this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
328 points (99.4% liked)

YUROP

1265 readers
99 users here now

A laid back community for good news, pictures and general discussions among people living in Europe.

Other European communities

Other casual communities:

Language communities

Cities

Countries

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I just had a brainwave that I would like to see data on...

It is obvious that use of public transport will soar when it is free, but how much does car use decline at the same time?

If it is enough to significantly reduce road ware, then you can take money from that budget and use to finance public transport.

I wonder however if the reduced car use will also result in lower income from taxes from petrol sales and road tax...

[–] syklemil@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 18 hours ago

Induced (and latent) demand still holds. So if someone is enticed out of a car by this, they'll likely be replaced by another driver.

And in the case of enticing walkers and bikers into transit, nothing is really gained, and it might actually have a negative public health effect.

If you want to reduce car traffic, restricting it is the way to go—price signals on driving and parking work well, as do restrictions on where you can drive and park.

And to get people to use transit, it has to be efficient—not stuck in car traffic, frequent enough, reliable and reasonably direct. And of course, pricing is important as well.

So correct policy will vary by location and situation. E.g. if transit is already jam-packed, reducing the price will be the wrong way to budget; capacity increases should be the top priority. But if the other metrics are good but ridership kind of lacking, dropping the price should improve the ridership. It ain't exactly rocket science, but there's also no silver bullet.

load more comments (8 replies)