2,500 Euros for a driver's license but great public transit, what do you think?

[gimmethesimplelife]

I've been meaning to post this topic for awhile. Something that I was very impressed with when I was in Vienna, Austria last year is that truly one does not need a car to live there - the public transit there is absolutely amazing for a city of less than two million people. It's even better than the mass transit system I think so highly of in Portland, Oregon. Also - in inner city Vienna, the sidewalks are as such - to the right side are the bicyclers, and to the left side are the pedestrians. I was also amazed at how many people actually bike to work/errands as opposed to most cities in the US. Until I found something out while I was talking to relatives there. It turns out that it costs over 2,500 US dollars to have a driver's license. I don't know if this is per year, or over a number of years - so I don't know how long this over 2,500 US dollars buys you.

My family told me this was put into place to help the environment and to give the public incentive to bicycle and to use the incredible (!!!!!) subway system and bus system there.

My question is - how would you feel about this happening here (in the US)? I can't see this working well here as so many cities don't have great mass transit and not only that, so many cities are auto centric (such as mine, Phoenix) and I can't see many people making the sacrifices I have to save money and also to help the environment in some small way. What's your take on this, expensive driver's licenses to steer folks towards public transportation? Rob

[kib]

Political suicide.

[bae]

My question is - how would you feel about this happening here (in the US)? .... What's your take on this, expensive driver's licenses to steer folks towards public transportation? Rob

It's sure a good way to keep the riff-raff out. Where I live, the working-class people would have to move out, and the 1%-ers would still drive their Lambos.

I suppose that would increase my property values even more. Yay?

[Float On]

Around here they'd have to install a pulley system of sorts to get most of us up the hills if we went strictly bicycles.

[sweetana3]

It would harm the lower and middle classes the most. Just consider the size of the US and compare it to Europe. Consider how tight their cities are built and how fast (due to distance)it is to get around by rail. It is truly apples and oranges. Example: It would penalize a farm family who cannot work, play or live without a car. It would penalize anyone whose home and job cannot be connected by public transportation and especially those whose work hours do not match with transit systems that are not fully 24 hour.

Most all areas of the US are not covered by enough public transport to provide for the needs of the public and the cost of taxis and commercial trasit are prohibitive.

Even in Indy where we have public rental bikes and now rental electric cars, only a limited area (core area) is covered and of course it is the high income areas. Limited in reach to jobs in any of the area around the city where the vast majority of middle class jobs are located and little if anything is in our high poverty areas. Indy covers 400 square miles. Just how do you want to fix that? We are not SF, NYC, Chicago, Seattle, etc.

[SteveinMN]

It would harm the lower and middle classes the most. Just consider the size of the US and compare it to Europe. Consider how tight their cities are built and how fast (due to distance)it is to get around by rail. It is truly apples and oranges. Example: It would penalize a farm family who cannot work, play or live without a car. It would penalize anyone whose home and job cannot be connected by public transportation and especially those whose work hours do not match with transit systems that are not fully 24 hour.
Just to play devil's advocate a little, yes, the scale of the U.S. and Europe are different. But the families in France or Austria or Italy who live outside the large cities (there are millions of them) still need a vehicle to work or play. Certainly there are factories and job sites and worktimes which are either poorly-served or not served at all by good public transportation.

So do those Europeans simply take on a 2500-Euro license as one more expense in life? Perhaps it's less expensive to live "out there", which compensates for the cost of a license? It's a bit like here in the U.S., where there was much rending of garments and gnashing of teeth because it cost $4+ per gallon to fuel the SUV. If you have to have an SUV to carry/tow/whatever, it's part of your cost of living. If your SUV is an anatomical enhancement, it's up to you to decide if it's how you want to spend your money. If living away from mass transit or walking/bicycling to where you need to go is worth the money to you, it's part of what it costs you to live.

All that said, the American public is not ready for anything that remotely resembles a carbon tax. Implementing one, no matter how much sense it makes, would indeed be political suicide.

[Gardenarian]

I think it's a fantastic idea for Vienna. European countries have transportation systems that go back centuries, from horses to carriages and boats, to trains bikes, and modern public transport.

Much of the U.S. wasn't even settled before the advent of the car, and our infrastructure is designed for individual driving.

That being said, I think oil subsidies and lower gas prices are a very bad thing. I read an article the other day that said more cars were sold in the U.S. in 2015 than any previous year, and the biggest growth category was SUVs. Crazy!

We need a carbon descent plan, and soon.

[Williamsmith]

We have folks on this forum here that live in Texas. I only visit once or twice a year but will tell you that the culture of trucks and SUV use is nothing short of part of the state identity. Their answer to traffic gridlock is to add another lane or build another highway.

Of course, space is a resource. Public transportation is an idea largely spurned. High occupancy is two persons in one vehicle. Mostly everyone drives alone in a large gas guzzling mode of transport. Their pride in the oil industry dictates these things. Texas would be the first state to secede from the union if carbon tax and license increases or such is federally mandated. Take that economy away from your already fictionalized monthly job reports and unemployment stats and this economy goes to neutral or worse.

A General Electric plant in my area that builds train engines , mostly for China and India, is in the process of moving 3000 jobs to a Texas plant near Mexico where they do business. The Northeast may become more friendly for climate change worriers but it will be easier to swallow because there will be no need for combustion engine cars.......there will be no jobs to go to anyway.

[razz]

Having just returned from a trip to Spain and Portugal, the idea of a total transit system in Europe similar to Austria and Switzerland is a myth.
There are so many vehicles and scooters everywhere as people struggle to get around just as they do in North America. Distances and limits of transit are substantial. Walking is pervasive but the accessibility for those of limited mobility is a huge problem. Up hill and down dale were the key features in Portugal, wonderful as it was to visit. Canada is so much more accessible with legal mandates and timelines for accessibility for all.

Challenges around the world are the same. Some solutions work some of the time even if the willingness to do so is there. Some of the ideas that work in one location are not feasible in others. Even in Europe, a full transit system may require destruction of historical buildings that are so treasured and important to the tourist economy.

[Zoe Girl]

One of the things that I wonder about, as a hiring manager and part of a large district, is that when I got my job or when we hire people we only consider where someone lives for the lowest level jobs and not always then. So I could not go to my department and ask to move my work position based on where I live. My son and his girlfriend both work very close to our apartment, however my job is not like that. I am also about a mile outside of the car share programs at home but in the area for work. I know businesses often change locations, send employees to other sites, etc. Do you think if we moved this direction it would take a change of our mentality around work (be available any hours, any location, to have opportunity).

[Gardenarian]

One of the things that I wonder about, as a hiring manager and part of a large district, is that when I got my job or when we hire people we only consider where someone lives for the lowest level jobs and not always then. So I could not go to my department and ask to move my work position based on where I live. My son and his girlfriend both work very close to our apartment, however my job is not like that. I am also about a mile outside of the car share programs at home but in the area for work. I know businesses often change locations, send employees to other sites, etc. Do you think if we moved this direction it would take a change of our mentality around work (be available any hours, any location, to have opportunity).

Zoe Girl, I'm not sure I'm reading you correctly, but it seems to me that it is easier for individuals to move closer to their work than it is for employers to create jobs in certain areas that exactly match the skill set of a particular employee.

As for Europe, most of the northern cities have excellent public transportation systems - clean, fast, and reliable. They put anywhere in the U.S. to shame, and a great many more people use public transportation there than in the U.S. Transportation between cities is easy by train or bus than in the U.S. But then, the U.S is HUGE!

Another factor is that in many countries the weather is not as extreme as the U.S. We consider near-zero temps in winter and near 100 (or over) in summer to be normal, but those extremes make for uncomfortable walking and biking.

Here's an article: "9 Reasons the U.S. Ended Up So Much More Car-Dependent Than Europe" (http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/02/9-reasons-us-ended-so-much-more-car-dependent-europe/8226/)

And let's not forget the "General Motors streetcar conspiracy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy)"

[Lainey]

. . .

A General Electric plant in my area that builds train engines , mostly for China and India, is in the process of moving 3000 jobs to a Texas plant near Mexico where they do business. The Northeast may become more friendly for climate change worriers but it will be easier to swallow because there will be no need for combustion engine cars.......there will be no jobs to go to anyway.

just an aside, but I've always marveled at the fact that GE's CEO Jeff Immelt was on Obama's jobs program team for the Fed gov't, and yet I don't think GE has added any net new jobs here in the U.S. for years. I wish the government would appoint actual job creators instead of window-dressing some of these teams with CEOs who like being in with the higher powers of government.

[Miss Cellane]

One thing I noticed when visiting various parts of Europe is just how extensive the public transportation system is. I could take a train to a major city, but the train station might be on the outskirts of town. But there was a subway to the center of the city. And then from there, I could take a bus to my final destination--be that a museum or hotel, etc.

Most of that is just not present in the US. We have trains. We have buses that go long distances, like Greyhound. We have, in some cities, subways and local buses. What we don't have, in most of the US, is interconnected public transportation that allows you to get to where you want to go.

Amtrak opened a station in my city (in New Hampshire) several years back. Lots of people take it to work in Boston, because once they get to South Station in Boston, they have a multitude of buses, subways and commuter trains to get them where they need to be. Fewer people take the train up here, because the train station is serviced by one bus line, that stops there once an hour, and mostly will take them to other towns.

Because we have public transportation here in this small city of 30,000 people. But the bus routes are designed to take you to other towns, not to get you around the city itself. There is one route that has several stops in the city, but it does not go near the major shopping centers, the library, the Post Office, or the churches. It does have a separate stop at one of the larger employers in town, but not at the other large office buildings on that same road--meaning if you work near the big insurance company, you can get off on their campus, walk the mile back to the road, then the mile or more down the road to your own office. Oddly, there are few people who choose to do this in the winter cold and snow.

When I was unemployed and working a part-time job at the local mall, a 15 minute drive away, the bus could get me there at 8:30 am, an hour and a half before the mall opened, or at 10:30 am, half an hour after my opening shift started. Being late wasn't an option, waiting around outside for an hour and a half wasn't a very good option--that was time I could spend job hunting. And the trip took 45 minutes to 75 minutes, depending on when you caught the bus. Massive waste of time, when a car could get you there in 15 minutes or less.

So while I am a big advocate of public transportation, I don't use it in my own town. The US in general has a very long way to go before most people will use it regularly.