Rationalising Railcards

[RT4038]

Motorists may have a sense of a lack of dependence. It's entirely illusory, of course. They wouldn't get 50 yards through a wood, thicket or ploughed field. Nor would they get very far on the road network as it was before the horseless carriage.

It is not illusory at all. None of my journeys by car or any other means involve going to or via a wood, thicket or ploughed field. Public transport is not very good at providing trips to ploughed fields either. None of my journeys now are being made 100 years or more ago, so this is entirely irrelevant.

My point is that if it is true that some people have this view, as 35B asserted, which makes them prefer the private car over other modes because this somehow makes them self-reliant, then while that may be the case even though motorists are wrong to think that, it is not a state of affairs to which we have to be resigned. People who hold fallacious views are normally persuadable. The automotive and petrochemical industries took a great deal of trouble, in the 20th century, to create and then perpetuate these myths about motoring, but it is perfectly possible to change people's minds.

I own and use a motor car almost entirely because it means I am self-reliant on the journeys that I make. I can travel when I want to, to where I want to, by the route that I want to, in the ambience that I want to. I am not reliant on transport management in providing routes and timetables to which it may or may not make journeys possible in a reasonable time; I am not reliant on transport employees in providing that service reliably; I am not paying for someone to drive me when I am quite happy to do this activity myself without payment; I am not reliant on the good behaviour of my fellow passengers; I can engage in some forms of behaviour which would not be reasonable to inflict on fellow passengers; I do not have to plan my life down to the last minute and activity in order to fit in with public transport routes and schedules.

As has been pointed out by other posters, private transport enables one to make a single journeys for multiple purposes in a sensible time. It enables, in a sensible time, to make longer journeys that would require multiple changes and much longer journey time by public transport. It enables loads to be carried (shopping, but not restricted to). As I get older, it means I don't have to walk from my house to an access point of public transport (8 min down a hill (up on the return) to the bus stop or 25 min to a railway station).

Thinking about this last weekend - a 75min car journey to visit my elderly Mother would take 3 hours by public transport of if all the stars aligned, severely restricted by departure time. The detour via a supermarket on that journey to pick up various items would add a ridiculous time penalty and spoil the frozen food. The one item forgotten to purchase which takes 10 min each way by car to the retail park would take near on 60 min each way by public transport.

When people had only public transport (up unto the 50s) they rarely went more than about 5 miles from home. The retail and leisure offer was much more restricted than now. Do we really want to even contemplate going back to those times?

Then there's all sorts of other small value items (screen wash, car accessories, washing equipment, etc.) however some will pay a lot more than others, for example some may wash their own cars, but take it to a car wash and those costs increase significantly.

That's before you consider the value of your time to do things like take the car to get it fixed (or fix it yourself), washing & cleaning the car, and the time taken to do all the car admin (including finding and buying your new car and potentially selling the old one).

Is this really worth thinking about compared to the sheer inconvenience of not having a car? Not in my life, in my town.... (And I'm someone who actively uses public transport, even when mildly inconvenient)

 

[yorksrob]

There isn't, and you will notice that I have less of a problem with low earners being given greater access than a reduction in fares for all. However, as I have noted before a railcard is a blunt instrument and risks more overcrowding on services that already have problems, in oarticular exacerbating the 'Saturday morning problem" that exists on many routes, rather than encouraging the use of services that have spare capacity.

That is a reasonable concern, and there are always trade-offs. However, I'd take that risk for an affordable walk-on railway.

 

[Farnborough]

We have deviated a long way from rail cards...

 

[martin butler]

Would a simplified system work better? make all railcards nationwide so you buy one and its valid on any service, off peak,
I would simplify it further a child's rail card valid up to their 18th birthday, Adult valid up to pensionable age, and finally a pensioner railcard. all valid for 12 months, with automatic renewal if paid by installment, so you in effect are paying for your next one as well, something like £6 a month, initially then say £3,for each renewal with each new card continuing from the previous,