Dublin bus routes privatised.

[odyssey06]

No, DART could and should be run without a loss.
Commuter train services can and should be run without making a loss.
Irish Rail handles 42 million passenger journeys a year and get nearly 5 times that in State subsidies. That is excluding funding for infrastructure.
There is no economic case for an intercity rail service in this country.

I hadn't seen the subsidy statistics painted so starkly...

I just wonder is there anything those stats could be missing... are those intercity rail lines used for cargo \ goods transport? If so, do they pay their own way or are they subsidised also?

 

[Delboy]

No, DART could and should be run without a loss.
Commuter train services can and should be run without making a loss.

So you are for running some trains and have backtracked somewhat on your quote from a couple of days ago

...but there is absolutely no argument for running any trains in this country.

 

[Purple]

So you are for running some trains and have backtracked somewhat on your quote from a couple of days ago

Only if they can be run without a State subsidy for day to day costs.
I strongly suspect that bus services in Dublin could also be run without a State subsidy for day to day costs.

 

[odyssey06]

The figures between rail and bus subsidies are slightly misleading because the rail subsidies include the cost of the rail line, but I expect that the bus subsidies do not include the (harder to quantity) cost of bus lanes.
Bus lanes are not exclusively used by buses e.g. out of hours cars use them or at junctions, and emergency vehicles. But I think their current primary function is economically beneficial to Dublin Bus.

This would not be a "day to day cost" therefore I think it still reasonable for you to argue that bus services in Dublin could be run without a State subsidy for day to day costs.
Further - it should be used as a counter argument if people respond that the State is abandoning public transport.

 

[Purple]

The figures between rail and bus subsidies are slightly misleading because the rail subsidies include the cost of the rail line, but I expect that the bus subsidies do not include the (harder to quantity) cost of bus lanes.
Bus lanes are not exclusively used by buses e.g. out of hours cars use them or at junctions, and emergency vehicles. But I think their current primary function is economically beneficial to Dublin Bus.

This would not be a "day to day cost" therefore I think it still reasonable for you to argue that bus services in Dublin could be run without a State subsidy for day to day costs.
Further - it should be used as a counter argument if people respond that the State is abandoning public transport.

No, the rail line (Capital) subsidy is separate. It's an extra €26 million last year and €11 million this year.

 

[TheBigShort]

They are probably more efficient and have less waste and so can offer the same services for a lower price.

Like I said, they will have to cut costs. You assume they are already more efficient. Do you know how so?

 

[TheBigShort]

Well that's up to the new company to determine. It has been stated that existing services will stay the same and so to will prices. If the new company were happy to bid for this business it just goes to show how they think they can make money on such quieter routes.

You are avoiding the question. It was alleged, that on this particular route that buses were near empty 90% of the time.
Yet you quoted the NTA stating that service's will increase under this tender.
Between Go Ahead, NTA and your good yourself, how does it make any sense to increase services on a route that is, apparently, near empty 90% of the time?
I also ask that question in the same context if Dublin Bus had been awarded the tender and also planned to increase services.

 

[TheBigShort]

That argument can be made to provide any public service or utility free at the point of consumption.

Except Dublin Bus passengers don't get the service for free, do they?
Along with the taxes that they pay, like everyone else, they pay additional to that in bus fares, isn't that right?

Every Irish water customer is also a tax payer (although only 30% are net contributors) so they shouldn't have to pay for water

Anyone who pays taxes (basically everyone, bar children), pays for the water system.
The 30% net contributors? Excuse my French, WTF?

Every ESB/Energy company customer is also a tax payer (although only 30% are net contributors) so they shouldn't have to pay for energy.

Why shouldn't they pay? As a reminder, Dublin Bus passengers pay their taxes AND pay for consumption of the service. Who is getting anything for free?

How about motorists; they are tax payers, should they get their petrol/diesel for free or heavily subsidised?

Not for free, no. Is there a point to this?

While we are giving people water for free why not give everyone food as well?

You are wishing for an ideal world where everything is free. I'm afraid that is not the reality.

Not just a set amount they need to live on but as much food as they want. Sure isn't food essential for life? It's a human right!

It certainly is a human right. Article 25 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as decided, agreed and declared by...humans.

Same goes for houses; the government should just give everyone a house too

Yes.

not just anywhere though, it will have to be where they want it to be or else they will move out, say they are living in their car with their kids and RTE and the tabloids will run sob-stories about them...

No. If you are fussy about where and how big your house should be, then you should pay for it.
Notwithstanding legitimate cases of family and social cohesion.

 

[TheBigShort]

You are missing a couple of points here. First, the number of (income) taxpayers (excluding VAT for the moment) is shockingly low in Ireland. Second, the number of passengers actually paying for using public transport is probably leven lower.

...and I'm still missing the point (if any)?

"Minuscule amount" must clearly be a joke I am not getting. Monthly / annual tickets are insanely expensive for what you get, compared with similar sized European cities. I guess somebody must pay for all the free travel passes.

The miniscule amount referred to taxpayers subsidy. Those that subsidise the service but don't use it. A figure of €100m was mentioned. Some 3m taxpayers, in one form another = €33 a year for a public transport service in the capital city.

In Vienna, for example, the yearly ticket covering all available modes of public transport costs 365 euro.
Yes, 1 euro per day for unlimited travel on any public transport system in all of the city (into some suburbs). That is all tubes, trams, busses, trains.

Yes, those services receive a much greater subsidy from taxpayers than public transport in Ireland does. A good example of a public transport system derived through socialist policy.

Stuttgart, to use another example, has some zone based systems but has yearly tickets starting at around 650 euro. Again, *all vailable* public transport types.

Socialism at work.

Paris: 827 euro for the most expensive one.

Yes, I've used the Paris subway, excellent service.

In Dublin, if you want / need a ticket for bus / luas / dart it will set you back 2180 euro. 2.5 times more expensive than Paris. And that is for a service that is essentially really bad.

I know, it's very expensive. We need to upgrade the services, but we are not willing to pay the taxes for it.

 

[TheBigShort]

old ERSI report but it's a good one.
One of the real doozies is that Irish Rail spent €1.2 billion to reduce rail fatalities. The average fatality rate was 8 per decade so the cost per life saved is €150 million, assuming that it was 100% successful.

But of course that report assumes that the only fatalities are those that have happened and (8) and doesn't consider the fatalities that will happen if safety is not kept up to high standard.
Do we have to wait for a train derailment before we invest in safety?

 

[Firefly]

Like I said, they will have to cut costs. You assume they are already more efficient. Do you know how so?

I don't know, nor do I care. They have come in with a lower tender and thus lower cost to the taxpayer to provide the same or more frequent service. For what's it's worth my money would be on that they have lower costs to begin with and rather than having to cut cost they are probably just operating as normal.

 

[Firefly]

You are avoiding the question. It was alleged, that on this particular route that buses were near empty 90% of the time.
Yet you quoted the NTA stating that service's will increase under this tender.
Between Go Ahead, NTA and your good yourself, how does it make any sense to increase services on a route that is, apparently, near empty 90% of the time?

I quoted an article that in turn quoted the NTA. If the NTA are saying that the service will increase then you should really ask them. At a minimum services will stay the same and prices too. All with a lower cost to the taxpayer.

All you have done thus far is ask questions but you are clearly against this development. Care to outline why????

 

[Purple]

Except Dublin Bus passengers don't get the service for free, do they?

Along with the taxes that they pay, like everyone else, they pay additional to that in bus fares, isn't that right?

If they are getting more back in social transfer than they pay in taxes then no, they aren’t paying for anything.

Anyone who pays taxes (basically everyone, bar children), pays for the water system.

The 30% net contributors? Excuse my French, WTF?

Only the top 30% of earners are net contributors to the exchequer. The rest of us get more back than we pay in. You have posted on threads about that very topic. Did you forget or did you not understand the discussion?

Why shouldn't they pay? As a reminder, Dublin Bus passengers pay their taxes AND pay for consumption of the service. Who is getting anything for free?

If you are part of the “It’s my right” brigade then everything is an essential service and nobody other than “the rich” should pay for anything.

Not for free, no. Is there a point to this?

Should they get it heavily subsidised?

You are wishing for an ideal world where everything is free. I'm afraid that is not the reality.

No I’m not. I’m pointing out the absurdity of such notions but having these discussions with a socialist is like talking to a creationist about evolution.

It certainly is a human right. Article 25 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as decided, agreed and declared by...humans.

Sure, so how come the “It’s my right” brigade don’t want it given to everyone for free, just like water?

Yes.

Yes? Excellent! Where do I sign up? I think I’ll quit my job too and get my food, water and transport for free because “It’s my right”.

No. If you are fussy about where and how big your house should be, then you should pay for it.

Notwithstanding legitimate cases of family and social cohesion.

For the sake of my family and social cohesion I need a house just like the one I’m in now in the same area. Just get “The Rich” to pay for it.

 

[Purple]

But of course that report assumes that the only fatalities are those that have happened and (8) and doesn't consider the fatalities that will happen if safety is not kept up to high standard.
Do we have to wait for a train derailment before we invest in safety?

The program wasn't about train derailment, it was about people getting hit by trains.
We spent €1.2 billion of fences and signs...
Of course you can't criticise and public body or unionised workforce. I understand that.

 

[TheBigShort]

I quoted an article that in turn quoted the NTA. If the NTA are saying that the service will increase then you should really ask them. At a minimum services will stay the same and prices too. All with a lower cost to the taxpayer.

All you have done thus far is ask questions but you are clearly against this development. Care to outline why????

Fri 11, Irish Times, NTA Chief is reported as saying that she was not in a position to reveal how much Go Ahead would be paid for the service.

I have no objection to a private operation providing the service providing quality of service is maintained and improved, and the standards of working conditions are not adversely affected.
I am somewhat skeptical that that will be the case, but I stand to be corrected in due course.

 

[TheBigShort]

If they are getting more back in social transfer than they pay in taxes then no, they aren’t paying for anything.

How do you know if they are or are not getting back more than they pay in taxes? You would have to have knowledge of each of their personal finances! Absurd.

Only the top 30% of earners are net contributors to the exchequer. The rest of us get more back than we pay in. You have posted on threads about that very topic. Did you forget or did you not understand the discussion?

Yes we have been through this nonsense before. We spend some €50bn a year, if we balance the books then the 3m or so taxpayers would have to contribute some €17,000 each per annum. Do you think that is feasible? I don't. A minimum wage job would have to increase to about €37,000. Not feasible.
So we have implemented a progressive income tax system to facilitate low tax on low income. We also have VAT, motor tax, property tax, bus fares etc.
You can go into the merits, or not, of the tax system. But low income tax rates on low incomes facilitate employers wanting competitive wage rates.

If you are part of the “It’s my right” brigade then everything is an essential service and nobody other than “the rich” should pay for anything

The "rich" have same rights. Nobody has suggested anything like that in this thread. You are the only one peddling this nonsense.

Should they get it heavily subsidised?

That is a policy decision. Certainly I see the merits in subsidising a public transport system that carries over 300,000 people to their place of work, school, college, shops etc every day.

No I’m not. I’m pointing out the absurdity of such notions

Yes it is absurd. Why are you peddling it then?

Sure, so how come the “It’s my right” brigade don’t want it given to everyone for free, just like water?

Water isn't free, it is paid out of general taxation, income tax, VAT, motor tax etc.

Yes? Excellent! Where do I sign up? I think I’ll quit my job too and get my food, water and transport for free because “It’s my right”.

Why would you quit your job?

For the sake of my family and social cohesion I need a house just like the one I’m in now in the same area. Just get “The Rich” to pay for it.

You can apply to the Dept of Housing. I think you are mistaking a "right" as something that is automatically afforded to a person upon demand. The State has the authority to determine the criteria to which it affords an entitlement to an individual.
For instance, my 10yr old, has a right to vote in democratic elections. He also has a right to a childhood free from political persuasion or coercion. The State sets the criteria, through age, to limit his right to vote until he turns 18.

The program wasn't about train derailment, it was about people getting hit by trains.
We spent €1.2 billion of fences and signs...
Of course you can't criticise and public body or unionised workforce. I understand that.

In fairness I didn't read the full report and if what you are saying is correct, then I stand corrected. But I doubt €1.2bn was spent solely on fences and signs.

 

[newirishman]

Yes we have been through this nonsense before. We spend some €50bn a year, if we balance the books then the 3m or so taxpayers would have to contribute some €17,000 each per annum. Do you think that is feasible? I don't. A minimum wage job would have to increase to about €37,000. Not feasible.
So we have implemented a progressive income tax system to facilitate low tax on low income. We also have VAT, motor tax, property tax, bus fares etc.
You can go into the merits, or not, of the tax system. But low income tax rates on low incomes facilitate employers wanting competitive wage rates.

Nonsense? You numbers aren't correct.
Here's some details:
http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/170104 Appendix I - Tax Receipts - end December 2016_0.pdf

Income Tax receipts for 2016: €19 billion (roughly) - that means a contribution of 6300 euro for the 3m or so taxpayers if everybody would pay.
Of course, the "bottom" 50% of earners contribute only 2.8%
[broken link removed]

VAT? Most Food stuff is zero rated, the rest (non-essential stuff!) is 13.5% . Children's clothing is zero rated. (OK - clothing for adults has VAT).
You get pretty far in this country without paying any significant amount of tax. And I'd say that many get more than that back via things like free travel passes, children's allowance, medical cards, etc
Taxation for people earning less than 35K (that is industrial average!) is close to non-existent in Ireland.

 

[Purple]

In fairness I didn't read the full report and if what you are saying is correct, then I stand corrected. But I doubt €1.2bn was spent solely on fences and signs.

Read the link.


That example speaks to my issue with the whole discussion we have about Public Services and Taxation. We waste billion every year through waste, theft, duplication of services and gross inefficiency. I listened to a Hospital Consultant on the radio this morning. He agreed that Doctors unions, Nurses unions and public sector unions in general were at the heart of the problem in the health service. He said that they have to be tackled in order for things to be fixed.

We now see Dublin Bus outsourcing routes but not getting rid of any drivers. The end result of all of that waste is poverty, hardship and death and yet you and others like you, as well as the unionised media, will not brook any criticism of the people and organisations at the heart of our public services but instead look at everything from an ideological perspective, glibly defending the indefensible and attacking the same vague targets.

We as a State have been going around in circles for 30 years.

The bottom line is that public services should be run for the benefit of the public. Nothing else.


I don’t mind paying half my income in taxes. I resent the hell out of how little the people who take my hard earned money value it.

 

[TheBigShort]

Nonsense? You numbers aren't correct.
Here's some details:
http://finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/170104 Appendix I - Tax Receipts - end December 2016_0.pdf

Income Tax receipts for 2016: €19 billion (roughly) - that means a contribution of 6300 euro for the 3m or so taxpayers if everybody would pay.
Of course, the "bottom" 50% of earners contribute only 2.8%
[broken link removed]

VAT? Most Food stuff is zero rated, the rest (non-essential stuff!) is 13.5% . Children's clothing is zero rated. (OK - clothing for adults has VAT).
You get pretty far in this country without paying any significant amount of tax. And I'd say that many get more than that back via things like free travel passes, children's allowance, medical cards, etc
Taxation for people earning less than 35K (that is industrial average!) is close to non-existent in Ireland.

I wasn't talking about tax receipts, I was talking about government expenditure. And I stated "if we were to balance the books" then it equate to €17,000 a year for the 3m or so taxpayers.

 

[TheBigShort]

Read the link.

That example speaks to my issue with the whole discussion we have about Public Services and Taxation. We waste billion every year through waste, theft, duplication of services and gross inefficiency. I listened to a Hospital Consultant on the radio this morning. He agreed that Doctors unions, Nurses unions and public sector unions in general were at the heart of the problem in the health service. He said that they have to be tackled in order for things to be fixed.

We now see Dublin Bus outsourcing routes but not getting rid of any drivers. The end result of all of that waste is poverty, hardship and death and yet you and others like you, as well as the unionised media, will not brook any criticism of the people and organisations at the heart of our public services but instead look at everything from an ideological perspective, glibly defending the indefensible and attacking the same vague targets.

We as a State have been going around in circles for 30 years.

The bottom line is that public services should be run for the benefit of the public. Nothing else.


I don’t mind paying half my income in taxes. I resent the hell out of how little the people who take my hard earned money value it.

Yes, and you no doubt have serious issues about how the public service is run. But you cannot conflate every single issue in the public service, everytime, something you see something you disagree with.
We are talking about a specific tender to outsource Dublin Bus transport routes. You have diverted it to talk about Irish railways, the health service , the media, and whatever else you fancy having.

Nobody is disputing that there are numerous examples of public service efficiencies that could be improved. But as I have stated before, the argument to privatize any public service, purely on the basis that it can be done cheaper by someone else, is wholly inefficient (the irony)reason in itself.
I can give you examples of Gardaí, Judges, Prison Officers, Healthcare professionals, Teachers, Professors, etc...In each case, the job can be done by cheaper by someone else. However, driving down wages will lead to increased inefficiencies, decreased morale (in many, not all cases), open the door to corruption and overall deteriorate the welfare of the state to such a point as to increase poverty, hardship and death.
You are prepared to highlight inefficiencies, fair enough, but you stand at a point that ALL public services are inefficient. You broadstroke the whole public service with your generalisations. Thus your arguments continually fail.

The issue is about the outsourcing of Dublin Bus routes. I am skeptical that it will provide any discernable improvement to the consumer and/or to the working conditions to those that provide the service.