Topic: Why isn't public transport free? - page 6. (Read 8591 times)
Public transport isnt free and why. It depends on the country you are in. Well in my country the government calls it as "Economic Enterprise". These are branches of the government who does not rely on the government for the salary of the personnel and the daily operations except for big purchases of course. The pay on this public transport are to be used to pay their personnel, to the maintenance of the terminal and the equipments and others. If these expenses will be taken from the government budget then many sectors of society will be affected in terms of delivery of services due to shortage of funds. So let it be, so that the public transport can sustain on its own while not touching the allotments for service delivery of welfare sectors.
Taxes + tickets + ads revenues... All of this to pay executives and press relation managers high salaries?
It is Finland sometimes free bus in morning
Pirateparty Finland is saying about this (Free public transport)That's cool but in the morning rush hour alot of revenue will be lost. It doesn't sound like a good idea to me. How do you pay to repair and expand the transportation system? Its best the way it is.
Robots can be built to do all the work, from the mining of the raw materials, to the rolling out of the pavement.
Robots don't need any more than in their "life" than to work. So, they will do all the work for free.
Robots can even repair themselves, and make their own spare parts.
Robots mean freedom for all people.
Taxes + tickets + ads revenues... All of this to pay executives and press relation managers high salaries?
There are some transport that free to used by employee or because of the traffic sometimes i don't think that there are some of countries will be a free transport every ride , GOverment here in my country want this but they have something to do and they need to pay taxes and for the maintenance of every vehicle. 
Taxes + tickets + ads revenues... All of this to pay executives and press relation managers high salaries?
It is Finland sometimes free bus in morning
Pirateparty Finland is saying about this (Free public transport)That's cool but in the morning rush hour alot of revenue will be lost. It doesn't sound like a good idea to me. How do you pay to repair and expand the transportation system? Its best the way it is.
In my country, all public transportations are owned or leased by private entities, the government awards the infrastructure projects to the highest bidder and after finishing it, they will be the one to operate it under rules and regulations by the government. So basically all public transportations here can never be free.
IMO, infrastructure projects must be undertaken by the government, rather than giving them to private corporations. If the private companies gain ownership to these projects, then they will make transport unaffordable to the general public.
In my country, all public transportations are owned or leased by private entities, the government awards the infrastructure projects to the highest bidder and after finishing it, they will be the one to operate it under rules and regulations by the government. So basically all public transportations here can never be free.
Taxes + tickets + ads revenues... All of this to pay executives and press relation managers high salaries?
It is Finland sometimes free bus in morning
Pirateparty Finland is saying about this (Free public transport) Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
That's the way nature works. When you are born, you will be gifted with organs which are in perfect working condition. When one of your organs fail, you are supposed to die. You are going against nature, when you are replacing your organs such as kidneys and liver.
but if we were given higher intellect by nature and we've managed to develop procedures that will help us live longer and better like replacing certain body parts, why isn't that natural? It naturally happened that we're able to do that unlike animal that don't have the intellect or anything do perform such things.
Because it goes against the rule of "survival of the fittest". In the old days, only those who are extremely healthy would survive in to their 20s and 30s. The situation has changed now, due to the advancement in the medical field.
Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
That's the way nature works. When you are born, you will be gifted with organs which are in perfect working condition. When one of your organs fail, you are supposed to die. You are going against nature, when you are replacing your organs such as kidneys and liver.
but if we were given higher intellect by nature and we've managed to develop procedures that will help us live longer and better like replacing certain body parts, why isn't that natural? It naturally happened that we're able to do that unlike animal that don't have the intellect or anything do perform such things.
It wasn't nature giving it to us. It was nature allowing the things that God gives to exist in us. Of course, nature can't really stop God's gifts. So even the passing through that allows gifts, is just a passing through, designed by God to happen by cause and effect.
Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
That's the way nature works. When you are born, you will be gifted with organs which are in perfect working condition. When one of your organs fail, you are supposed to die. You are going against nature, when you are replacing your organs such as kidneys and liver.
but if we were given higher intellect by nature and we've managed to develop procedures that will help us live longer and better like replacing certain body parts, why isn't that natural? It naturally happened that we're able to do that unlike animal that don't have the intellect or anything do perform such things.
Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
That's the way nature works. When you are born, you will be gifted with organs which are in perfect working condition. When one of your organs fail, you are supposed to die. You are going against nature, when you are replacing your organs such as kidneys and liver.
I don't agree with that. After all, nature allows us the ability to make body parts to some extent. So, it isn't wrong to do and use the things nature has allowed.
Nothing can really be free actually as many of these free programs are funded by taxpayers' money. However, yes there can be many innovative and creative ways to deal with this challenge but in many cases not all people can avail of the free service...you must belong to the marginalized sectors.
IMO, nothing should be made free. Even for those belonging to the "marginalized sectors". Subsidization is a good thing, but don't give away anything for free. Those belonging to the marginalized sectors should be made to work.
That's the beauty of freedom so many countries have fought for.
Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
That's the way nature works. When you are born, you will be gifted with organs which are in perfect working condition. When one of your organs fail, you are supposed to die. You are going against nature, when you are replacing your organs such as kidneys and liver.
Nothing can really be free actually as many of these free programs are funded by taxpayers' money. However, yes there can be many innovative and creative ways to deal with this challenge but in many cases not all people can avail of the free service...you must belong to the marginalized sectors.
IMO, nothing should be made free. Even for those belonging to the "marginalized sectors". Subsidization is a good thing, but don't give away anything for free. Those belonging to the marginalized sectors should be made to work.
For the sake of argument, everything should be free. Consider the following.
Everyone gets his life and body free. If a person loses a body part, science and the medical might be able to replace it. But the replacement isn't nearly as good or complex as the original. And it costs lots of money, whereas the original was essentially free.
Now, think about things that people make, like houses and cars and computers, etc. These things are not free. But they are far inferior to body parts which nobody can build.
Something is wrong here. The cheaper junk that people make costs more than the highly complex stuff that nature makes, and that people have no ability to make.
If you wanted to buy yourself a whole new body, built from scratch, the price might be $infinite, if it were even possible.
Since the best stuff in life is free, everything should be free.
Nothing can really be free actually as many of these free programs are funded by taxpayers' money. However, yes there can be many innovative and creative ways to deal with this challenge but in many cases not all people can avail of the free service...you must belong to the marginalized sectors.
IMO, nothing should be made free. Even for those belonging to the "marginalized sectors". Subsidization is a good thing, but don't give away anything for free. Those belonging to the marginalized sectors should be made to work.
Nothing can really be free actually as many of these free programs are funded by taxpayers' money. However, yes there can be many innovative and creative ways to deal with this challenge but in many cases not all people can avail of the free service...you must belong to the marginalized sectors.
There is such a world cannot exist. If robots learn to exist without the person, then the person will disturb them. They will destroy it. How man destroys everything weaker and fairer Cham it.
Robots don't have to be AI.
In an automobile plant, where they make cars, they have robots working right with people, making cars. If the robots could do everything, the people would not be needed. But, so far, there are some things the robots can't do, and they need people for. Things will change in the future.
There is a McDonalds in Phoenix, Arizona, that is entirely run by robots, right now.
Yeap, just because it's called a robot, that's doesn't automatically mean that it's an AI. But if AI comes into power by some miracle, one small emp bomb can take them down pretty quick. :|
Mobile Money Has Lifted 194,000 Kenyan Households Out of Poverty
Read more at https://fee.org/articles/mobile-money-has-lifted-194-000-kenyan-households-out-of-poverty/.
Quote from: https://fee.org/articles/mobile-money-has-lifted-194-000-kenyan-households-out-of-poverty/
It's only recently, though, that experts have tried to quantify how these products have benefited the poor.
In their recent study "The long-run poverty and gender impacts of mobile money," Tavneet Suri and William Jack assess mobile money's contribution to poverty alleviation in Kenya, the country where the "mobile money revolution" began.
Complementary products like the interest-earning mobile banking service M-Shwari and retail payment platform Lipa na M-PESA have only added to its popularity.
From surveys they conducted between 2008 and 2014, Suri and Jack find that M-PESA has lifted 194,000 Kenyan households—about 2 percent of them—out of poverty. It has done so, they conclude, mainly by making it easier for the poor to protect themselves against negative shocks to their wealth and income stemming from events such as bad harvests and general economic downturns. This enables poor citizens to enjoy a more stable and predictable flow of income and therefore have a smoother pattern of spending over time.
In their recent study "The long-run poverty and gender impacts of mobile money," Tavneet Suri and William Jack assess mobile money's contribution to poverty alleviation in Kenya, the country where the "mobile money revolution" began.
Complementary products like the interest-earning mobile banking service M-Shwari and retail payment platform Lipa na M-PESA have only added to its popularity.
From surveys they conducted between 2008 and 2014, Suri and Jack find that M-PESA has lifted 194,000 Kenyan households—about 2 percent of them—out of poverty. It has done so, they conclude, mainly by making it easier for the poor to protect themselves against negative shocks to their wealth and income stemming from events such as bad harvests and general economic downturns. This enables poor citizens to enjoy a more stable and predictable flow of income and therefore have a smoother pattern of spending over time.
Read more at https://fee.org/articles/mobile-money-has-lifted-194-000-kenyan-households-out-of-poverty/.
Jump to: