Re: I have been CHALLENGED. . .

On 2008-06-17, TimC <tconnors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2008-06-16, Maarten Wiltink (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

It is only silly in that taking a stepladder shouldn't be free,
either. Train companies are in the business of renting out space
that moves between stations.

For some reason, I wacky parsed that as "renting out advertising space
that moves between stations". And that would be true. I reckon that
should be a more lucrative scheme than the current fare based system
given how much advertising space they currently rent out.

Well, I'm not sure what sort of scheme you'd advocate instead, if any,
but I think you do want to keep charging the passengers somehow. Two
common arguments for keeping the fare system (in which I include season
tickets and such) are:

1) Fares are an important demand management instrument. While you could
devise other schemes that allocated more funds the more passengers
used the system, you still want some means of discouraging overuse,
especially during peak hours (hence why single fares cost more during
peak hours in many systems). There are a few other reasons why you
might not want to have people able to hitch a ride for free whenever,
e.g. public health; it's better to have them walk or cycle if they're
not in too much of a hurry/it's not too far/etc.

2) People tend not to value things that are for free, and would tend to
lose what little respect they still have for the trains and other
facilities, likely leading to an increase in littering, graffiti,
etc.

Niklas
--
Butterscotch schnapps is a great memory restorative. Now I remember why I don't
drink it more often.
-- Stevo, asr
.