any - In defence of the car part 2 - oldroverboy

just trying to find a bus to gatwick from west wales for us going out to see family in the middle east.

First of all, no viable services when we want to travel, so would have to travel 1 day early and get hotel at Gatwick, the returning, 6 hour wait for morning bus then change twice both ways, making it a horrible experience. Coach costs for 2 = £140 + hotel £80 at Gatwick + extra food costs! plus taxi to carmarthen bus station.

so back to the car then, Airport parking £54, fuel £70 @1.40 a litre, and 4 hours instead of 8 going and 14 hours returning. (with being forced to wait 6 hours on return for 1st coach)

it's a no brainer really.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - jamie745

Today it was announced that Rail Fares will increase by an average of 8% across England and Wales and could end up adding a four figure increase to some season tickets. Its been pointed out on here before that Rail Travel is unprofitable in this country and it cannot survive without heavy Government subsidy and to be paid for by us, the taxpayer. On its own its a useless form of transport in economic terms. Endless campaigns to put more people on public transport has been driven by a left-wing idealist notion rather than on any facts. Figures last year showed the Govt loses around 21p per mile covered by Train and clearly they're taking notice. These rises will mean the taxpayers contribution to rail will reduce further, its now set to be almost £3billion less than it was five years ago as those who actually use the trains will be expected to pay up for it.

They've had plenty of people on the TV with 'oh its going to stop us all working' which translated is 'if the Government stop subsidising this useless form of transport i cant use it' or 'if i have to pay the true cost of my tickets and services its too expensive!' unlike the fact the Government make a 6p profit per mile travelled by car. Looks like the Govt are finally taking notice and all the taxpayer subsidised public transport policies and campaigners will now probably radically change their thinking now they have to pay for it themselves.

For further reading on todays announcement http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14538167

The fact rail travel has to be run at a loss and subsidised by the taxpayer to get people to use it shows how useless it is. Its interesting how alot of these hippies will now change their outlook now they'll be forced to pay a proper price for the service they've had largely for free until now.

Fantastic news.

Edit: I know someones going to say it, so ill deal with it now. My comment of 'trains have to be subsidised by us, the taxpayer' someone will point out 'rail users are tax payers too' and indeed they are but currently under 6% of the commute is done by rail and the taxes of those 6% of people is not enough to cover it, unless they're all Premier League footballers. Which means its heavily subsidised by taxpayers who dont use the services to largely give rail users something for nothing.

Edited by jamie745 on 16/08/2011 at 20:14

any - In defence of the car part 2 - corax

. Which means its heavily subsidised by taxpayers who dont use the services to largely give rail users something for nothing.

I don't think the rail commuters quite see it that way when their annual ticket payment falls in their lap.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - justadriver

. Which means its heavily subsidised by taxpayers who dont use the services to largely give rail users something for nothing.

I don't think the rail commuters quite see it that way when their annual ticket payment falls in their lap.

But if you want to travel 50 miles to work each way, fine, just don't expect me to pay for it (or subsidise you). but there again, I chose my house close to where i work when we moved out of london, can walk to work, 15 minutes. I still get hammered for tax to subsidise the bus routes, the trains etc, but even if we are all different, those who use a service should be those who pay for it. If I go out for a coffee or a pint, it's pay or don't go. To all the bleaters paying £4000 a year from tunbridge into london or somesuch, calculate in the real cost of your commute.

Life isn't perfect but again, i'm fed up of paying for others to travel subsidised.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - jamie745

When a motorist dares to point out they feel motoring taxes are maybe slightly too high, the guardian readers come out with 'if you want to use the roads then pay for them, but dont expect any road improvements, the taxes dont exist, general taxation and all that' but you say to a rail user 'if you want to use the train then pay for it' and suddenly its a very different mentality. Tax money should be ploughed into it to subsidise it to get more people on it. Apparently. One rule for one...etc

Bus Companies currently receive a 43p a litre fuel duty rebate on diesel and bus travel costs the Government money every year, the mere fact they feel the need to give the rebate shows they know the tax is too high. Imagine what bus fares would be without Government subsidies. Theres only an 8p a litre duty on biofuels currently thanks to Gordon Brown's bright idea to encourage it for train use, although im not sure how many trains currently run on it in the UK so if anybody knows, info would be very welcome.

I agree with the commuters who say the fees are too much, totally agree, 4k a year to stand on a 19th century relic (dont even get a seat most of the time) beside vomiting homeless people having third hand resteamed coffee from a plastic cup is not my idea of value for money, i sympathise with the commuters, its not their fault rail travel is unsustainable and costly. And ive said in the past i support investment which improves the services of public transport, as i feel plenty of people are probably forced to use a car when in many cases minor upgrades or improvements to bus or train services would remove the need for them to do so, but with all the billions thrown at it in the last decade i dont think any improvements have been forthcoming. I think thats the key issue, has the billions brought benefits? Discuss.

What makes me supportive of fare increases and lower subsidies is the people of Campaign for Better Transport who criticise these changes on the basis of 'higher fares will put more people in cars, we need more tax money to stop that happening' if you know you cant compete with the car on a level playing field that says it all. Still, i probably shouldnt let pathetic quacks like them reduce my sympathy for ordinary tax paying commuters who just want to get somewhere.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - John F

Jamie745 has written pages on this, always from the viewpoint of the businessman.

Clearly it is generally accepted that the railway is a hybrid organisation - a cross between a social service and a business. As it is unlikely that it will exist totally as one or the other, the argument is merely about how much of one or the other.

Personally, I think that anyone using it on a daily or weekly basis as a commuting service for a journey of less than an hour should pay the full cost. This would probably help to counteract the centripetal effect of moving wealth closer to big centres.

The mark of a civilised country/continent is the distribution of its wealth amongst the provinces. We appear to be going the same way as so much of the third world - huge contrast of wealth between the major cities and outlying provinces.

Back to the Romans!

any - In defence of the car part 2 - unthrottled

Personally, I think that anyone using it on a daily or weekly basis as a commuting service for a journey of less than an hour should pay the full cost.

I don't get your argument. Why should someone expect to travel from Manchester-London return for £10 return using a heavily subsidised super-advanced-saver-economy ticket booked 3 years in advance and a regular commuter pay £3000 for a season ticket to get from Euston to Basingstoke on a daily basis? The commuter takes far more car journeys off the road than the one-off pleasure passenger. Get rid of the headline-grabbing subsidised tickets!

Making London harder to get in and out of hurts London but it doesn't follow that it improves the economic outlook in the provinces.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - John F

Personally, I think that anyone using it on a daily or weekly basis as a commuting service for a journey of less than an hour should pay the full cost.

I don't get your argument. Why should someone expect to travel from Manchester-London return for £10 return using a heavily subsidised super-advanced-saver-economy ticket booked 3 years in advance and a regular commuter pay £3000 for a season ticket to get from Euston to Basingstoke on a daily basis?

Why indeed? I agree that's stupidly cheap. But my argument is around the distinction between the occasional traveller and the daily commuter. Why should the train commuter be effectively subsidised by the car commuter?

any - In defence of the car part 2 - jamie745

Jamie745 has written pages on this, always from the viewpoint of the businessman.

I control budgets and spending for a living. In two different jobs over the last four years my role has been to stop people urinating money up the wall, specifically in the first one where i was in a public sector area and you know what public sector workers are like, they very much enjoy spending taxpayers money without recourse. So yes i view everything in terms of the numbers and the numbers say Rail Travel isnt sustainable or worthwhile of investment. Its like digging a hole and putting a pile of money in it.

I agree there is stark differences between the big cities and outside areas in terms of wealth but at the same time rich people will be rich and poor people will be poor. Poo doesnt roll uphill does it? A big problem where London is concerned is to live in London is so expensive, in terms of a house you dont get much for £1million and living costs dictate people to live outside of London and commute from afar, but sky high fuel costs, mostly instigated by ludicrous taxes result in that being very difficult too. Its easy for company to go 'well we need to make some money so we'll put our prices up' but the customer has nobody to palm their debt off onto to get more money to pay for the service.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - jamie745

Sorry i know people must be bored now of hearing how useless trains are but i just had to respond to the cold faced cow on BBC News earlier from Campaign for Better Transport who came up with this favourite nugget 'increased rail fares will force more people onto the roads and a severe increase in emissions'. Always a favourite but i forgot to mention that actually real science, not fake Guardian science but real science suggests that theory doesnt stack up. Anybody on here from a scientific persuasion will know already Trains consume more fuel and pollute more than cars, even if its full and you calculate it per passenger, per passenger its still more polluting than driving to work on your own in a 5 year old Fiesta. Im of course referring to the diesel trains of which we still run plenty in this country. Some of the high speed rail links they're talking about, Birmingham to London etc the 180mph trains and all the rest of it they would actually use more fuel and energy than a flight from Heathrow to Glasgow. Rail Travel is not environmentally friendly.

The crux of the issue is over the years the car has been made the scapegoat for alot of environmental issues and in turn the industry really has cleaned up, cars are much cleaner now than even 20 years ago but at the same time Buses which still run on Iron Age diesel engines kicking out particulates like theres no tomorrow, and trains which are less eco friendly than Ryanair, have been let off the hook in the meantime. Surely we need to question this. But will the Greens accept that and show that they genuinely care about the environment and instead discourage rail travel and encourage people into cars instead?

Yeah right.

Edited by jamie745 on 21/08/2011 at 02:42

any - In defence of the car part 2 - OG

Can I ask why it has to be Gatwick? You'll be passing Heathrow on the way and there are flights to the ME from Cardiff and Birmingham.

It's possible Gatwick has such poor transport links with West Wales because so few people want to make the journey.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - oldroverboy

Can I ask why it has to be Gatwick? You'll be passing Heathrow on the way and there are flights to the ME from Cardiff and Birmingham.

It's possible Gatwick has such poor transport links with West Wales because so few people want to make the journey.

Why Gatwick? Heathrow would be a whopping £350 EACH more expensive and flights from Cardiff go via amsterdam, strange hours too, and long times hanging around, also DOUBLE Heathrow, same for bristol, same for brum, and still got to pay for parking..

By the time we get to cardiff and then turn back and drive on country roads and the little country lanes to get to the parking and it is a tiny airport and any delay means we are stuffed for 24 or more hours. (some airlines don't fly every day!) flights would be via amsterdam, paris or frankfurt with 10-12 hour waiting outbound and maybe 20-24 hours inbound. From the time we leave the m4 at j33 to get to cardiff airport we are another 35 miles toward where we want to go.

For the links it is the sunday that is the problem, and as my wife still works for a living, there is the consideration for her colleagues and employer in not leaving them in the doo-doo. Also the total time frame for the visit, more time travelling = more tired.

But each to his own...........

any - In defence of the car part 2 - OG

Point taken. I take it the Heathrow fares are with another airline? Depending on when your flight leaves I would still tend to travel down the day before and stay overnight to make sure I was on time. However you travel in this country arrival times cannot be guaranteed 100%.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - oldroverboy

Point taken. I take it the Heathrow fares are with another airline? Depending on when your flight leaves I would still tend to travel down the day before and stay overnight to make sure I was on time. However you travel in this country arrival times cannot be guaranteed 100%.

just checked again out of interest.

Gatwick - Amman return flight 5 hours £178 inc 20kg checked 15kilo carry on

Heathrow £470 5 hours 20kg 10kilos carry on

Cardiff £708 and 25 hours outbound ! 2 stops

I'd love to fly from closer to home but the costs are crazy.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - Waino

The viability of using a car for the airport run depends on a lot of factors, and particularly on the number of passengers carried in the car.

In May, we piled 4 adults + cases + hand luggage into my Astra 1.3tdci estate for the Bury St Edmunds to Heathrow run. We stayed overnight at the Easyhotel - 2 rooms + 10 day's parking for £140 (think, room = broomcupboard), and then had to pay £20 each way taxi fares to the airport. We didn't feel that this was too bad considering that we wanted an overnight stay to avoid the bother of an M25 blockage and a missed flight. Of course, it would have been cheaper if we had been willing to risk an early morning (small hours) drive directly to airport parking.

The best bit was the Astra; the 1.3 is undoubtedly slow off the mark, but I was surprised to find that being filled with passengers and luggage didn't seem to hit it. It coped well, returning 55mpg (a brim to brim check) on a distance of around 120 miles each way at a diesel cost of £7 per person for the return trip.

We also had the flexibility to accept a 'bump' from BA, catching a later flight from Moscow, taking advantage of a cash payment and a pleasant few hours relaxing in the executive lounge.

any - In defence of the car part 2 - oldroverboy

The viability of using a car for the airport run depends on a lot of factors, and particularly on the number of passengers carried in the car.

Exactly! We are travelling to Lisbon from here and No flights from wales unless we want to pay several hundred quid more than easyjet, parking same price, but travel time with flight changes is utterly stupid from cardiff on return journey 17 hours! flights vary between £300 and £1300 EACH from cardiff and are £57 from luton.