jump to navigation

Ticket To Ride August 13, 2013

Posted by Audit Monkey in The State of the British Nation.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

Today was the moment which the majority of the rail commuters dread as the annual fare increases for 2014 were announced. And lo and behold, the cost of the average season ticket will rise by 4.1 per cent, one per cent above July’s Retail Price Index of 3.1 per cent under a formula set by the Government. The full story can be read here.

You may not think that this isn’t much but multiplied over a year, it stacks up. Using my good self as an example, when I travel into London, I usually pay for a weekly ticket which costs £51.80. Over a year this comes in around £2,500. I would imagine that the cost of a weekly will rise to £53.90 or thereabouts.

This wouldn’t be so bad but the rail fares have to be paid from income which has often already been taxed at source. Taking a basic rate payer, one would need to be grossing just over £3,000 in salary to pay the fares alone for the commute to work. The rub is that London commuters are often beholden to the rail firms as there is no alternative work out in the sticks. If there is, often the salaries are considerably lower. Moreover, wages have been flat over the past few years so any increase in fares has a real impact on the take home salary.

Everyone whinges about the rail service and anyone reading this will probably think I’m whinging as well. My personal rail service gripes are lack of information during exceptionally cold weather, dirty seats and overcrowded rush hour trains. However, I will leave you with this thought. My income tax goes towards paying for the huge amount of public spending in this country. If I was unemployed (which I am) and wanting to work, why would I get off my backside when faced with a rotten journey to work and being charged through the nose for it? Quite simply where’s the incentive? David Cameron over to you.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. ITauditSecurity - August 14, 2013

And the fare you pay probably doesn’t pay the entire cost; I assume the government subsidizes it too? That’s what happens in the US. Bummer.

2. Audit Monkey - August 14, 2013

Think they do, but now they don’t want to, so the commuters are picking up the tab. Problem it’s chicken and egg. Either the government invests decent transport systems otherwise everyone sits around all day watching TV and generally doing nothing productive.

3. itmonkey101 - August 15, 2013

You’ve answered your own question as to why we have huge swathes of the populace sitting on their backsides because quite frankly why would you bother to work and put up with this carp when you can get free money and a house for doing nothing.

And it really gets my goat when you hear these sanctimonious idiots rhetorically asking why taxpayers should subsidise commuters.. The answer obviously is that the commuters are the ones paying all the tax and without them we’d be taken over by the IMF, or worse the EU.

ITauditSecurity - September 8, 2013

When government subsidises something, that means that the market forces spoke (service isn’t worth the cost), but the government disagrees, usually because poor people need it. An unintended result is that the people who can pay the full fare get to ride at a reduced rate.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: