Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 181 posts

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#91

Post by bondarchuk »

dotancohen wrote: post #79
bondarchuk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true though, quite amazingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...

Why do you double down on this when I specifically disregarded that aspect of your comment from my post? And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes, whereas my other unpopular opinions are downvoted one by one?

Because I (different person btw) was curious about whether it was true, that's all, no further "agenda". There's some discussion on the talk page btw about whether or not it is indeed attributable to direct democracy btw.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#92

Post by dukoid »

theappsecguy wrote: post #28
dukoid wrote: post #11

Why do we still allow drivers to externalize most of the costs associated with cars? There is existing technology to extract co2 from the atmosphere, and the current cost of this should be the free market-based price for co2 emissions.

This is a very naive take. For one, we don't do this because a lot of people in a lot of places have no other choice. Not everyone lives in a developed European country, good luck living without a car in Texas.

I am not arguing against cars. I am just arguing against the "right" to pollute the environment without taking responsibility for adequate cleanup.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#93

Post by rented_mule »

dotancohen wrote: post #79
bondarchuk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true though, quite amazingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...

Why do you double down on this when I specifically disregarded that aspect of your comment from my post? And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes, whereas my other unpopular opinions are downvoted one by one?

> And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes

Maybe because acknowledging flaws in "y" is not necessarily "anti-y"? In fact, it is often "pro-y". I want to improve things I care about. A critical part of that is identifying flaws so they can be learned from and sometimes fixed.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#94

Post by insane_dreamer »

ferguess_k wrote: post #78
insane_dreamer wrote: post #19

Not sure it will make a difference to people's travel habits; I think those inclined to take public transport already do so. But it does highlight the fact that we subsidize private transport (our taxes pay for the roads, traffic police, etc.), so why not public transport?

What do you mean "subsidizing private transport"? I'm sorry but "your tax" also includes the tax paid by people who drive private cars. And since most public transit companies don't break even anyway (at least in Canada), it is the private drivers that are paying for the public.

Did you miss the part about the roads for cars? If I don’t have a car I’m still paying for all the roads built and continuously maintained so that those with cars can drive them. So yeah, we are subsidizing private transport.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#95

Post by adolph »

dukoid wrote: post #11

Why do we still allow drivers to externalize most of the costs associated with cars? There is existing technology to extract co2 from the atmosphere, and the current cost of this should be the free market-based price for co2 emissions.

> existing technology to extract co2 from the atmosphere

I wonder what would be the energy cost of onboard co2 extraction for vehicles? Could there be a theoretical automobile that used a carbon-oxygen cycle fuel but which emitted nothing, where a "gas station" would push fuel into the vehicle and then pull out the stored material that was formerly emissions?

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#96

Post by lupusreal »

jewayne wrote: post #32
bluGill wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Public transportation should always be free in cities, with car commuters paying the operation costs Strongly disagree. There are too many perverse incentives that work against transit. If there are a lot of car commuters (which there will be - plumbers taking their tools to the job for example) they have inventive to pressure politicians to reduce that tax - any voting block will always be more powerful than the d…

I'm going to guess that you're a fellow American. That's our answer to everything - build a ghetto. Why make anything nice for everybody when you can make it suck for 79% of us, Hell on Earth for another 20+%, and nice for the privileged few?

Most ghettos aren't built to be ghettos. They were built as nice neighborhoods and have nothing structurally wrong with them, but then had criminals and shitbags wreck the place. Ghettoification can in fact be reversed without any changes to infrastructure by simply having nice people move in who give a shit and make an effort to clean up and maintain their properties. This is derogatorily called "gentrification".

Also, your ratios are absurdly out of wack. 79% of the country doesn't live in a ghetto and you don't need to be economically or socially privileged to maintain a nice neighborhood. Most working class neighborhoods are not ghettos, nor even resemble one in the slightest.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#97

Post by fmobus »

SilverElfin wrote: post #70
dukoid wrote: post #11

Why do we still allow drivers to externalize most of the costs associated with cars? There is existing technology to extract co2 from the atmosphere, and the current cost of this should be the free market-based price for co2 emissions.

Why single out cars? I may like using cars to get to destinations. Maybe you walk but do other things that have various environmental impacts like having kids or buying trendy clothes or pick something else. It seems unfair to let some people externalize their life’s costs but charge others.

If you like it so much, you should be willing to pay for the externalities.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#98

Post by mikestew »

dotancohen wrote: post #79
bondarchuk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true though, quite amazingly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_Switzerl...

Why do you double down on this when I specifically disregarded that aspect of your comment from my post? And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda posts always met with multiple simultaneous downvotes, whereas my other unpopular opinions are downvoted one by one?

And why is pointing out anti-Western agenda…

Perhaps folks don’t feel as if that’s what you’re actually pointing out. The post you replied to was referring to the direct democracy of Switzerland, not castigating all of Western society. I mean, from my point of view, by “disregarding” you basically ignored the entire point of the comment to support a narrative.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#99

Post by ferguess_k »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #94
ferguess_k wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "subsidizing private transport"? I'm sorry but "your tax" also includes the tax paid by people who drive private cars. And since most public transit companies don't break even anyway (at least in Canada), it is the private drivers that are paying for the public.

Did you miss the part about the roads for cars? If I don’t have a car I’m still paying for all the roads built and continuously maintained so that those with cars can drive them. So yeah, we are subsidizing private transport.

You are still depending on the roads for trucks that transport merchandises around and emergency vehicles and a lot of other stuffs. We are also paying for your public transit, thank you, because at least in my city it never breaks even, so everyone including us gets taxed -- but I have no issue with that -- I mostly take public transit anyway.

Re: Geneva makes public transport temporarily free to combat pollution spike

#100

Post by bluGill »

mtalantikite wrote: post #72
mvieira38 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also false that transit prices are small, by the way, at least globally. Where I live (third world), taking the subway daily to and from work amounts to 14% of minimum wage

Here in NYC the transit fare is about 35% of the minimum hourly wage for a round trip. I'd guess it's still cheaper than owning and maintaining a car though.

Minimum hourly wage is a terrible metric - very few people make that wage. In your areas where transit is most useful it is also the most economically productive so even less people are making minimum wage than the normal population. I don't the cities in question, but in general these days minimum wages is what you see paid in the economically depressed dying small towns, or people so disabled (generally mentally) that they cannot do your easiest fast food jobs.

How do costs compare for average people in that area is a much better metric. (understand that in transit areas I'd expect people with cars to have newer luxury cars, while in more car centric areas I'd expect more used non-luxury cars, and in poor areas worn out cars - which is itself a skew of the facts)

Post reply on HN