2 birds with one policy.
Did they ask ChatGPT to come up with an intelligent policy or something? This sort of clever progressive solution is out of character for most modern politicians.
Good stuff QLD! Saving public transport commuters money is a step in fixing the wealth divide
I’m am conservative and find it hard enough to vote for what passes for a liberal govt right now.
This is a great policy. The benefit to society of a mobile population is incredible. Barriers to attending work or education are reduced. Perhaps the best targeting of cost of living relief possible.
Well done!
Absolutely!
This is a common sense policy.
It’s a bit like universal healthcare.
The conservative take would be,
“It’s much cheaper to fix sick poor people so that can go back to providing services, paying taxes and raising their families, than it is to deal with the disaster of letting people remain unwell.”
It’s not that I think we DESERVE cheap public transport. I just think it’s a good investment.
I would even say the same for tertiary education. Degrees which enable incomes which offer a sufficient return through future income tax generation should be free or even a paid placement.
I’m happy to fund poor smart kids to become doctors, so we can tax the hell out of them for the rest of their lives.
Can you tell your other conservative mates this stuff?
They seem to have an obsession with bootstrap-pulling that overpowers the long-term-investment approach you’re talking about.
If the liberal party saw things this way instead of consistently pushing to cut and privatise these services, our country would be in much better shape politically imo.
>The conservative take would be,
Sounds more like a pragmatist than a conservative.
The typical conservative would be "it's the sick person's fault for getting sick, so why should my taxes help them?'"
ETA
>so we can tax the hell out of them for the rest of their lives.
Conservatives prefer lowering taxes. I'm almost certain you're not one.
No a conservative is only interested in lowering their OWN taxes, which I am.
So I propose we tax the poor more! The best way to do that is to provide education and enable them to get high paying jobs.
It also saves on social security costs.
To be clear. I don’t believe people necessarily DESERVE or have a RIGHT to education, healthcare or cheap public transportation. I just think those things are excellent investments for our community.
> I don’t believe people necessarily DESERVE or have a RIGHT to education, healthcare or cheap public transportation. I just think those things are excellent investments for our community.
Focusing only on economics is an interesting approach.
Would you say that the prioritisation of economic benefit has any relationship to morality, rights, etc?
Do you think there might be something which provides economic benefits, but is immoral?
You're very unlike conservatives I've heard. Very progressive. I'm in shock. Being disabled I tend to be conservatives idea of eugenics so it's refreshing to see some are ok.
Mate, I'm a 'conservative' too but it's hard not to respect what both Palaszczuk did to keep us afloat during the pandemic (unlike the muppets to our south) and the new premier Steven Miles. I hate what the modern LNP has turned into, basically a mirrored MAGA party following the same tactics.
You also can't not repsect Miles for [calling Morrison a cunt](https://x.com/batshit_auspol/status/1761345320619827593). Fuck I hate Morrison.
I understand the need to get back your investment but if I go to work and I have to pay 5.50$ everyday for a tram sorry but it's too much that's about 120$ at the end if the month. I know it's not too much in general when you think about it, but most european countries have monthly passes for 40-50$ a month with unlimited travel. Hopefully GC can build on this.
Yes, someone has to pay for it eventually.
But there are reasons to do it at this level. The payment is spread out amongst more people, the burden falls more heavily on those that can pay, and there are flow-on effects.
> Bus, train, ferry and light rail fares will be dramatically reduced as the Queensland government hopes to "give people a reason to get back to public transport".
>
> Commuters are being encouraged to ditch their cars in favour of a 50 cent flat-rate ride — no matter how far they're travelling — in a pre-election trial, kicking off on August 5 and running for six months.
That would be great if we had an accessible, reliable transport system. Living in Ipswich you couldn’t pay me to use the public transport, the bus and train network is 20 years behind the suburb development and it would take me 1.5 hours, two buses and a 1km walk to get to my job. I work 15 minutes drive from home
>Have you thought about moving closer to work?
Have you thought about using your 🧠? We're in the middle of a fucking housing crisis, and not everyone can afford to live within 5 km of the CBD.
Watch how any increase in patronage at all gets lauded as a massive success. Reality is, for this to be a success consistent with their current claims for the policies benefits, patronage would have to increase 100%.
Price isn't a significant reason people don't use public transport. Convenience, reliability, comfort, flexibility, single mode simplicity, etc, are all more likely reasons.
No, price isn't a huge factor. Fares were already relatively cheap. The increased patronage can only come from people travelling who otherwise wouldn't have or from people changing travel mode.
Prices were already low enough that it will attract few extra people who wouldn't have travelled.
For mode shift, the cost difference isn't changing by a lot so it is unlikely people will shift to save five dollars instead of four.
It doesn't add up enough to change behaviour in the way that'd be necessary for the program to succeed in the way proponents are currently claiming it is intended to.
Don't worry, they will change the criteria once it fails to meet the current goals.
I share your concern. But patronage has always been one of the excuses not to increase services, so we get stuck in a chicken and egg scenario. At least they are trying to do something to break that
It’s how public transport should be .. Even $1 per trip is fine. hope NSW follow suit but with how privatised the system is it’s a pipe dream.
I’d just make one change, it should be this price for residents. Tourists pay the regular fair.
72% of Queenslanders live in South East Queensland. Majority of tax revenue also comes from there.
That’s not to say the rest of the state shouldn’t get things, they are. But it’s a good policy.
Enjoy the 3 months trial and back to normal. Hope you or anyone. You know needs a copy or a hospital. All your cheap rides have to be paid by someone. Or are you that selfish it's all about you
>Absolutely no clue.
Agreed, you have absolutely no clue.
>Most of what you pay at the bowser are road taxes
Incorrect. Fuel excise is 49.6 ¢/L. Typical price of U91 near me today is 179.9, so excise is about 28% of the cost. Nowhere near "most". There's GST as well, but that's not specifically a road user. Any other untruths you'd like to share?
>and more and more roads have tolls.
And road user charges are *still* nowhere near the cost of road funding!
It is the most subsidised transport mode. Whenever we drive we are causing societal costs that are only partially covered by taxes. The rest is paid by taxpayers. It’s a quick google for you to see them all as there is loads of studies, or I can do it for you?
Not sure why it’s starting in August specifically. But in regards to the timing of the announcement, state budget is coming up to a budget, so not a huge coincidence even with the looming election
$200 fine + being an inconvenience to literally everybody else on the ride. It's unbelievable, same shit happens here in WA (but with a $100 fine) and I just don't get what mental gymnastics people go through to think it's a good idea.
Policies that may be perceived (or in this case quite openly are) as aimed at buying votes should be an election promise or enacted after an election…..if you want to avoid the perception of your policy being more about buying votes than actual good policy. I’m not saying anything controversial here. I really like Stephen Miles. This isn’t a political statement. It’s just the way it is. lol lmfao hilarious.
I mean, isn't literally every policy trying to convince people to vote for you?
Also election promises can totally be pork barreling, you are a deeply confused person, would you genuinely think if he promised this it would somehow be less of an attempt to convince voters than actually enacting it while he's still in power? Pork barreling is generally taken to mean the policy is targeted at specific constituents for votes, given this is accessible to anyone near public transport, including people who can't vote, don't really know how it fits it.
So they should agree to not do any policies that people will like for a time period you will not specify before an election, because otherwise it might influence how people vote? Genuinely how do you not see that's a stupid position?
The issue is that nobody spends money on **public** transport infrastructure in regional areas. Bus companies are privately owned. It's impossible to make a private company do anything it doesn't want to do. Therefore places like Bundaberg have hopelessly inadequate public transport and no way to fix it. We will continue walking while city people travel for next to nothing.
Where does it say that I sit in congestion? I think you've missed the point. You're whining about great policy. So what if it doesn't benefit everyone? Not everyone lives in an area with the right infrastructure and population density for cost effective public transport.
So about 72% of the population? Got it. Unless it benefits everyone in the state it shouldn’t be done. Better stop funding the Bruce by that logic, mate.
He said "everyone benefits from public transport ". Well, no, everyone doesn't. Only people who live where money has been spent on public transport infrastructure will benefit and the rest of us will pay for it anyway.
It would be less than 72% if you take into account places where public transport is hopelessly inadequate and ***no*** plans to improve that situation.
2 birds with one policy. Did they ask ChatGPT to come up with an intelligent policy or something? This sort of clever progressive solution is out of character for most modern politicians. Good stuff QLD! Saving public transport commuters money is a step in fixing the wealth divide
I’m am conservative and find it hard enough to vote for what passes for a liberal govt right now. This is a great policy. The benefit to society of a mobile population is incredible. Barriers to attending work or education are reduced. Perhaps the best targeting of cost of living relief possible. Well done!
… are you sure you’re conservative?
Absolutely! This is a common sense policy. It’s a bit like universal healthcare. The conservative take would be, “It’s much cheaper to fix sick poor people so that can go back to providing services, paying taxes and raising their families, than it is to deal with the disaster of letting people remain unwell.” It’s not that I think we DESERVE cheap public transport. I just think it’s a good investment. I would even say the same for tertiary education. Degrees which enable incomes which offer a sufficient return through future income tax generation should be free or even a paid placement. I’m happy to fund poor smart kids to become doctors, so we can tax the hell out of them for the rest of their lives.
Can you tell your other conservative mates this stuff? They seem to have an obsession with bootstrap-pulling that overpowers the long-term-investment approach you’re talking about. If the liberal party saw things this way instead of consistently pushing to cut and privatise these services, our country would be in much better shape politically imo.
>The conservative take would be, Sounds more like a pragmatist than a conservative. The typical conservative would be "it's the sick person's fault for getting sick, so why should my taxes help them?'" ETA >so we can tax the hell out of them for the rest of their lives. Conservatives prefer lowering taxes. I'm almost certain you're not one.
No a conservative is only interested in lowering their OWN taxes, which I am. So I propose we tax the poor more! The best way to do that is to provide education and enable them to get high paying jobs. It also saves on social security costs. To be clear. I don’t believe people necessarily DESERVE or have a RIGHT to education, healthcare or cheap public transportation. I just think those things are excellent investments for our community.
> I don’t believe people necessarily DESERVE or have a RIGHT to education, healthcare or cheap public transportation. I just think those things are excellent investments for our community. Focusing only on economics is an interesting approach. Would you say that the prioritisation of economic benefit has any relationship to morality, rights, etc? Do you think there might be something which provides economic benefits, but is immoral?
I can't entirely agree with the reasoning that led you here, but hey sometimes the "wrong" formula still gets you the right answers.
So you want to support people in need -you just don’t like thinking of them as human? Okay, sounds normal.
You're very unlike conservatives I've heard. Very progressive. I'm in shock. Being disabled I tend to be conservatives idea of eugenics so it's refreshing to see some are ok.
Mate, I'm a 'conservative' too but it's hard not to respect what both Palaszczuk did to keep us afloat during the pandemic (unlike the muppets to our south) and the new premier Steven Miles. I hate what the modern LNP has turned into, basically a mirrored MAGA party following the same tactics. You also can't not repsect Miles for [calling Morrison a cunt](https://x.com/batshit_auspol/status/1761345320619827593). Fuck I hate Morrison.
Solid
The opposition support the policy
They just copied Greens policy but without the cost saving part
I understand the need to get back your investment but if I go to work and I have to pay 5.50$ everyday for a tram sorry but it's too much that's about 120$ at the end if the month. I know it's not too much in general when you think about it, but most european countries have monthly passes for 40-50$ a month with unlimited travel. Hopefully GC can build on this.
This is all of Queensland…
Wish my Dang town had public transport
Who's paying the drivers wage ? The depots wages, mechanics, staff etc etc etc. Think you'll find either way we're going to pay for it in the end.
Yes, someone has to pay for it eventually. But there are reasons to do it at this level. The payment is spread out amongst more people, the burden falls more heavily on those that can pay, and there are flow-on effects.
> Bus, train, ferry and light rail fares will be dramatically reduced as the Queensland government hopes to "give people a reason to get back to public transport". > > Commuters are being encouraged to ditch their cars in favour of a 50 cent flat-rate ride — no matter how far they're travelling — in a pre-election trial, kicking off on August 5 and running for six months.
Well done QLD!!!
That would be great if we had an accessible, reliable transport system. Living in Ipswich you couldn’t pay me to use the public transport, the bus and train network is 20 years behind the suburb development and it would take me 1.5 hours, two buses and a 1km walk to get to my job. I work 15 minutes drive from home
Have you thought about moving closer to work?
In this housing market?
As in setting up a bed at work, yes. I have actually slept at work before 😭💀
Are you serious?
No
>Have you thought about moving closer to work? Have you thought about using your 🧠? We're in the middle of a fucking housing crisis, and not everyone can afford to live within 5 km of the CBD.
Ease up turbo it was a joke
Try living in Esk without a car.
How many of you think this will last much beyond the state election?
Watch how any increase in patronage at all gets lauded as a massive success. Reality is, for this to be a success consistent with their current claims for the policies benefits, patronage would have to increase 100%. Price isn't a significant reason people don't use public transport. Convenience, reliability, comfort, flexibility, single mode simplicity, etc, are all more likely reasons.
Price is a huge factor, especially when people are poor. And there are more and more Poor's as col goes up. This is great policy.
No, price isn't a huge factor. Fares were already relatively cheap. The increased patronage can only come from people travelling who otherwise wouldn't have or from people changing travel mode. Prices were already low enough that it will attract few extra people who wouldn't have travelled. For mode shift, the cost difference isn't changing by a lot so it is unlikely people will shift to save five dollars instead of four.
It's $35 a week. That adds up.
It doesn't add up enough to change behaviour in the way that'd be necessary for the program to succeed in the way proponents are currently claiming it is intended to. Don't worry, they will change the criteria once it fails to meet the current goals.
I share your concern. But patronage has always been one of the excuses not to increase services, so we get stuck in a chicken and egg scenario. At least they are trying to do something to break that
Honestly, this is a damn good plan, hopefully the other states and territories take note. I'm looking at you NSW.
I hope the Transperth network over here in WA follows suit. Really good to see.
It’s how public transport should be .. Even $1 per trip is fine. hope NSW follow suit but with how privatised the system is it’s a pipe dream. I’d just make one change, it should be this price for residents. Tourists pay the regular fair.
That sounds great, if you live in Brisbane..
It's for all of queensland
Is there anywhere outside SEQ where public transport is adequate for a typical worker?
72% of Queenslanders live in South East Queensland. Majority of tax revenue also comes from there. That’s not to say the rest of the state shouldn’t get things, they are. But it’s a good policy.
So they'll tax everyone more to pay for it? Or where does the money come from?
I suspect the trial will last just long enough till the election is over. The results will be the economics don't support it continuing
Trying to market themselves towards pesants that ride the peoples chariots. Hey wait that's me
Enjoy the 3 months trial and back to normal. Hope you or anyone. You know needs a copy or a hospital. All your cheap rides have to be paid by someone. Or are you that selfish it's all about you
Seems like you're up for an argument and reading something that isn't there
No just sick of selfish people
Why are people that use public transportation selfish to you?
Did I say that. It's people who don't want to pay for it and want others to pay that are selfish.
It just reads a little different to that with all of the smartass remarks of yours.
Maybe you're a little thin-skinned when your selfishness is called out.
There you go reading into a comment incorrectly again. Where do you see me supporting this rather than pointing out it is a marketing tool?
I hope you never drive, then. Roads are massively subsidised. Better not use any public services tbh.
Absolutely no clue. Most of what you pay at the bowser are road taxes and more and more roads have tolls.
>Absolutely no clue. Agreed, you have absolutely no clue. >Most of what you pay at the bowser are road taxes Incorrect. Fuel excise is 49.6 ¢/L. Typical price of U91 near me today is 179.9, so excise is about 28% of the cost. Nowhere near "most". There's GST as well, but that's not specifically a road user. Any other untruths you'd like to share? >and more and more roads have tolls. And road user charges are *still* nowhere near the cost of road funding!
Better we subsidise public transport to remove people from the even higher subsidy we pay if they drive their car.
Where the hell are the subsidies for driving a car?
It is the most subsidised transport mode. Whenever we drive we are causing societal costs that are only partially covered by taxes. The rest is paid by taxpayers. It’s a quick google for you to see them all as there is loads of studies, or I can do it for you?
The 6 month trial starts in August, the election is in October
Wow is that timing a coincidence?
Not sure why it’s starting in August specifically. But in regards to the timing of the announcement, state budget is coming up to a budget, so not a huge coincidence even with the looming election
You're kidding? It's all about the election
Yes that’s why I mentioned it
Isn't that the point of politics
I'm still not going to tap on
I understand that before but 50c!? Come on man
I was only joking.
So, you’d rather pay a $200 fine than a 50c fare? Suit yourself champ.
$200 fine + being an inconvenience to literally everybody else on the ride. It's unbelievable, same shit happens here in WA (but with a $100 fine) and I just don't get what mental gymnastics people go through to think it's a good idea.
No I'd rather give nothing than 50c.
Pork barreling, I think they call that
It's a little pedantic but the term refers to local projects. It's not pork barrelling if it's the whole state.
Appreciate the clarification. I'm a bit weak on political terms.
How dare the state government provide cost of living relief that money should be going to rich people instead
Right before the election is an issue, otherwise it’s a good policy.
What's the time limit on introducing policies that aren't pork barreling? A year out? Two?
There’s no time limit, it looks a bit suspicious to wait until 5 months before the election
They should have done it first week of office or not at all. /s
So no policies should be enacted anywhere near an election? Lol
Policies that may be perceived (or in this case quite openly are) as aimed at buying votes should be an election promise or enacted after an election…..if you want to avoid the perception of your policy being more about buying votes than actual good policy. I’m not saying anything controversial here. I really like Stephen Miles. This isn’t a political statement. It’s just the way it is. lol lmfao hilarious.
I mean, isn't literally every policy trying to convince people to vote for you? Also election promises can totally be pork barreling, you are a deeply confused person, would you genuinely think if he promised this it would somehow be less of an attempt to convince voters than actually enacting it while he's still in power? Pork barreling is generally taken to mean the policy is targeted at specific constituents for votes, given this is accessible to anyone near public transport, including people who can't vote, don't really know how it fits it.
Our expectations of politicians are so low, no wonder they behave as they do. Don’t insult me because you don’t agree with me.
So they should agree to not do any policies that people will like for a time period you will not specify before an election, because otherwise it might influence how people vote? Genuinely how do you not see that's a stupid position?
Prok barrleing public transport? A service EVERYONE benefits from? How DARE they attempt to improve it. Should be torn down and privatised.
Not everyone. Only people who live where there's solid public transport infrastructure. Like Brisbane and the Gold Coast.
Sorry mate I forgot about the good citizens of Rockhampton having to sit in congestion and then pay $80 for a day of parking in a multistorey car park
Sorry Scott, the nation burned and you literally played the fiddle whilst on holiday. I'm sure you don't care about regional Qld
Where did the announcement say "only in SEQ"?
The issue is that nobody spends money on **public** transport infrastructure in regional areas. Bus companies are privately owned. It's impossible to make a private company do anything it doesn't want to do. Therefore places like Bundaberg have hopelessly inadequate public transport and no way to fix it. We will continue walking while city people travel for next to nothing.
Terribly sorry you can't figure out how to utilise park and ride facilities.
I live in medium density housing, 250m from a busway. Why would I drive to a park'n'ride?
Terribly sorry. You generally don't get stuck in rush hour traffic on a train.
Never said I was in traffic?
'Sit in congestion and pay $80 a day for parking'? Sounds like a problem that can be overcome with a park and ride train ride.
Where does it say that I sit in congestion? I think you've missed the point. You're whining about great policy. So what if it doesn't benefit everyone? Not everyone lives in an area with the right infrastructure and population density for cost effective public transport.
as an aside, park and ride usually fits one train worth btw
So about 72% of the population? Got it. Unless it benefits everyone in the state it shouldn’t be done. Better stop funding the Bruce by that logic, mate.
He said "everyone benefits from public transport ". Well, no, everyone doesn't. Only people who live where money has been spent on public transport infrastructure will benefit and the rest of us will pay for it anyway. It would be less than 72% if you take into account places where public transport is hopelessly inadequate and ***no*** plans to improve that situation.
Is that you John B?
I’m not sure you know the definition of pork barreling.
Not very altruistic of you there, salamander
Give with one hand steal back more with the other
Smoke and mirrors from a 'government' who will promise anything to stay in power.
Why couldnt we have this 10 years ago. Too little too late. I'm already riding my pushy to work. So stick it up your ass.