedly by adults...no, violence is not increasing, it's just getting reported a little more this week. The Police in SF turn around and walk the other way when they see assaults and violence.

YouTube - Muni violence explosion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOWlvnaI1NY)

[teamrican1]

Buses SHOULD be free. As in anyone should be free to own or operate a bus service. But if I were to purchase a bus and start ferrying people around to places they want to go, the state would label me a "gypsy bus" and throw me in jail. If we had a true free market in transportation, buses and cabs would be plentiful and dirt cheap. It is the state and the barriers to entry that it constructs and maintains by force that are the reason for our transportation woes.

[WClint]

Do they mean that buses are paid by the government, IE the taxpayers. The only people who use the bus are low income workers and students. Ask them if they really want to pay for them. Tell them if they do that there is nothing stopping them from setting up a "charity" to pay for these people... When they reply they dont want to do that, say neither do I. Explain to them that "spreading the wealth around" is simply the government forcing you to pay money to them so they can give money to charities that you would otherwise not do yourself. HOHO COMMIES

[AshleyLawsonEire]

My third and final correction before


Why Buses should not be free

OK my argument against public transport owned by the state and providing 'free' transport, is that like all government run programs, they're inefficient, they cost more and there is no incentive to provide a better service.

As it stands at the moment Bus Éireann is subsidiary of CIE along with Iarnród Éireann, I was going to base my argument around Bus Éireann being in competition with Irish Rail, taxi's and other public transport but unfortunately I can't go down that route as CIE is state owned.

Now as a Libertarian I'm obviously for low taxes and against Ireland being a welfare state but before i go any further i should clear something up. I'm against government braking promises, therefore, If government promises free transport for pensioners and those on disability, they should not go back on that.

To enable free bus trips for everybody in the country, its quite obvious that taxes would rise, for everybody, that means that Dolores who lives in the back-arse of nowhere, she never goes on the bus, has to start paying for bus rides she never uses. To add insult to injury the bus doesn't even come by her way, so she can't make use of the service.

Now let's say Dolores doesn't drive, in fact she wants to get a taxi to the local village where she'll get a bus to town, but when government made buses up and down the country free for everybody, what kind of effect do you think this had on taxi's ?

The truth is, it's actually hard to tell, and this is the problem, since economics taught as a science, fails to predict human nature. The most likely thing to happen, is that people using taxi's and trains would migrate to the 'free' transport. Now if this was a free-market, these services might quickly adjust, but free isn't exactly easy to compete with ! Now your thinking there's nothing wrong with taxi's lowering prices, but see the knock-on-effect this is starting to have !

OK for the sake of argument let's take Irish rail. Who in their right mind is going to pay the €72 return, from Dublin to Cork when you can get a bus there and back for free ? As the majority of people have now moved from trains to buses, Irish rail may have to pump up the cost of their service to both the public and private business' to cover their overheads.

But transport in Ireland isn't a free-market no, no. It's pretty safe to say Irish Rail as a public service may just fail if buses where free, so the nanny-state may have to make train rides free too, raising taxes further and deciding what to do with your money. I believe you know best where to spend your money, and a free-market will respond to that and provide better services that suits you.

Now let's move on to the issue of the workers, At them moment I believe the drivers, engineers and general staff are payed differently, right. They negotiated a contract at the start of employment, if this contract wasn't agreeable, they wouldn't of taken the job.

Paddy is an experienced bus driver, the other day he successfully negotiated a pay rise which will help pay for his 2nd child, on the other hand Jim is a new trainee engineer, he doesn't have the best wage buy he doesn't have any children, he lives it up on the weekends, this is his first real job and he's getting some good experience, he's not complaining. Their contracts suit them and they're employers, they all benefit.

Now let's stick some socialism in the mix ! The government decides a suitable wage for drivers, a suitable wage for engineers etc, etc... Everything is running fine as it usually doesn't in a socialist society, until the inevitable happens, the cost of living starts rising. The drivers aren't happy, there wages don't suit them, so they demand higher pay, threatening to strike. The government has three options.

1. It raises taxes further.
2. They cut Jim and few others, so they're out of work.
3. Accept strike action, people don't make it to work and parts of the country come to a stand still.

There is also the issue of environment, and I believe nothing protects the environment better then the free-market and you'll see why in later videos. But getting back to the point, now government has a monopoly and it decides it own policy on emissions, the people do have the power to change that but, its only once every four years!

You see there is no real incentive for those in power to upgrade to better, cleaner, more fuel efficient equipment, the buses they have are fine ! New vehicle's would mean more taxes and that just won't go down too well anymore. The people can't spend or won't spend they're money on alternative transport, so now nobody has a choice.

Now i understand the oppositions argument - by allowing free bus travel, charging 'everybody' fees though taxing. It would seem you get more people using public transport, lowering prices, traffic congestion and emissions, i admit, a most noble cause. But one has to question would this become a reality, especially with the amount of force used to execute such a goal.

1. Would it really lower prices ?
2. Stop traffic congestion ?
3. Do you really believe free public transport would stop people driving cars ?

The answer to all those questions is No. and especially not without more government intervention.

I'll end by quoting some advice I got when writing this -
"Where do your friends think the money to pay for the buses, the bus driver, the maintenance, the gas, the government bureaucracy, etc., is going to come from? It will come from our pockets; that's where. Why doesn't it make more sense to have those who USE the buses, pay for them ? Nothing comes for free. They are confusing holding their neighbours up and forcibly taking their money to use on someone else's whims, as "free". Call it what it is. It's theft."

That really is the heart of it, government should stay where it belongs, to protect individual rights to life, liberty and property. Power must be used only to protect the individual from the use of force or fraud by others. There are no free Mars bars !

[BenIsForRon]

1. Would it really lower prices ?
2. Stop traffic congestion ?
3. Do you really believe free public transport would stop people driving cars ?


No.
Yes.
Somewhat.

The local government already owns the roads in town. I think we can both agree that they are not going to come up with a complicated plan to privatize the roads, so we can scratch that option.

So what's the next best thing? Public transportation. People in and around the city have a cheaper, easier, more environmentally friendly way to get around town. Of course, government will probably poorly manage finances and infrastructure, but it's up to the local citizens to elect intelligent officials that can keep costs affordable, and adequately prepare for future expansion.

Over time, local businesses will cater to bus/train traffic instead of car traffic, and thus you will see further reductions in fossil fuel use.

And don't forget sidewalks and bike lanes, they are even more important than public transportation.

[Krugerrand]

...The local government already owns the roads in town. I think we can both agree that they are not going to come up with a complicated plan to privatize the roads, so we can scratch that option.

So what's the next best thing? Public transportation. People in and around the city have a cheaper, easier, more environmentally friendly way to get around town. Of course, government will probably poorly manage finances and infrastructure, but it's up to the local citizens to elect intelligent officials that can keep costs affordable, and adequately prepare for future expansion.

Over time, local businesses will cater to bus/train traffic instead of car traffic, and thus you will see further reductions in fossil fuel use.

And don't forget sidewalks and bike lanes, they are even more important than public transportation.

I would not mind a free public transportation system. I would insist on it being locally funded and organized - not a federal government thing ... not a state government thing. Additionally, I'd rather see routes contracted to multiple companies. That would allow for competition in the bidding process.

It's pretty inefficient to have to pay people to take money, collect money from machines, print passes, enforce passes, etc. In PA the state already dumps a boat load of money into the public transportation system. That's a waste. Private companies contracted by local municipalities would be far more efficient and for what people are paying now probably could be free.