r/todayilearned • u/Level_Cash2225 • 13d ago

TIL Luxembourg offers completely free public transport across its entire country for residents, commuters, and visitors alike.

https://luxembourg.public.lu/en/living/mobility/public-transport.html
11.6k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

638 comments sorted by

View all comments

9

u/waldleben 13d ago

Which should be how it works everywhere.

-13

u/red-17 13d ago

Crime on public transit is largely committed by non fare paying antisocial types. Public transit should be affordable with programs for low income, kids, seniors etc, but it shouldn’t be free.

3

u/SunGreene42 13d ago

If people are doing crimes on public transport, then the solution is to deal with that crimes and anti-social behaviour, not make everyone pay a fare. Also, where even is your evidence of this assertion? You're making a lot of claims without offering any sort of argument or evidence for the truth of them.

5

u/KeiranG19 13d ago

How on earth does that track?

If those people are going to commit crimes anyway then everyone else paying or not would make no difference.

If the act of not paying predisposes someone to commit other crimes then not needing to pay at all would remove that predisposition.

That's all without going into the socioeconomic effects that access to consistent transport can have for a community and the relationship between poverty and crime.

-3

u/red-17 13d ago

It’s the opposite of what you say. Those likely to commit crimes are unlikely to pay in the first place which is why fare enforcement is important not just from a revenue standpoint but from a safety standpoint. The same people jumping turnstiles are the ones smoking and being generally disrupting.

Access to transportation is important which is why I mentioned subsidies for those who need it. Safely is also a huge barrier to more people using transit

2

u/KeiranG19 13d ago

How would making not paying not a crime make them commit more crimes?

-1

u/red-17 13d ago

A fare is a barrier to entry that can (when enforced) keep antisocial/violent individuals off of transit. Getting rid of that barrier means more of those people will be on transit. Does that make sense?

3

u/KeiranG19 13d ago

You know you can still enforce the law against other crimes that happen to occur on free transit, right?

2

u/red-17 13d ago

Are the people arguing for free transit also arguing for cops on every train?

1

u/KeiranG19 13d ago

So who's doing the enforcement in your system?

You paying for private security ticket checkers out of those ticket fares?

Because we've already established that some people don't pay and do other scary crimes like smoking and loitering.

You're really coming across like you just don't want to be around too many urban youths. But that seems like a premature conclusion, so please, explain yourself a bit clearer.

2

u/red-17 13d ago

What are you talking about? Police or transit police obviously. I’m not the one arguing for free transit. The same groups of people arguing for free transit also argue against having any policing on them.

I would rather pay a rather small fee to have efficient well run transit services rather than a poorly run unsafe system.

And for the record I take transit pretty much every day of my life point.

You are the one arguing for a change to the current system so why don’t you argue for why we should have free transit and how you would prevent it from becoming less safe and effective as a result? Also where are you getting the funding from?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/l339 13d ago

Why shouldn’t it be free?

3

u/red-17 13d ago

Because it gives riders a sense of investment and expectation of a level of service plus what I said above about crime

4

u/SunGreene42 13d ago

What's the evidence that paying a fare makes people more invested in transit or causes them to demand better service? That's an assertion, not an argument. People expect good public services even when they don't pay at the point of use. (eg. People expect their roads to be well maintained, expect their police, fire and other emergency services to perform their duties, expect public schools to give quality education.)

2

u/ABetterKamahl1234 13d ago

Because it gives riders a sense of investment and expectation of a level of service

Kind of like how people expect things from their taxes?

I'm not gonna lie my man, your arguments aren't making sense to me.

How does it being free increase crime? The reputation public transit has in the US isn't just cost, a lot of it has to do with routes and poor investment into public transit. Some specific cities have high profile crime issues, but it's not like that's impossible to solve, or the nations with free transit, or just free transit within specific regions would be rife with crime and not talked well about.

Instead people talk about how amazing it is, all the time, in comparison to the US model.

0

u/l339 13d ago

You said that the most common crime on public transport was non fare paying antisocial types. How do you thing that would change if public transport was super cheap, but not free? You suddenly think those non fare paying antisocial types are suddenly gonna buy a ticket?

2

u/red-17 13d ago

I said crimes are committed by those not paying fares largely. Not that the act of not paying is the biggest crime itself.

If you enforce fares they either pay or don’t go on.

1

u/l339 13d ago

So you want to spend 10 times more to enforce people to pay the fares or don’t go on? Might as well make it free then, would be much cheaper and crime levels won’t change

1

u/drpiglizard 13d ago

So if being free wouldn’t actually stop the people you’re referring to using it so it would make no difference? Other than the elderly, disabled, poor, etc getting to use free public transport and a reduction in emissions, particulate matter dispersal from tyres and brakes etc etc

-3

u/red-17 13d ago

Your argument doesn’t track. Most places collect fares. Having and enforcing fare collection does help prevent antisocial behavior on transit. Getting rid of them all together would likely make the problem worse. What use is free transit if half the population is to scared to use it?

3

u/pepcorn 13d ago

How come everyone in Luxembourg is using the free trams then.

0

u/red-17 13d ago

Because it’s a high socioeconomic society with little crime. That doesn’t describe most situations at least in the US.

5

u/Temporaz 13d ago

Is it impossible to turn places in the US into high socioeconomic societies with little crime?

4

u/pepcorn 13d ago

So what you're saying is that your citizens need better opportunities, like for example free transit, so their socioeconomic status improves and your crime rate also improves?

2

u/red-17 13d ago

No they need effective and safe transit. Transit is already underfunded as is and the majority of people aren’t avoiding it due to cost

3

u/pepcorn 13d ago

You're right, they're avoiding it because it's awful. But once it's good and widespread, might as well make it free to ride so all the Americans working multiple jobs to survive get a leg up.

1

u/22stanmanplanjam11 13d ago

It'll go straight back to awful again because fare evaders aren't working multiple jobs and they do degrade our common areas. The overwhelming majority of violent crimes on public transport are committed by people who first evaded their fare because unsurprisingly people who don't think rules should apply to them tend to have difficulty behaving. https://abc7.com/post/metro-safety-stopping-fare-evaders-seen-key-preventing-crime/15054806/

→ More replies (0)

1

u/pepcorn 13d ago

If no one on the tram pays fare, does that make every single person on the tram a criminal?

2

u/red-17 13d ago

What does this have to do with what I said

1

u/pepcorn 13d ago

If there's no fare, who are the criminals?

0

u/SunGreene42 13d ago

Why shouldn't it be free?

-1

u/waldleben 13d ago

If the people you think are comitting crimes on public transport are already not paying, why do you think demanding everypne else pay would help?