Train fares, should they be subsidised?

We havnt got a good bus or rail system our local station doesn't accommodate wheelchair users ,has no ticket office it's up a very steep hill with no bus going up to it.,most of the fast trains don't stop here and fares are high.😒

Germanshepherdsmum

A lot of people travelling by train are high-earning commuters, as I was. My train fares were very expensive but why should others subsidise them?

A lot of not-very-well-paid people can't afford to live in London (for example), but their services are still required.

ronib

The taxpayers alliance estimates £1300 cost per taxpayer for railway subsidies 2023.
Just saying….

And where is that £1300 being spent? My guess is that as usual it will be concentrated in London and the SE, and the rest of the country will get very little.

Doodledog well given the overpopulation of London and the SE, to emphasise - high population density of this area - it makes sense to have public transport in place.
I guess quite generous salaries and pensions plus private finance initiatives might have some impact on the tax payer.

ronib

The taxpayers alliance estimates £1300 cost per taxpayer for railway subsidies 2023.
Just saying….

The 'taxpayers' alliance, Ronib is a right wing, opaquely funded, think tank that believes in privatisation of all public services (and has no interest at all in common or garden taxpayers, it just lobbies for tax cuts for the wealthy). I wouldn't give any credence to anything it says.

I would suggest that if rail prices didn't have to include an element of profit for paying shareholders' dividends that would be a start to reducing costs to the user.

I'd also suggest that government should be pricing in the environmental benefits, health benefits, and the costs of initiatives needed to counter climate change, if it were looking at subsidising rail ticket prices.

A good integrated public transport system is badly needed in the UK but we won't get it while private providers are competing for profit.

As for the railways, this report from Manchester University came out several years ago. It makes interesting reading.

hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/institutes/cresc/sites/default/files/GTR%20Report%20final%205%20June%202013.pdf

Thanks MaizieD that is a very good report to read.

ronib

Doodledog well given the overpopulation of London and the SE, to emphasise - high population density of this area - it makes sense to have public transport in place.
I guess quite generous salaries and pensions plus private finance initiatives might have some impact on the tax payer.

I’m not sure why ‘the taxpayer’ should subsidise London though. If there are more service users the routes will be more cost-effective. It is areas such as Cumbria or rural Devon that should be subsidised - places where there are fewer routes and higher prices.

Doodledog I thought London and the SE subsidised the rest of the Uk ? Are you suggesting this is unfair?

I’m suggesting that it’s untrue😀. People pay tax at the same rate across England but more goes to the SE per person than anywhere else.

I don’t know about that Doodledog- I always thought the richest paid the least?
Somehow - don’t know how!

A rich person in London pays the same rate as a rich person in Liverpool, and poor people in both cities pay the same rate as one another too.

You have to laugh. If only the whole country had good transport, like london. londoners can subsidise londoners. The rest of us would riot if we were asked to put our hands in our pockets for them

Should travel of any kind be subsidised? No.

M0nica

Should travel of any kind be subsidised? No.

I'm no economist nor transport specialist but I thought that all transport is somehow subsidised, whether in tax breaks or direct subsidies - even AMTRAK in the USA is heavily subsidised.

ronib

I don’t know about that Doodledog- I always thought the richest paid the least?
Somehow - don’t know how!

Here's your answer
Income tax payments are concentrated amongst those with the largest incomes. The 10% of income taxpayers with the largest incomes contribute over 60% of income tax receipts.5 Jun 2023
commonslibrary.parliament.uk › ...
Tax statistics: an overview - The House of Commons Library - UK Parliament

M0nica

Should travel of any kind be subsidised? No.

so why are we tax payers paying huge amounts for the road network?

M0nica

Should travel of any kind be subsidised? No.

I couldn't disagree more.

If people can't get to work they can't earn a living, so they can't pay taxes and they can't provide the services or good that their work brings. If people can't get to the doctor's they get ill, as do animals if they can't be taken to a vet. If people can't get to theatres, cinemas, restaurants etc their lives shrink and the venues lose money and can close. Similarly, things like toddler groups, evening classes and social events, eg lunches for older people can only continue if people can get to them. In tourist areas, if people can't get about on buses and trains, they often won't bother, or will stay in the towns and not explore other attractions.

Travel is not all 'Grand Tour' style - I'm talking about getting from A to B, which is often very easy and cheap (or free) in cities, but all but impossible and expensive elsewhere. The busy routes should subsidise the quiet ones, IMO.

The alternative is for everyone to use a car, which is bad for the environment, and excludes those who can't, or don't want to drive everywhere.

surely if net zero is so critical etc
It is, but it’s not to the powers that be, they’re paying lip service to the problem.

Freya5 Oxfam for example suggests that top taxpayers are paying less than they should be and Oxfam has a way of working it out. Bit of a distraction though from the discussion.

ronib

Freya5 Oxfam for example suggests that top taxpayers are paying less than they should be and Oxfam has a way of working it out. Bit of a distraction though from the discussion.

Oxfam certainly have their finger on the pulse, don’t they.
top tax payers are paying less than they should be
Stone me, whatever next 🤦🏼‍♀️

If the government want to get people out of their cars they need to make public transport affordable. We live in Berkshire and one of our favourite outings is a trip tp the South Kensington museums. This means me, DD, SiL and two GSs in one car. If we go on a Sunday there is no congestion charge and DD has done it so often she's expert at finding free parking. With just the petrol to pay for the train can't begin to compare. Even if we go to parts of London where we have to book and pay for a day's parking it is still a huge saving.

I am always a bit peeved that friends living in London have free access to the tube network, why can’t that be extended to all pensioners.

LouLou21 good point- I asked the local mayor and her response was- no way as it is far too expensive to implement. Her view was that pensioners are well off and don’t need this!

LouLou21

I am always a bit peeved that friends living in London have free access to the tube network, why can’t that be extended to all pensioners.

It should be, IMO. We all pay tax, so there is no reason why subsidies should be concentrated in some areas and not others.

As for pensioners being well-off - I wonder how the mayor would feel if that comment were made public. I doubt her constituents would take that well.

Some pensioners are well-off, but many are struggling, and the people who, potentially, could benefit most from cheaper transport are those who have made some provision for old age, but have to spend it on means-tested things that others get free.

Many commuters used to buy a season ticket for their train journeys which was effectively a subsidy. Nobody seems to have thought about the many people who now work from home and only go in three days a week. I'm guessing that their fares are not much less than a whole week with a season ticket.