The solution to CIE's financial issues? Nominal charge for FTP holders?

Del.Monte

Addle wrote: »

I know a couple of pharmacists who work in the north, and some of their customers wouldn’t even by sudocreme for their babies nappy rash or sun block for their holidays unless it was prescribed and free on the nhs.
I don’t have any sympathy for people who don’t prioritize their health over discretionary spending.

I think it’s a great country that respects its elders and incapacitated and allows them free travel. As usual, it’s the scroungers who take advantage that ruin such programmes for everyone.

Likely tale. :rolleyes:

end of the road

antix80 wrote: »

Nominal charges are the way to go.
When things are free there's unlimited demand. Supply/demand economics goes out the window.

Remember the London marathon when all the blacks turned up to take the free water, some with trolleys, even though they weren't even running. Free water bruv. https://youtu.be/KGXP_pF19F4

The A&Es are filled with idiots with medical cards who won't wait a few days to see their GP.
And the reason gp's are fully booked is because people can see them for free.

"Free" travel should have a charge of 50c a journey for short journeys, maybe capped at €1 a day.
GP visits should cost €5.
A&E should cost €10.

Remember, these people aren't getting hampers of food. They're getting cash every week, and many are choosing to spend it on stupid things while undervaluing important things like transport and healthcare.

how much will my taxes have to go up to pay for the implementation, administration and enforcement of these nominal charges, that will probably in all likely hood increase over time?
or if not specifically because of the charge itself, the hidden issues they may cause?
what people spend their money on when it goes into their pocket is not my problem, and is no justification for charges to use services they have been deemed to be entitled to use for free due to their situation.
a situation they will have had to provide proof for by the way.

Addle wrote: »

I wouldn’t leave a baby uncomfortable because I refused to buy something that was easily available for me to buy.

I don’t believe paying a nominal amount for a prescription has lead to suffering for genuine people and I don’t think paying a nominal amount to travel on public transport would either.

you may not believe it, but it doesn't mean that genuine people won't and don't suffer, you aren't going to know about it unless they tell you.

Addle wrote: »

Ya, when I hear about overcrowding in a&e I wonder why some of them are there, and should they be there at all.

Same with patients not canceling free appointments and just being no shows. They’d have respect for the system if they were directly paying for their appointments.

there isn't anything to show that to be the case apart from wishful thinking.
if someone currently doesn't have respect for something, they won't start because they have to pay, because they are disrespectful in the first place.

silver2020 wrote: »

We are in Ireland. Not the UK.

Our prescription charge is €2 / €1.50, Not £9stg

Social welfare payments are on average DOUBLE those of the UK.



So, as another poster asked - can you show any Irish figures that show how a small nominal prescription charge has caused undue hardship - or "deaths" as you hysterically state.

Please use an Irish source, not something from a totally different country

we are in ireland yes, that doesn't make us immune from having issues.
we also have a higher cost of living hence our rate of wellfare payment.
all leinster dub had to show is that a charge where it was once for free, can cause genuine hardship and he showed that. the fact it is in a different country doesn't really change that possibility or make us immune because the figures happen to be different.

road_high wrote: »

The deeply ingrained welfare culture is breath taking in Ireland- among a certain very vocal cohort (those that pay for nothing) there's an expectation that the "government" should pay for everything.
Unlimited free public transport is insanity - a public resource that is limited by its nature should always have a limit on it. Our welfare rates are already amongst the highest in the world so expecting someone to pay a nominal fee to shift their carcass will be negligible to their standard of living.

Same crap here with the so called homeless and free dinner/food parcel brigade. I can stroll into my local Aldi and feed myself (well) for €20 for a week yet these lot seemingly can't survive on the very generous welfare payments and fringe benefits. There's something very wrong with either how these lot spend their money or we are not getting the entire truth.

unlimited free public transport is not insanity as long as the costs can be justified against the costs of not having it, which it seems it can be, for now at least hence the existence of the scheme.
costs such as people being less active, being unable to get around, local economies etc.
you and i being able to do something doesn't really have any relevance to another given people's situations, ingoings and outgoings differ.

antix80

end of the road wrote: »

how much will my taxes have to go up to pay for the implementation, administration and enforcement of these nominal charges

You mean the existing ticketing systems? Hmm

Lower usage = lower costs

end of the road

hapime wrote: »

This!!!
You work hard all day and then you have the choice of the car or get the bus home sitting beside some scumbag, 50/50 chance that they will stink of BO as well.

so what? not the fact scumbags whether they smell of boo or not are a nucence, but the fact you work hard all day? that doesn't make us special as much as some may think they are gods gift.

hapime wrote: »

Too many people have FTP,

on what basis do you state this to be the case?

hapime wrote: »

seems to be all you need is a hang nail and you can get one.

quite thankfully, no, that is not the case.

hapime wrote: »

If you can walk/run like normal folk why are you getting a FTP?

because you have a disability that doesn't prevent you from specifically running and walking.
and there is no such thing as "normal" people. what is normal to you is not normal to someone else.

hapime wrote: »

Going to the gym/football practice/a hike up the mountains and so on, why do they have FTP?

because they have a disability that doesn't specifically prevent those particular activities.
it's not the 1950s anymore lads, you don't need to be in a wheelchair to have a disability. you don't need to be visibly disabled to have one either.
yes absolutely there are some taking the piss and they need to be dealt with but that doesn't change the fact that because someone else may not think someone has a disability, it doesn't mean that they don't.

end of the road

antix80 wrote: »

You mean the existing ticketing systems? Hmm

Lower usage = lower costs

lower usage doesn't equal lower costs if costs pass on elsewhere due to those users not being there, which it probably will. our fares.
the existing ticketing system also hasn't got enough enforcement by the way. few revenue inspectors around, especially on the rail services.

trellheim

The reason IIRC for FTP is that those buses and trains were rolling around empty anyway so this got people out and about who otherwise would not. I dont object to the FTP

LeinsterDub

Addle wrote: »

I wouldn’t leave a baby uncomfortable because I refused to buy something that was easily available for me to buy.

I don’t believe paying a nominal amount for a prescription has lead to suffering for genuine people and I don’t think paying a nominal amount to travel on public transport would either.

How do you know it wasn't chronic nappy rash for which a doctors visit was required? You don't, your just up on your high horse judging the 'povs'

You're nominal amount may not be so nominal for others.
We should be extending free public transport to everyone not limiting it.

monument

Posts with racist comments will be deleted.

Others need to limit non-transport comments to things which are somewhat linked to transport.

-- moderator

thenightman

Revenue from actual enforcement of bus lanes, yellow boxes, cycle lanes etc via traffic camera fines should be put back into public transport funding. No need to employ an extra army of civil servants and consultants to administer a 20c tariff on FTP holders. I know this would disappoint the thinly veiled right wing blowhards (one particular one on this thread!) as they wouldn't like the idea of not kicking vulnerable people when they're down.

road_high

thenightman wrote: »

Revenue from actual enforcement of bus lanes, yellow boxes, cycle lanes etc via traffic camera fines should be put back into public transport funding. No need to employ an extra army of civil servants and consultants to administer a 20c tariff on FTP holders. I know this would disappoint the thinly veiled right wing blowhards (one particular one on this thread!) as they wouldn't like the idea of not kicking vulnerable people when they're down.

Both red herrings- the fantasy revenue you imagine from all these bus lane hoggers would amount to how much exactly? And that would cost nothing to administer of course?

Why would charging users a nominal fee paid directly to the PT providers mean any more admin fee over and above the staff and machines already employed at stations, buses and ticket machines? Yea dismiss anyone that wants sensible public spending as "right wing". They must be racist as well surely?

A lot of folks are under the impression that the government will do something to piss off the grey vote, they wont. This vote is becoming more and more powerful with each passing year.

The approach in this thread is to attack the weakest, poorest, most vulnerable of society and lay the ills of CIE at their feet. Nice Trump approach there. Only problem is that approach doesn't actually solve the underlying issues and only serves to disenfranchise said poorest, most vulnerable

There is a lot more money to be saved by removing inefficient work practices, tackling unions and paying drivers a realistic salary more in line with the skills and education requirements of the job. They are on ludicrous money for what they do and a large reduction in salary is overdue .

Autonomous buses will improve the financial situation of public transport providers the world over.

Wanderer78

Deleted User wrote:

There is a lot more money to be saved by removing inefficient work practices, tackling unions and paying drivers a realistic salary more in line with the skills and education requirements of the job. They are on ludicrous money for what they do and a large reduction in salary is overdue .

Should be an easy task, everyone loves a pay reduction and increased work insecurities

Idbatterim

I’m honestly surprised oap, unemployed have to pay for anything here at this stage. Why not pay for their grocery shopping , mobile bill etc too...

Idbatterim

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A lot of folks are under the impression that the government will do something to piss off the grey vote, they wont. This vote is becoming more and more powerful with each passing year.

The approach in this thread is to attack the weakest, poorest, most vulnerable of society and lay the ills of CIE at their feet. Nice Trump approach there. Only problem is that approach doesn't actually solve the underlying issues and only serves to disenfranchise said poorest, most vulnerable

There is a lot more money to be saved by removing inefficient work practices, tackling unions and paying drivers a realistic salary more in line with the skills and education requirements of the job. They are on ludicrous money for what they do and a large reduction in salary is overdue .

Autonomous buses will improve the financial situation of public transport providers the world over.

I can only imagine the piss take practices that go on within cie. But it’s not a patch on unlimited free travel. Not so that cie employees can be paid more , but so that infrastructure and transport here can be improved. From its current third world state

LeinsterDub

road_high wrote: »

Both red herrings- the fantasy revenue you imagine from all these bus lane hoggers would amount to how much exactly? And that would cost nothing to administer of course?

Why would charging users a nominal fee paid directly to the PT providers mean any more admin fee over and above the staff and machines already employed at stations, buses and ticket machines? Yea dismiss anyone that wants sensible public spending as "right wing". They must be racist as well surely?

If compatible to Belfast about 1 million per year.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-northern-ireland-49263375

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

A lot of folks are under the impression that the government will do something to piss off the grey vote, they wont. This vote is becoming more and more powerful with each passing year.

The approach in this thread is to attack the weakest, poorest, most vulnerable of society and lay the ills of CIE at their feet. Nice Trump approach there. Only problem is that approach doesn't actually solve the underlying issues and only serves to disenfranchise said poorest, most vulnerable

There is a lot more money to be saved by removing inefficient work practices, tackling unions and paying drivers a realistic salary more in line with the skills and education requirements of the job. They are on ludicrous money for what they do and a large reduction in salary is overdue .

Autonomous buses will improve the financial situation of public transport providers the world over.

there is nothing to tackle in relation to the unions, they are already as weak as they can be made. both the unions in ireland and the uk are the weakist in this part of europe.
drivers are payed a realistic salary in line with the skills and education requirements of the job, and based on the european market rate.
a large reduction in salary would make the job unattractive and would mean we find it hard to get and keep the talent required which will be hugely problematic in terms of running public transport services.
the first part of your post is absolutely correct however. people do love to engage in trumpism and attack the weakist in society as it makes them feel better about their own situation, even though the weakist in society being made to suffer wouldn't deliver in what the people attacking them would want.

road_high

Idbatterim wrote: »

I’m honestly surprised oap, unemployed have to pay for anything here at this stage. Why not pay for their grocery shopping , mobile bill etc too...

That'll be no doubt the next move- perhaps they can petition the UN to get that included under another looney tune Rights Bill?

joeysoap

Anyone have the figures of how the FTS are issued?

How many are to over 66’s, how many to other groups? Are they issued to students in certain circumstances?

L1011

They're not issued to students unless the student qualifies under the same requirements as anyone else (disability)