Do You Think There Is A World Wide Plot To Move People Onto Public Transport And Away From Cars?

Which line?

 

Sheerness branch line.

Yes I know I live just round the corner from where Richard beeching was born. The enemy!

 

Hadn't heard they were planning on closing it, or that Arriva were pulling out. Seems odd that I can't find anything on it as that would be big news.
I know they've pulled up the lines to the docks and the old industry south of Quenborough (though the lines are still in Rushenden Road)
And definitely seen buses going up that way last week (I was visiting Sittingbourne)

 

Well I say recently, this was before the pandemic. The islanders and local council were heavily against it so it stayed. There's was a few articles in the tabloids.

Arriva depot in sheerness is gone. There's still a few Arriva services to and from Maidstone but no more local services around the island. They have been taken on by a local company.

Train services have been cut to one per hour of peak.

There's still the section of the line which is called sheerness steel reception in tsc. There were plans of a rail freight terminal there but I think they may have been abandoned.

 

I actually operated the loco in Queenborough rolling mill a few times when I worked there as a boy. It was like driving a roller coaster.



Wasn't quite as bad as the above but was getting there.

 

There was actually 2 lines crossing rushenden Road at one point. The one where its still situated today, running around a mile to the coal washer. Then another further along rushenden Rd, this one come out of where the Mills loco shed used to be and run along the side of the now defunct klondike Estate to the chalk wharf. I belive there were also tracks running into the klondike est at one point.

The loco shed is still there today with the tracks, pit and buffers still in place.

 

I can't wait for the days where I can finish work, hop in the back of my self driving car and enjoy the ride home.

 

Just like that futuristic film with Stallone and Wesley Snipes - Demolition Man!

Never did work out what the shells were for...

 

Good to hear from you Sam.

At the start here you said there isn't a plot...

How would you level with every Western country using the same language in lock step: "build back better" "green new deal" "no new petrol cars by 2030" ?

If not plot could it be a gentle nudge? Getting the younger generation onboard with the slogans and a bit of subtle nudge here and there towards this leasing system?

Or do you simple see it as demand economics with no string pulling whatsoever?

Very interested in your thoughts

 

So you would say FD that the work of the World Economic Forum overall is a force for good?

Akin to say a UN or WHO, but just backed by business rather than more holistic purposes (UN = Western Defence Force, WHO = global disease response like cdc) ?

 

Always welcome in off topic Sam.

Thank you for the insight. Nothing to see here all just a generational moving of time is a perfectly reasonable view point.

These are interesting times however, how much of this environmental push is lead by youth and how much is a drive from WEF/Western governments is an interesting debate.

Could be a bit from both.

However a quick Google of western leaders who use the phrase "Build back better" or "a chance to reset post pandemic" would indicate its a little more top down than bottom up.

But it's always good to hear an opposing view.

All opinions welcome

 

I should say at this point as we drift towards page 3 I do believe climate change to be real and to extent man made.

I think the science would back up my above statement. To what extent and in what time frame we are killing the planet is however up for debate and the push to EV is for me a little more corporate than about the environment... but maybe that's just how capitalist societies function...

 

As I said on my earlier post, I am not sure if governments are actually colluding together. like a sort of NWO. But I don't think you can say that having "moving people from using cars to using transit" as your goal is a bad thing in any way, shape or form. As Sam said this alone won't save the world, but I am of the opinion that personal cars are extremely wasteful and inefficient on almost every level.

And again, even if we end up in this utopian future of fully self driving electric cars that are used as autonomous taxis, some fundamental problems will remain, and I think that high quality rapid transit is a better alternative, for now and the foreseeable future.

And yes, I think in the future robotaxis as a service will replace owning a car (unless the players that profit off of cars can lobby hard enough), but I think public transportation will still have a place, and I hope we will still incentivise using it, just think about how much less energy a train uses (per person) to move people, even with the US Diesel trains, the cost per kg per mile is a lot lower on a train compared to trucks, that's why less profitable bulk freight often travels by train and not truck, think of how many cars, with how many different batteries, etc... are needed to replace a full capacity metro train. Public transportation is and will always remain the most efficient way to transport a big number of people, no matter how fancy cars get.

In terms of infrastructure, yes, transit requires a bigger "upfront" investment, but roads can get expensive too with time, tarmac, like everything else has a life expectancy, then the road needs to be entirely repaved, even not considering that, particularly if a road is heavily used it will require attention. I guess potholes exist in the UK too, so you know that roads need maintenance as well.

Addendum: I also agree that EVs vs ICE cars is a drop in the ocean, and happening at the same time as coal power plants being fired back up to respond to the lack of natural gas, but what can I say... every little helps, I guess. I'd rather see a lot more emphasis being given to other problems, for example ships, I really can't see why not go nuclear like the US Supercarriers. Or nuclear in general TBH, talking about Europe us stupid italians voted against nuclear, but a nuclear power plant can blow up in France and scatter radiation here anyway, but we don't have cheap domestic electricity, unlike them, yay? but perhaps it's for the better knowing how infrastructure project go here, perhaps they'd use newspapers instead of concrete.

also I'm happy to see that aviation is getting a move on Sustainable Aviation Fuel and Hydrogen, and for smaller planes batteries.

 

I have to admit I’m still not sold on the soullessness of electric cars. I found myself politely refusing a ride in a friends Tesla to go out in another’s Porsche 911. Granted electric are the future and faster etc but I’ve found my carbon foot print getting worse. At a meagre 6’6 and 19st I don’t like small cars so I’ve gone from old 200sx I literally couldn’t fit in to 3ltr BMWs, to 4.3ltr v8 Lexus to a 4.4tdv8 Range Rover (incidentally the most economical).
I’m not liking the £195 to fill it up but it by far gives me a smile every time I take it off road or use it like a van

 

Welcome to the debate chief

As a petrol head what are your thoughts on who is driving this:

The youth?

WEF / Western forces?

Or a bit of both?

 

What I like about your replies FD is you don't blame the boomers at any stage. You are much more focused on resolution than harping back to missed generational opportunities of ownership. If I was sub 25 I think I would be bitter towards the lower costs of housing and car ownership that boomers had, so it is a credit to you that you retain the balance that you do at your age.

 

Personally, it’s the climate gimmick. The 1 or 2% we’ll save on emissions by going electric will be offset by chinas increase in output . I think the larger countries need winding in first, secondly someone needs to send some contraception to India having read about their populous growth yesterday. 1.4billion I believe now

 

The "plot" that has actually happened works the other way around, and the US is probably the clearest and most notorious example of allowing the lobbying (=bribery) of politicians by airlines, private car manufacturers and oil corporations against public transportation projects, a process that has wrecked the prospects of passenger rail in the US since the 1920s, against the interests of the public. Thankfully governments in many other parts of the world decided to actually represent the people electing them (mostly in Europe), or thought their best transportation option after WW2 was rail for practical reasons (Japan) and went for public transit, rail networks and high-speed rail projects, which are serving them well and have saved their cities from becoming disfigured, dysfunctional spaces like American cities split down the middle by highway monstrosities and roaring traffic. The US public is now pushing back on this after learning about all these shady dealings between corporate lobbyists and corrupt politicians over the past century, but it is still going on.

I will repost links I shared in another thread on the forums a while ago on this subject:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/26/koch-activists-phoenix-ban-light-rail

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/climate/koch-brothers-public-transit.html

https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/The-great-high-speed-rail-lie-2336677.php

https://texassignal.com/op-ed-texas-republicans-need-to-stop-sabotaging-high-speed-rail/

https://www.vox.com/2015/5/14/8605917/highways-interstate-cities-history



So that's the part on the actual plot. Now more directly about the question of whether governments today are seeking to make people swap cars for public transportation. Yes, a lot of cities are doing this - there are some in Europe that have banned cars from city centres, etc - but there is no "shady conspiracy" here, we all know the reasons this needs to be done. Cities can be built either for people or for cars - if we want the former, that means as much public transportation and as few private cars as possible. The introduction of private cars in cities in the 20th century was one of the most damaging phenomena for city development, recreation, noise pollution and ecology. So there are very practical grounds for now attempting to reverse the course and implementing progressive urban planning and transportation reforms. To claim this is happening because of some dark conspiracy against vague "freedom" is the same sort of infantile stuff anti-vaxxers come up with, it's not serious. And if we want to talk about actual implications of freedoms, the freedom of someone to fill up my street with private cars is against my freedom not to live on a street like that, so there is no one "ultimate freedom" that cars - or anything else - bring.

 

Oh, puh-leez!

 

That "argument" speaks more about its author than anyone or anything else when it is posted in response to a factual description of history and current reality, combined with articles and a documentary presenting it. Self-screening is good as a practice of honesty, but bad when you're unveiling yourself as either illiterate or ideologically motivated to deny facts.

 

Literally just been watching a fairly decent youtube series on this (America and Canada centric)
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6OGLN69ehUTVa

 

Come back after you've read a factual history of Interstate Commerce Commission and other Federal regulation of the railroads and the Staggers Act

 

A word salad saying nothing whatsoever is exactly what I expected. The only response bootlicking servants of the system can muster.

 

"Word salad" : feebleminded people's way of saying "I can't understand it."

 

Easy guys. This is an interesting discussion, let's not risk having it shut down.

 

To get past the disingenuous attempts above of spamming non-arguments while escaping the factual history: what do you think about the question in the OP?

 

What I was about to say is that separating Americans from their automobiles would be akin to mowing your lawn with a knife and fork.
Even when gas was $5.50 a gallon last week, I saw no reduction in the number of cars on the street, most of them gas- guzzling SUV's.
(Of course, gasoline is still cheaper than just about anywhere else in the world ).
Last I heard, public transportation accounts for about 5% of total commuter spending over here

 

Well, I wouldn't call it a plot. Our current batch of politicians are not really capable of that kind of cooperation. But there are attempts to separate people from their cars by instituting things like congestion taxes, speed cameras and very high parking rates and fines.

 

I think it depends on the government some cities are trying to get rid of cars, and some are actively trying to bring more cars. In my city the government just announced that the main road (known as the golden mile) would be turned into a public transport and walking only section, along with announcing light rail and half price fares for the entire country.

But the public transport in my city is still not that great, with buses cancelled (This was happening alot before the pandemic as well), some places only getting buses every hour, or worst only in the peak times, and our trains are also constantly cancelled, with one line feeling like its cancelled 50% of the time, and our intercity rail being practically non-existent.

I think the government's like to make it look like there improving public transport, and drawing people away from cars (which I think is a good thing), but are actually leaving parts of our public transport system to die.

 

Fuel is around £10.00 per gallon over here atm and people are not abandoning their cars. We have grown too used to the convenience of having our own transport, parked outside our house, where we can jump in and drive and go anywhere. We can listen to what we want, we don't have to put up with other people sharing the same space, we can set the temperature to how we want. People will not give that up lightly and no matter how much governments and councillors try and make it hard or inconvenient to drive, many people would rather do so. I know plenty of people who would sooner sit in traffic coming out of Birmingham in their own car rather than travelling on a bus or train.

We had three days of rail strikes here a few weeks ago, trains weren't running on my line for a whole week, so I had to drive to work. I struggled to get back on the train the next week as driving was generally quicker and the car is outside my house. It isn't that much more expensive to drive either. The main reason I take the train is that it feels like the right thing to do environmentally plus it gives me more exercise, and I think we should take public transport when convenient to do so.

People argue that young people might be more accepting of public transport. Pretty much everyone I know who has children, are their personal taxi service. Many young people today are used to having the convenience of a car to be ferried about in before they are even old enough to drive so I can't see a huge abandonment of private transport with the next generation. Young people are still clamouring to learn to drive.

 

Good post, so these attempts in your view have no backer as such, more just at random and by what colour of badge of local authority happens to the in charge nearby... red = more green, blue = less so ?

 

More good posts from all, let's keep this civil debate going.

 

My state can't even build a HSR in a timely manner, not to mention dealing with the power shortages of the power grid, on top of a ton of other issues here and there. Also I live in a small town, buses are scarce, and the local depot hasn't seen a passenger train since 1968. Even though the local highway is in the middle of a long rehabilitation project, (Not to mention it was rated as the deadliest highway in the US) Its still the most convient way for me to get to and from work.

I also prefer to hide my purchases in a vehicle vs having to lug them around in bags in and out of vehicles.

 

I think framing any type of international cooperation as an attempt at imposing a global world order is unhelpful. Of course governments, leaders, organizations etc work together to make changes that they want to see - as to whether that is something to be feared depends on the details of the specific goals. Reducing car use would be an example that I support, whether that is done by banning cars from areas of large cities like some have done or by using 'the market' by increasing the cost (usually just by pricing in externalities via taxes).

And yes, the history of the US is one of shady organizations conspiring to influence the behaviors of its people - the automotive industry.

 

Zefreak would you categorise the work of the WEF as just good will with business backing then?

Akin to say any other fraternity.

 

I don't actually agree with a lot of the WEF / Davos crowd, I think they are standard western neoliberal institutions and try to 'do good' with business friendly solutions that don't rock the boat and are not up to challenges of today. I think that international cooperation is critical to solving many of the global problems we face and so what I take issue with is framing attempts to influence government policies as underhanded rather than simply misguided.

The WTO and World Bank are definitely bad, though

 

I'm lucky to live in a city with 'good' public transportation - light rail and a large bus network - and it still suffers from infrequent service and delays (busses stuck in traffic, no dedicated bus lanes, shortage of staff causing reduced service). The US as a whole has a long way to go before people can realistically reduce their reliance on cars, but better late than never.

 

Also from what I understand about the US there seems to be this mentality that public transport is reserved only for people too poor/desperate to drive. Is this actually true? Living somewhere that has at least made an attempt at public transportation, do you see this mentality starting to change?

 

I've seen this go even further on some channels, people being told they cannot have a job or even LOSE their job when their boss finds out they're using busses etc because they don't see it as valid or reliable enough for someone they employ...

 

That is mind blowing. Crazy

 

It's definitely true in much of the country, but in some cities (New York, Chicago, Philly, Seattle, Portland) it is not as stigmatized. Busses seem to be viewed as reserved for 'lower classes' compared to trains though.

Younger generations at least in big cities are seeing the benefits of good public transit and walkable neighborhoods, and that is making these areas more desirable (and expensive).

 

I see. That's better at least.

To be completely honest this mentality about the bus kind of exists where I live (in Palermo, Italy), but it doesn't seem as strong as it is the US. I Believe the cause is the god awful abysmal state of our bus network. I was mind blown to learn that buses on other parts of the world have a schedule and an arrival time.

But here it's more like people almost feel sorry for you rather than judging you.

 

A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation. ― Gustavo Petro

Having spent a lot of time travelling, this is definitely true.

 

Something like that, though you'd have to define the word "rich"
From what I've seen the "rich" tend to be the ones who have VERY personal transport (which they don't drive themselves) so many it's the middle and upper middle class that use public transport as well as the "normos"

 

Some london bus routes run as frequently as the underground trains do... ie you don't need a timetable because one is always just a few minutes away
Even the night busses run to a timetable though

 

Klaus Schwab can have my truck and my guns when he pries them from my cold dead hands.

 

But that isn't actually using the market now, is it?

 

Yes agreed by definition a market should be a supply / demand area not a manipulation