Slashdot Mirror


Paris Will Make Public Transportation Free for Kids (citylab.com)

In a plan to help families and reduce car usage, anyone under 11 years old will be able to ride metro and buses for free, as will people with disabilities under 20. From a report: Starting in September, Paris is making all public transit free for people under 11, including non-nationals. Preteens aren't the only ones getting a bonus, either. All people with disabilities will get free public transit until the age of 20, while high school students between the ages of 14 and 18 will be entitled to a 50 percent tariff reduction. To make transit access for this group even easier, any 14- to 18-year-olds who buy a travel pass will also get a free bikeshare account as well.

The plans, which apply across the Greater Paris region and cost an estimated $17 million a year, are part of a staggered plan to make things cheaper for people with mobility challenges. Already last spring, the region introduced a (means-tested) scheme by which adults with disabilities and all people over 65 got a free annual travel pass if they were on a low-to-medium income. This new plan to extend cheap or no fares toward younger people should make the public transit system more widely accessible and prove to be a happy cost-saver for families.

168 comments

  1. London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 5, Informative

    Glad to see other cities catching up, as enabling use of public transit is one of the best ways to reduce traffic, pollution, etc

    https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/free-...

    Under 5 - Free with a paying adult
    5 to 10 - Free with a paying adult, or on their own by using a free Oyster card
    11 to 15 - Free when using a free Oyster card
    16 to 17 - Free when using a free Oyster card... but only if you LIVE in London.

    1. Re:London has done this for years by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but public transport is often uncomfortable and smelly.

    2. Re:London has done this for years by shilly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      London's a big, busy city. Every mode of transport is uncomfortable from time to time -- driving is a pain, cycling and walking gets you a faceful of fumes, etc. But it's London, and the upsides far outweigh these inconveniences for me and millions of others.

    3. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 2

      That is sometimes true, but in London (and I suspect other big cities with metro systems like New York, Paris, etc.) it's usually the fastest way from A to B. Even the famous Black Cab with their privileged use of Bus Lanes, and intricate knowledge of the streets can't compete with the speed of a Tube Train through the centre of London.

      It's not as bad as you imagine because everyone in London uses the tube, not just those that are downtrodden and smelly. In fact, many of the trains on the network are quite decent in comparison to what springs to mind when the phrase "public transport" is used:

      http://www.railtechnologymagaz...
      https://londonist.com/london/t...

      Then you have the inter-city trains, like the one from London to Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam etc. There's no comparison to flying:

      https://www.cnet.com/pictures/...

    4. Re:London has done this for years by war4peace · · Score: 2

      Yes, because car exhaust fumes aren't smelly at all.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    5. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 1

      It only works in places where the majority use Public Transit. I also lived in a smaller town in Australia for a while, and the public transit was a joke... so everyone drives. But, where it can work, it should be encouraged.

      Free tickets for kids is just so normal here, that it's hard to imagine any other way. Consider it an early intro to public transit, so that as they grow up it's not a big boogeyman that they need to confront. It's just a normal part of getting around the city.

    6. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to think about private transport. You see, I used to smell public transport from a long way away and it was awful. Now, with private transport I have the best of all worlds and its even cheaper than public transport. I have a brand spanking new car with a very simple dash that I just love. And it is not even financed so I can spend money on my creature comforts. It is the one call I would make again. Home away from home.

    7. Re:London has done this for years by fred911 · · Score: 1

      You forgot "rude", remember this is in France.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    8. Re:London has done this for years by dehachel12 · · Score: 1

      Driving gets you the most fumes in your face, more than cycling or walking.

    9. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn you! You made me do a double take and spill my coffee all over the place!

    10. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The black snot from riding the tube doesn't trouble you?

    11. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You thinks fumes stick to the road, but somehow avoid cyclist, and stay away from the sidewalk?
      Not to mention that walking or cycling requires physical exertion. That speeds up your metabolism, which increases respiration, so you actually breath in more fumes than sitting in a car. It is a bit obscene, but at times of high air pollution it is actually better for your health to leave your bike at home and also get in a car.

    12. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like your fishing for references. Do your own wanky work

    13. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh even if they did I could not care less and they dont

    14. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 3, Interesting

      To be honest, I've not had that for years. Yes it was very worrying, because what the hell was it? Brake dust, with added asbestos for extra flavour? Carbon from the electrics? Luckily the new trains don't seem to be anywhere near as dirty as the old ones, so black snot is a thing of the past.

      I find it hard to imagine that they used to run steam trains burning coal through these tunnels. How disgusting would that have been! :-O

      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...

    15. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider it an early intro to public transit, so that as they grow up it's not a big boogeyman that they need to confront.

      This. But it only works when you have good public transport. If it is shitty you will put them off permanently. That is what happened to me. Never a place to sit, buses so full they would sometimes not even stop to let me in, travel times just as long as on the bike and 2-3 times as long as with the car.

    16. Re:London has done this for years by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Under 5 - Free with a paying adult

      So what, they have to pay if they rock up alone?

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    17. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrifying! Coal! Trains!

    18. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Glad to see other cities catching up, as enabling use of public transit is one of the best ways to reduce traffic, pollution, etc

      Unfortunately not. You can make as much public transport you want in cities, but as soon as you move people to public transport, the roads clear up, and new people start driving. Lessening congestion will also encourage people to move further away from their jobs, bringing you back to more traffic and pollution.

      If you want to reduce traffic and pollution, the only effective ways to do it are increased congestion for cars and massively increased costs of driving. The cost of alternatives to driving is insignificant, since the advantages of car transport are so large -- people will pay a lot extra to drive. Once you have made driving painful or overly expensive, you can then add public transport to make the situation bearable for the population.

      It is nice to think that there are happy fluffy ways to make traffic better. I really wish it was possible.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    19. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's unfortunate that these schemes are always limited to children and teenagers. All the good-will that is generated during that time is thrown out the window: You use public transport until you are grown up, then you get a car. It costs just $17 million a year to make public transport free for young ones in greater Paris? That's an area with 6 million people. Less than a cent per person and day. How little would it cost to extend this to everyone?

    20. Re:London has done this for years by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they don’t want under 5s to rock up alone

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    21. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 2

      I guess... yes. If you're independent enough at 4 years old to be swanning around London alone, then you get to pay for your own damn ticket! :-P

    22. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes! I will take black snotly seconds to get on that car. Whatever man

    23. Re:London has done this for years by dehachel12 · · Score: 1
    24. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "breathe in", not "breath in".

    25. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 2

      Interesting. Taking the London as an example:

      https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/a...
      https://www.google.co.uk/searc...

      So that's 10.2 billion / 8.1 million people... or £1,259 (1,620 USD) for each person. We could spread it across the country, but then we would need to include the costs for other transport companies.

      Is it worth it?!? Maybe... but there are many angles to that argument.

    26. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern cars have pretty nice filters though.

    27. Re:London has done this for years by phayes · · Score: 3, Informative

      The fastest way from A to B in Paris is not using public transport in Paris but is on two wheels which how I'm usually doing it almost year round: On a bicycle (public shared bikes or my own depending) for shorter trips and on my motorcycle for longer trips like to/from work which is usually on the other side of Paris from where I live. Except for special cases like A & B being on the same Metro line and close to the Metro exits, two wheels will be faster almost all the time (often 1/2 the time) and if A or B are outside Paris & you need to take a bus and or then walk for a while, 1/3 of the time. Now to be able to be so much faster than the Metro, buses or cars you will be lane splitting but that's allowed here and if done prudently & with experience is not dangereous.

      Scooter (Mopeds for people in the US) sales in & around Paris have been skyrocketing for over a decade -- and not just 125cc models people can drive with their car drivers licenses or the 50cc models that you don't need a license for, more people pass the motorcycle license now intending to use a scooter than a motorcycle. Three wheeled scooters (look at Piaggio's main French web page: https://www.piaggio.com/fr_FR/) reassure those who are afraid of being unstable and (other than being more expensive) have pretty much the same advantages as two wheels.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    28. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vienna has 1.9 million people. Public transport isn't free, but you can buy a one year ticket that costs 356 Euros: 1€/day.

    29. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Oyster card is only free as in beer, it's a tracking system.

    30. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 2

      Definite thumbs-up for two wheels! When I can take a bike, it's certainly faster than the bus or tube as you say. Being a fair-weather cyclist, I tend not to cycle as much as I'd like... plus the statistics for incidence or crashes and injury to weigh on my mind. Even if you're a careful rider, the actions of another can have catastrophic consequences for the cyclist. Same goes if you're driving a car, but then it's more 50/50 about who bears the consequences... unlike 99/1 when it comes to cycling.

    31. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's been a while since I was last in London, but I doubt it's gotten better, but my biggest problem was always how crowded the tubes were. I got groped every time I used them, and it's not like the guy groping me wanted to, we were just crammed in there so tight he didn't really have a choice. I'm a dude, btw, so I don't think he was just trying to get handsy.

      I imagined it was what being a sardine felt like, but I don't think they cram sardines in quite that tight. And then the train doesn't take off full speed because somebody is blocking the door from closing and you get the passive aggressive "please stop blocking the door so the train can reach full speed. You are delaying everyone" or whatever it was. I honestly don't think the person blocking the door had a choice, who ever was cramming people in let go before the door fully closed and they popped out a little.

    32. Re:London has done this for years by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well it isn't going be be like a limo ride. The Smell is mostly in your head, the probably is your car that you commute back an forth too reeks far more then the Public Transport does. But you have gotten use to it, and you would get use to Public Transport as well.
      In terms of comfort. The real question comes down to distance. The Car seat even for small cars are designed for sitting for hours comfortably. but for public transit. a 10-15 minute trip would not be such a painful experience. Public transit seating is often just as conformable if not more so, then the seating at a 5 star restaurant. As you just sit on wooden chairs.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    33. Re:London has done this for years by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      You know if you don't tailgate the car in front of you, you don't get fumes in your face, also you have a few more seconds to react to change in driving patterns.
      The guideline is 3 seconds of space between you and the car ahead of you. (6 seconds in inclement weather). So at a slow 30 mph you have 40+ feet between you and the car. Plenty of space for the fumes to dissipate.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    34. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I thank you for the clarification. as a Yankee I was about to moderate the parent as a troll, because I have interpreted it as a racist comment. Not some sort of actual pollution.

    35. Re:London has done this for years by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      I am sure to the French the English and Americans seem insincere. With its false politeness and friendliness to people you don't know.

      As an American who lives in the North East section of the country, I often find people who are in the Southern Regions a bit too friendly to be trustworthy.
      My Culture has taught me, If someone you don't know is too friendly with you, they are probably trying to sell you something, the more friendly they are the more they are going to rip you off.
      That said, as an American, there are standards of politeness and well defined areas considered acceptable. Talk to people with at least a 1 meter gap between the other, but no more then 2 meters. Give people a firm handshake with eye contact, smile while introducing yourself. Ask "How Are You" when asked you answer you are "Doing Well" or "Good" even if you are not. When asked to be somewhere at a particular time, I am allowed +/- 5 minutes until I am considered late.

      But these are cultural norms. In other countries and even areas of the United States, may either seem overly friendly and getting too close to a stranger, or to others may make you seem distant, and combative.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    36. Re:London has done this for years by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      One person also cycled and another walked on a quieter parallel route away from busy roads.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    37. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say that, but the Western European governments are decades ahead of you. The fuel tariffs are deliberately punitive so that the poor people can be controlled. Not like the U.S. where every gun toting redneck can drive wherever the hell they want.

    38. Re: London has done this for years by Type44Q · · Score: 5, Funny

      Black snot?! Riding the "tube??" Get yourself checked... and next time have him wear a condom.

    39. Re:London has done this for years by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      Yeah this is hardly unique, public transport is free or significantly discounted for children in many places. Not sure why this made it here. In Prague I think under 6 is free and until 16 it's half price. Anyway I used to ride for free as a teenager because what are they gonna do.

    40. Re:London has done this for years by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      3 seconds of space is about zero meters when tone waiting at traffic lights or in a traffic jam.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    41. Re:London has done this for years by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Note to future historians who may be reading this discussion: at the current moment, there's still some work to do on personal air drones with robotic control and coordination to fly people around big cities, which is why there is so much hot air about subways and so on.

      As such, as with time capsules, you are probably more interested in the ads in the back of the newspapers we include than the headlines on the front, the stuff we think is important. So here are some contemporary ads. Burger King currently has a sale on 10 chicken nuggets for $1. McDonald's responded with their 2 for $5 from a choice of 10 McNuggets, Big Mac, Quarter Pounder, and Filet O'Fish.

      Yes, you can get 2 x 10 = 20 McNuggets for $5, but order it as 2x10 rather than 20 because 20 McNuggets is its own separate thing, and they may try to idiotically charge you the higher normal price, which is like $6.80.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    42. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 1

      True, that still happens... because the Tube is one of the best ways to get around, so EVERYONE uses is. I get 1 train per minute at my stop, and if there is a 2 minute delay in the service then it's so full you can't get on. Still, it beats trying to drive... what with the traffic, congestion charge (tax) rising to £24/day for diesel cars, then paying on average £42/day to park:

      https://news.sky.com/story/die...
      https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/...

      So you're stung for ~£66/day before you factor in your time, etc. Using a private car to commute into London is reserved for the 1%.

    43. Re: London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet it appears on slashdot for the first time. But thanks for the charming and aloof comment

    44. Re:London has done this for years by dbialac · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Let kids know from an early age that it's uncomfortable and smelly and they'll seek high paying jobs so they can afford a car.

    45. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm... they may still choose to prosecute, leaving a stain on your record. These are of older folks, but they were really taking the piss:

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...

      *Jonathan Burrows*
      Millionaire city executive Jonathan Burrows was labelled the biggest fare dodger in history after agreeing to pay £43,000 to Southeastern trains in an out-of-court settlement.

      He lost his job at asset manager BlackRock and was banned from working in the City for life when the five-year scam came to light, although he avoided prosecution. He insists that the true value of the fares he avoided runs to hundreds, not thousands, of pounds.

      *Dr Peter Barnett*
      International lawyer Dr Peter Barnett received a 16-week suspended sentence after admitting to a two-year scam in which he tapped-out his Oyster card at London’s Marylebone station, without having tapped-in, thereby incurring the maximum London Underground fare, rather than the true cost of commuting from his Oxfordshire home.

      Chiltern Railways said that he had avoided £20,000 in fares, but the solicitor successfully argued that the true cost was only £6,000, which he paid back in full.

      *Simon King*
      City banker Simon King admitted an £8,000 two-year fraud in which he returned his annual season ticket for a refund, but not before he had photocopied it.

      He then used the crude forgery to commute from his West Sussex home to London Bridge station, only being caught after a member of staff told him to insert the fake ticket into an electronic barrier. He received a community punishment.

    46. Re:London has done this for years by jellomizer · · Score: 1, Informative

      Even not being a Helicopter parent. A child under 4 is still mastering skills such as no going poop in their pants (they may be potty trained, but accidents still happen a lot), being able to walk steadily, and have enough discipline to avoid danger even if there is something shiny in the middle of it.
      That is why Kindergarten normally starts after the age of 4 years (normally at the age of 5). While some kids 3 and 4 may be mature enough to handle being alone, that wouldn't be anywhere near a good rule of thumb to follow.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    47. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > London has done this for years

      Yeah, but someone in Europe has to continue, now that you guys are out...

    48. Re:London has done this for years by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      That may vary depending on geography. In the U.S., the smell from people living and urinating in buses and trains and stations is quite real. And "seating" exists only in systems that are lightly used, like ours in Cleveland. And not always even here. It certainly doesn't in peak hours anywhere in NYC, the one U.S. city that can be said by some measures to have fairly decent transit. During off-peak hours, especially at night, you get people peeing/puking/etc. just like in more lightly used systems. The system is woefully underfunded, and thus the trains may or may not get cleaned up a little bit prior to the next morning's rush. At which point you are glad to be standing and not sitting, because of how dirty and gross the seats can get. I'm not trying to exaggerate or be sensationalistic. I use buses and trains whenever they make sense. But it's not the same experience that Europeans or people in other, slightly less odiferous parts of the world may be accustomed to.

    49. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pedestrianization / giving over road spaces to buses help here.

    50. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Public transport only sucks in gods own land (I wonder ho god made it from Palestina to there without public transport).
      And because it sucks they never will have one, or have a decent one.

      Self fulfilling prophecy.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    51. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The topic is about Paris.
      Owning a car in Paris is braindead, same as in London or any other majour european city.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    52. Re:London has done this for years by shilly · · Score: 1

      How this got marked insightful is beyond me. Explain again how increasing congestion reduces pollution levels? Did I blink and suddenly EV market penetration is approaching 100%?

    53. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Kindergarden is age of 3.
      In many countries at age of 5, kids go to school.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    54. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      since the advantages of car transport are so large -- people will pay a lot extra to drive.
      In a 1000 or 2000 year old city in Europe: there are no such advantages.
      Every public transport is cheaper and faster than a car. And you can not drive your kids to school while you drive to work same time. How would that be even imaginary possible? Oh, you never have been in Europe?

      The only way faster than public transport is a motorbike and breaking traffic laws.
      Similar fast is a bicycle ... but now we have winter in Europe ... -20C.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    55. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you talking about? You can pay with Apple Pay and avoid being tracked if your paranoia is that serious.

    56. Re:London has done this for years by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

      Not sure where everyone gets reduced pollution from public transit based on buses. Typically they have no, if any, environmental controls. Take up to 4 times longer to reach the destination. Stop and go constantly which is more polluting than just keeping a constant speed. They are typically filled to capacity only 3 to 4 hours a day with the remainder of the time mostly empty. Often sit idling for 15 minutes to 60 minutes while the driver is on a break.
      These should have been the first vehicles to be converted to electric.
      At the very least we could change our social behavior to reduce the 9 to 5 mindset.
      Just my .02$ based on all the literature and studies on the subject

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    57. Re:London has done this for years by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      When you're driving, you're RIGHT BEHIND the last car in line's exhaust pipe. Concentration probably goes as the inverse square or cube of distance.

    58. Re:London has done this for years by Sique · · Score: 1

      Ironically, car ownership is falling constantly in all major cities, even in those where the average income is high. Apparently, the example given tells them something different than you expect.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    59. Re:London has done this for years by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      Out of curiosity, what does London use for work/construction trains in the Tube? NYC uses diesel locomotives. Probably not as bad as a coal-burning steam engine, but if a work train with a locomotive or two passes through a station, the air gets pretty foul Fortunately, diesel engines don't produce much carbon monoxide, but it can't be healthy for the crews who work near the work trains for hours every day.

    60. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Take lanes away from cars. Congestion increases. Pollution drops.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    61. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      In a 1000 or 2000 year old city in Europe: there are no such advantages.

      The fact that in some cities the layout has already forced the issue does not change my point. People take public transport because congestion has made car journeys suck. Cost of public transport is practically irrelevant, no one picks it over driving because of cost. They do, however, pick cheap public transport over cycling.

      Oh, you never have been in Europe?

      I was born in Denmark. I have never lived outside Europe.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    62. Re:London has done this for years by phayes · · Score: 1

      Further note to future historians: Yes, we thought that Impy was an idiot too...

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    63. Re:London has done this for years by shilly · · Score: 1

      What? What? This makes zero sense. As congestion increases, so more and more cars are driving slowly or at a standstill, idling. Pollution increases in gridlock, it doesn't decrease. The loss of a lane doesn't change that materially, and in any event, that strategy only makes sense where there is a marginal lane to remove, which doesn't describe the vast majority of London (where most major roads already have dedicated bus lanes).

      Deliberately increasing congestion won't lower pollution. Banning cars works. Taxing them works, to a degree. Both policies are implemented in some parts of Europe.

    64. Re: London has done this for years by houghi · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you have not heard about the protests in France.people died orotesting e.g. fuel was too expemsuve.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    65. Re: London has done this for years by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      I dont think the French are rude. We just dont understand the rules. For instance, when you enter a shop you greet the shopkeeper. If you dont, they think you have been rude.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    66. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An adult with more than 1 toddler has to pay for the extras. Some families - even in cities! - have more than one child.

    67. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same in Warsaw and dozens other cities.

      If they made it for everyone - this would be news.
      But we have smaller cities or even countries with free
      Public transport already...

    68. Re:London has done this for years by Kjella · · Score: 1

      But these are cultural norms. In other countries and even areas of the United States, may either seem overly friendly and getting too close to a stranger, or to others may make you seem distant, and combative.

      And a lot of this is subconscious, I remember seeing a standing conversation between a Japanese and western (American? Don't remember) couple, in any case they'd constantly nudge a little closer and the other couple back away. Over like a 5-10 minute conversation you sped up you saw them more or less dance throughout the room. I also remember a guy I had a class with from India, he'd lightly touch the people he was talking to. It wasn't in a creepy way or anything, if it was my buddy in a pub I wouldn't think twice about it but it gave me all the vibes of *shoulder poke* "eyh, want another beer?" rather than going for a business lunch.

      But hey we're probably equally off in other settings, here in Norway you typically run late for a dinner invitation like if it starts at 6 PM dinner is usually served at 7 PM and people arrive 6:15 - 6:45. Well, a German teacher I had told the story of when she first invited Norwegians for dinner and it was on the table at 6 PM sharp and nobody had come and nobody had told her they were running late. She was quite mad until she was told this was completely normal and that the custom was quite different here. It's easier if you have a neon sign saying "tourist" over your head though, nobody really expect much from you.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    69. Re:London has done this for years by mysticalreaper · · Score: 1

      Think of congestion as a cost, like fuel. If fuel cost goes up, driving goes down. If congestion increases, driving goes down as people modify their behaviour to avoid the time-cost of congestion. They pick the closer store, they take the train (where possible), or they don't take the trip at all and stay at home.

      A car driving along at 60 km/h consumes more fuel per hour than a car at idle. Thus a congested street has less fuel consumed per hour, and people start choosing alternatives, all of which have lower fossil fuel consumption than a private motor vehicle.

    70. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a retarded story. Is there any public transit system that DOES charge for babies and children up to 11 years old??

    71. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      London is a great example. It is heavily congested, which keeps most people from driving into the center. Imagine the pollution you would get if you demolished houses to make most roads an extra lane wide.

      As to marginal lanes to remove, there is always a lane to remove. If a road is down to a single lane per direction, make it one lane and force cars to pass in certain areas. If that is not enough, make it a pedestrian street and force the traffic to other roads. You can always make congestion worse.

      Cars filling up a street idling emit less pollution per time than the same amount of cars driving at speed. Obviously they emit more pollution per distance travelled, but that is beside the point -- because there is no practical upper limit to the distance people are willing to drive in cities, if you give them room to do so.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    72. Re: London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      People in France don't like that fuel prices increase to tackle pollution. That does not say anything about whether fuel prices are an effective way to fight pollution (they are, but price increases have to be rather serious to work).

      As I said, the policies that work are painful. Voters do not like painful, and for very good reasons. By all means, give voters fluffy things like free public transport for children, if that is what they want. That's democracy. Just don't lie to them and pretend it will improve congestion or pollution.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    73. Re:London has done this for years by shilly · · Score: 1

      No no no. You are not thinking about this at all correctly. You are assuming that congestion forces a material number of cars off the road. Instead, what happens is you have the same number of cars, much more closely spaced, driving slowly and taking longer to get to their destination. Each car emits substantially more pollution. Take a look at the LAQN map during the weekday peak when traffic is at its slowest and you will see what I mean.

      London is heavily congested, and most people don't drive, and the streets are full of idling vehicles and the air is absolutely foul as a result. The strategy of congesting the roads, as opposed to preventing cars from using them at all, has worsened pollution. That's precisely why the Mayor is introducing the ULEZ -- because air quality is so poor, and the congestion charge has been unable to reduce traffic and pollution levels (car ownership has been essentially static at about 55% for a decade, while pollution has worsened in that period). In addition, congestion slows buses down (even accounting for bus lanes), and as buses slow down, so usage levels fall, and getting people out of cars and on to buses delivers a significant net reduction in pollution levels.

      Do you actually live in London or have you just been talking with authority about a place you don't know?

    74. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I was born in Denmark. I have never lived outside Europe.
      And you think, people don't pick public transport because it is super convenient?

      My car is parked next street ... did not use it in 7 or 8 months ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    75. Re:London has done this for years by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      My car is parked next street ... did not use it in 7 or 8 months ...

      That's... a terrible idea. Even if you don't want to drive, you can't just let a car sit there unused. You need to keep the battery charged, you need to make sure that oil and other fluids have a chance to circulate instead of drying out in the lines, you need to use up fuel so that condensation does not accumulate, you need to move it periodically so that it's not sitting on the exact same patch of tire. I have a spare car, and I typically take it (rather than my normal car) to work about once every other week for these very reasons. I also take it on a ride long enough to get the engine properly hot and help burn off any residue that may have accumulated within.

      Of course, I live in an American city with few sidewalks and no effective public transportation (we have buses, but you don't want to ride them), so owning a car is essential, and I have plenty of space, so storing an extra vehicle isn't really a problem, but in your case: if you haven't driven it in two months, you probably should just sell it. Cheaper to rent when you truly need one.

    76. Re:London has done this for years by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      That's price, not cost.

    77. Re:London has done this for years by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      he tapped-out his Oyster card at London’s Marylebone station, without having tapped-in

      Never had an Oyster card, so please fill me in: how do you get into the station without tapping in? Every variable-fare system I've used requires you to swipe/tap/whatever your card when you get on board. Was he just hoping that the conductor from wherever in Oxfordshire to the Underground transfer station simply would never come around and ask for his ticket?

    78. Re:London has done this for years by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      My car is 20 years old. It has no such battery issues as modern cars have, as it is not using any current when parked.
      The "fluid things" are only internet myths.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    79. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Instead, what happens is you have the same number of cars, much more closely spaced, driving slowly and taking longer to get to their destination.

      You won't have the same number of cars. You'll have more and more cars. London has a low rate of car journeys as a percentage of total journeys, and that would absolutely skyrocket if you gave the cars more room. The low rate of car journeys is there despite the rather sorry state of the London Underground these days. Making cycling viable would reduce the car journeys even more, assuming that you use the freed-up space for bike lanes and not for letting more cars in.

      In addition, congestion slows buses down (even accounting for bus lanes), and as buses slow down, so usage levels fall, and getting people out of cars and on to buses delivers a significant net reduction in pollution levels.

      Congestion only slows buses down when you let it. If it does, you make more bus lanes and dedicate some roads to public transport, further increasing congestion for cars.

      Do you actually live in London or have you just been talking with authority about a place you don't know?

      I do not live in London. Insulting me does not change facts.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    80. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      My car is parked next street ... did not use it in 7 or 8 months ...

      That is the other thing that works apart from increasing congestion. Making parking inconvenient. If you have to walk a significant distance to get to your car and you struggle to find a parking space at your destination, you are likely to use public transport or cycling.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    81. Re:London has done this for years by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      driving is a pain

      You have utterly failed to capture just how horrible driving in London is.

    82. Re:London has done this for years by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      You know if you don't tailgate the car in front of you

      You haven't driven in London. People don't tailgate there. They drive in slow crawling queues.

    83. Re:London has done this for years by shilly · · Score: 1

      Instead, what happens is you have the same number of cars, much more closely spaced, driving slowly and taking longer to get to their destination.

      You won't have the same number of cars. You'll have more and more cars.

      You mis-read me. I said if you increase congestion in London, you won't reduce the number of cars; the number of cars will remain broadly the same. As indeed has been the case for the last decade.

      London has a low rate of car journeys as a percentage of total journeys, and that would absolutely skyrocket if you gave the cars more room. The low rate of car journeys is there despite the rather sorry state of the London Underground these days. Making cycling viable would reduce the car journeys even more, assuming that you use the freed-up space for bike lanes and not for letting more cars in.

      You complain that I insulted you because I said you were talking with authority about London despite not knowing much about the city, but you keep on making egregious errors of fact. Here are three in just that paragraph:
      1. You can't "give cars more room" in London in any meaningful way because the built environment is too dense. You can't widen a material number of roads, for example. No-one is going to agree to buildings being knocked down in significant numbers. Instead, congestion levels are managed through road fees and traffic flow (eg traffic lights, traffic islands, pedestrian crossings, etc).
      2. London Underground is not in a sorry state. The only reason I can imagine you think that is you've read some articles online and that's given you a false sense of how it's functioning. But a few news stories don't give anywhere near a reasonable picture, and on all metrics that matter to passengers, LU has improved in recent years (finances are another issue). See https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/p... for example. Also, passenger numbers have been trending up for at least a decade. That wouldn't happen if the tube was in a sorry state. People would switch to buses (which carry twice as many passengers as the tube). They wouldn't get in cars in significant numbers though.
      3. Cycling is already viable in London. Boris bikes, cycle lanes, and now cycle superhighways have been introduced, with more to come. These typically involve taking some or all of a lane and dedicating it to bikes only. On those roads, the traffic in the remaining lanes increases and slows down, and pollution worsens. The bike lanes are still a good idea, but they're not going to shift people out of vehicles, because private cars are the only traffic where drivers could be encouraged to use a bike as an alternative mode, and private cars are only a small fraction of the vehicles on London's roads. A van, minicab, black cab, bus or lorry is not substitutable with a bike from the perspective of the driver. In fact, minicabs in particular have significantly increased in number (thanks Uber and AddLee) despite congestion.

      Congestion only slows buses down when you let it. If it does, you make more bus lanes and dedicate some roads to public transport, further increasing congestion for cars.

      Bus lanes don't prevent congestion from slowing buses down. I mean, honestly I take the bus down the Finchley Road with my kids every morning, and it goes down a bus lane and it goes really frigging slowly due to congestion. Because London has narrow roads and it takes just one lorry in the middle lane to make it impossible for a bus to pass by in the bus lane. Never mind vehicles turning onto and off the road. The pollution is awful because of the vast numbers of vehicles on the road -- the entire road is bumper to bumper for miles with slowly moving cars, so the exhaust fumes really build up. There is zero prospect of dedicating Finchley Road to public transport because it's a major arterial route for commerce.

    84. Re:London has done this for years by SD+NFN+STM · · Score: 1

      An Oyster card is an RFID card that you load credit on, or you can use any wireless Credit/Debit card at the barriers. In the case of London, there are so many stations on the network that some of them are unstaffed or don't have barriers in the first place. In this case there is a sensor pad to tap-in or out, but the onus is on the traveller to to so. These are much more frequent on the smaller stations served by the long distance trains which run into the main London stations.

      If you don't tap-in but then tap-out, the system assumes you've made the longest journey possible on the "Tube" network, but in this case he took a very long train journey that was much more expensive. He knew the system and simply tapped out, thereby paying much less than he should have.

    85. Re:London has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diesels are in use on some parts of the network but most of the tunnels are far too enclosed for ICEs to ever be considered except in emergencies; when power is going to be off there are combo mains/battery trains:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      If you're on a line that's undergoing overnight maintenance early in the morning or late at night, you can sometimes see an engineering train like this one go through the station:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    86. Re:London has done this for years by Dustie · · Score: 1

      Cost of public transport is practically irrelevant, no one picks it over driving because of cost.

      Only if driving a car is cheap enough. Raise the price and at some point people stop driving their car. Clearly even the Danish prices are too low to force it though.

    87. Re:London has done this for years by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Absolutely, raising the price of driving works. Lowering the cost of public transport doesn't. Naive economics would make people assume those things give equivalent results, but they don't.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  2. It's gradual process by ColdCat · · Score: 1

    Few years ago School kids pass work only between residential zone to school usually same zone.
    Then School Pass start working unrestricted on weekend ( all zone from 1-7 ) ( for many it was huge because going to Paris from suburbs cost much, same to go to Disneyland which is was zone 5 )
    Then all zone over 5 became zone 5
    Then Zone all merged to only one ( prices increased for user of only zone 1-2 but decreased for everyone else )
    Then this free pass for every kids, even without school pass.

    1. Re:It's gradual process by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 Informative, Thanks! :)

      I invite you to view my documentary videos on public transit and other topics here to learn more:

      https://www.youtube.com/cdreim...

  3. 17 millions a year ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If this is that cheap why don't they extend it to the whole population ?
    7 * 17 = 120 millions / year.
    10 millions a month. I guess this will be more than compensated by charging 1€/day for each car running through Paris.
    If this reduces the traffic jams then I guess the car owners will 'happily' pay for it.
     

    1. Re:17 millions a year ? by Confused · · Score: 2

      They might get to the point some day.

      In general, children pay a reduced tariff so it affects the bottom line less. Even more so, when there are already subsidised, so the difference between subsidising all children isn't that big. It also reduces the hassles with distributing reduced price cards.

      Another annoying thing are children under 15 riding alone and getting caught free-riding. You can easily fine adults, but with children things are more complicated. This problem is also gone when they don't need to pay.

    2. Re: 17 millions a year ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Parents already have to deal with children so they donâ(TM)t mind waiting in some line curving all the way out the door of the station handing out Cheerios and wiping noses. Its nice to get the discount to offset some of the work but you k ow they would do it all again tomorrow just to give their precious brats a small amount of fun watching the countryside from the train window - all good parents agree

    3. Re:17 millions a year ? by ThosLives · · Score: 1

      The marginal cost of an extra passenger on public transport is roughly 0. The cost of public transportation scales with the initial capital cost, total miles driven, and total number of starts/stops. Once you have an established route, the costs are almost constant. Perhaps cabin cleaning scales as number of riders, I dunno. Weight - well generally a fully-loaded bus has only 1/3 of the weight being passengers, so maybe there is a factor there on fuel, but it's small (that is, at most 33% of the fuel cost is passenger-based; probably far less).

      If I was setting up public transport, I really would just make it fully paid by taxes and never charge a ticket fee. Heck there's probably even slight environmental benefit by eliminating ticket-check delays while stopped: both in reducing idle time of the bus (say) itself, and because of reduced ancillary traffic hold-up by having shorter stop times. Less plastic waste by eliminating the need to print cards / tickets. Avoiding payment processing overhead.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    4. Re:17 millions a year ? by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Also: they do this instead of school buses, which the vast majority of American school districts have. So you don't have to equip a fleet of specially-designated buses to get children from home to school; you just give them a transit pass, and they can work it out themselves. This would never work in America; the hoops I have to jump through to pick my niece up from school - despite the fact that she comes over and gives me a hug when I show up - include being on the "allowed pickups" list (which her mom can't OK over the phone; she has to email it), and showing photo ID. There's no way in hell they would just let her leave of her own accord, although she lives no more than two miles from the school, and there are dedicated bike trails (not lanes on the road - actual dedicated trails) for 90% of that trip. No, she has to be picked up by a responsible adult on the approved list.

      Screw that nonsense. When I was her age (third grade), I was riding my bike to school if the weather was clear, getting a ride from my mom if it was nasty. If I was late, she would take me, but with the expectation that I would walk home unless it was raining. And the only reason it took until third grade is that the two other kids I rode with were a year younger than me, and their parents wanted to wait until they were in second grade to start biking unsupervised to school, and my parents didn't want me totally alone.

  4. All Public Transport should be free for ALL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Environmental benefits aside, people using Public Transport are almost all going to earn money in ( and for ) the city, or to spend money in the city.
    It is in a city's interest to promote that.
    ALL public transport should be free, and it is shortsighted of cities not to make it so.

  5. gradual process to move the burden.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As nothing is never really free, as it wont change cost of transportation, it will just be one more burden on the part of the population that are taxpayers.

    In France, a low wage employee is really likely to have less cash to live with than unemployeed.

    Then you are surprised workers protest every saturday...

  6. Why is this news for nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Just wondering...

    1. Re:Why is this news for nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why Cdreimer left /. after 20 years and posted 100+ videos in 2018. His trolls are still butthurt that he left them alone with APK.

      The thing to do for him: post more videos :)

    2. Re:Why is this news for nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't news. It's msmash pushing her socialist agenda again.

  7. The same in Warsaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since September last year.

  8. 12- and 13-year-olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    11 and under get to ride for free. 14 to 18 get a 50% discount.

    So 12- and 13-year-olds get screwed, seemingly having to pay full fare.

    1. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That is their punishment for hitting puberty. It is a rite of passage. Much like a Bar Mitzvah or Confirmation.

    2. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a bummer! I am thirteen and I plan to visit Paris next summer.

      I live on Fruitdale in San Jose, Santa Clara County, California, USA and I am a very famous youtube vlogger! :)

      I love to take public transit, imagine if it was free! All the pennies that I could save...

      This is my wildest dream and it is going to become my first cause and topic for all my new videos!

    3. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by stealth_finger · · Score: 0

      What a bummer! I am thirteen and I plan to visit Paris next summer.

      Well, I'll save you the bother. Don't. It's shit and a waste of time.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    4. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bus Mitzvah?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by gibbsjoh · · Score: 1

      It's a cultural capital and the sights are well worth it. "shit and a waste of time" is a little harsh.

      --
      -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    6. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by gibbsjoh · · Score: 0

      Oh you're from the UK. Much of the UK is a shit waste of time... well, at least 52% of it...

      --
      -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    7. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      No argument there.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    8. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by gibbsjoh · · Score: 1

      LOL fwiw I'm there too.

      --
      -- "...I'm a bad guy because I, well, I sing some rock-and-roll songs." M. Manson
    9. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Then you'll understand why I have an inherent distaste for anything French lol

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    10. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      So you don't eat french fries at your local Mac Doof?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Not really but we just call them fries anyway and only to distinguish them from chips.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    12. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is funny that some "fries" are called "chips", when chips actually used to look like chips. Or in other words: you cut a potato in thins slices, more or less round and fry them like french fries, we call that chips in Germany (and elsewhere), but it is not very common.

      So, you hate french red wine and women, too? Eeek, I hope not :P

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    13. Re:12- and 13-year-olds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally agree on that one. Spent a summer in Paris. It's worse now. However it's not like the UK is any better. It's a socialist shit show too. All of Europe really. 20% tax on near everything. Inefficient poverty run amock and it's not actually got anything to do with the immigrant either. That's just a poor excuse for socialist caused economic failures. If you are a hard working person you get screwed. They should eliminate child labor laws and let the kids work. Then there would be no need to cover them. It's not like a little hard work will kill ya [usually].

  9. Washington D.C. has done this for years by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Informative

    If you are in school and a D.C. resident (21 and under) you get a free Metro pass. I'm glad to see European cities finally catching up.

    1. Re:Washington D.C. has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I can't see the "news".. in other Europeans cities it's the same since decades. In Rome for example it's been always like that: 10 year old and younger travels free on public transports with an adult.

    2. Re:Washington D.C. has done this for years by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      It's generally not Europe that needs to catch up with these things.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Washington D.C. has done this for years by fred6666 · · Score: 1

      but my understanding was that most people in DC doesn't reside in DC

      Paris makes it free even for foreigners

    4. Re:Washington D.C. has done this for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could just evade the fare. DC doesn't seem to care.

  10. NYC in the 1970s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As a kid growing up in NYC, I was issued a bus pass by the school. Glad France is catching up with 1970s America in taking care of its most valuable asset.

    1. Re: NYC in the 1970s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kids are not an asset nor are they valuable. Kids can be made by unskilled personnel. They're not even a good source of protein.

  11. Very similar to Barcelona by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kids from 4 under 16 have a free card that allows them to use all public transportation for free, without limitations. The T-16 card has been available for at least 6 years.

    https://www.tmb.cat/en/barcelona-fares-metro-bus/single-and-integrated/t-16

    Kids under 4 travel free with a paying adult.

  12. Same for Vienna since the 70ies by Confused · · Score: 3, Informative

    Same for Vienna. There pre-school children are always free and all school-children (up to 15, also later if you still go to school) get al free transportation card.

    This isn't new and a really, really good thing. Good for Paris to catch up.

    1. Re: Same for Vienna since the 70ies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soon you can take your bike on the train all the way from one end of Europe to the other

  13. News for nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when is free public transport for kids news for nerds?
    Moreover, we're nerds... none of us ever touched a women, so we have no kids.
    So we really really don't care.

  14. What if I have more than 20 disabilities? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is proper grammar really that difficult slashdot?

  15. I identify as a child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I may be 40+ years old chronologically, but I'm young at heart. I'm fun and dynamic. I like long walks at the beach and playing with my dog. I can be silly at times and always cracking jokes. I'm loving and tender and enjoy chocolate. I don't understand why I can ride the bus for free. I'm a child. You're a mean bully who won't let me ride the bus.

    1. Re: I identify as a child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me your lunch money, pedo loser.

    2. Re:I identify as a child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I may be 40+ years old chronologically, but I'm young at heart. I'm fun and dynamic. I like long walks at the beach and playing with my dog. I can be silly at times and always cracking jokes. I'm loving and tender and enjoy chocolate.

      Dood! This isn't Tinder.

  16. Another example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of singles subsidising families. In the end someone has to bear the cost for this.

    1. Re:Another example by nucrash · · Score: 2

      AC, go pop out a couple of sex trophies so you can take advantage if you think it's such a savings.

      --
      Place something witty here
    2. Re: Another example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having children is costly. Not sure why I should have others subsidise my life choices though.

    3. Re: Another example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides the personal attack as well as mistatement of my stance, do you have any argument to bring to the table?

    4. Re: Another example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have something in common with you - they didn't ask to be brought into this world.

  17. business model: fake crutches/casts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...

  18. Disabilities by Reaper9889 · · Score: 2

    Honestly, the main problem for people with disabilities in Paris (of the physical kind anyway) is that many of the metro stations have no elevators. Hence, while it may be cheap or free for them, they will have to move further than others to get into and out of the metros (i.e. they have to go to the right metro stations - I have no idea how tricky it must be for some one with a disability that visits Paris to find out which stations they can get in and out of)... It is also annoying when you have to go up those 2-3 floors of stairs with a big suitcase.

    I think they really should fix that, but I guess this is at least them starting to think of such things.

    1. Re:Disabilities by Squirmy+McPhee · · Score: 1

      Honestly, the main problem for people with disabilities in Paris (of the physical kind anyway) is that many of the metro stations have no elevators. Hence, while it may be cheap or free for them, they will have to move further than others to get into and out of the metros (i.e. they have to go to the right metro stations - I have no idea how tricky it must be for some one with a disability that visits Paris to find out which stations they can get in and out of)...

      Not only that, it's not unusual for an elevator or escalator to be out of order in Parisian metro stations (or shopping malls, or pretty much anywhere else you might find an elevator or escalator). I am intimately familiar with the Paris public transit system for the able-bodied, but have also had to navigate it with somebody who is wheelchair-bound. We made a conscious decision to avoid the metro and use buses exclusively. They work pretty damn well for the physically disabled, and all of the discounts mentioned here will apply. There can be serious delays at rush hour, but really the biggest delays came when she and her family decided to use Uber -- the buses (and licensed taxis, for that matter) can use express lanes that, while still congested, are faster than anything but a train during peak traffic.

      There is quite a big modernization of the Paris metro underway. It is focused largely on expanding the network, but also on updating existing lines. I'm really hoping they will improve accessibility of existing stations (and maintenance of elevators and escalators) in the process.

  19. No they wonâ(TM)t by dnaumov · · Score: 1

    They will make it taxpayer-funded.

    1. Re: No they wonâ(TM)t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooooh taxpayer funded cast iron statues of fake news icons

    2. Re:No they wonâ(TM)t by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No. The money comes from tin air.
      Or perhaps they print it.
      Or they simply figure, on a train with 100 paying customers, 100 free riding kids don't change anything regarding costs or profit.
      Or perhaps you live in the US and have no clue about anything.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  20. Why does this matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Turnstile jumping is already epidemic in Paris, not just among youth.

    I was in a Paris metro station once with 4 cops standing just inside the turnstile - they ignored a guy (looked maybe 20) climbing over the turnstile right in front of them.

    1. Re: Why does this matter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess if your jumping turnstyles you hope like hell you get the wrong cop

  21. Toronto's done this for five years by mykepredko · · Score: 1

    There was a lot of people complaining about it but when things were all said and done it's a great program that's helpful for kids and their families.

  22. Likely a move to get more funding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More riders can and probably does mean more leverage to receive more funding. A great part of the funding is probably based on ridership.

  23. Good for them but... by Voice+of+satan · · Score: 1

    In theory, i am pro public transportation. This is probably a good measure.

    But, a common transportation cannot be better than the people riding in it. And you would have to pay me well to make me use the public transport in Paris again. Or go to Paris tout court. I do not blame the RATP. It is just there are too many smelly, rude and uneducated people in them. When i was living in Brussels, i avoided public transport because of that. A girlfriend of mine bought a car because being groped there made her allergic to common transportation. Even if driving there is uncomfortable she wouldn't have any of it. Not with "those people".

    It can be a turn off. If you want to make public transit appealing, you have to educate the public. People matter. You can build very good systems but if you do not have the right people in them it will not work.

    I second those who said two wheels rock. I never biked in Paris but biking can be very efficient and a pleasant workout. But it is difficult without the right infrastructure and mindset. People are often deterred by the traffic and bike theft. Society as a whole would gain a lot by taking bicycles more seriously.

  24. Weird by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

    France isn't shrinking, so it's unclear why they are discriminating in favor of families with children. Children take up just as much space on public transportation as adults unless they are infants, in which case they either use basically none, or actually more space (carrier/stroller, plus bag of supplies.) Either way, they're making people without children subsidize those with, which is an unusual move unless you are worried about population growth rate.

    Is there some reason the French should be worried about NPG?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. What's going on here is France, like many other countries, has signed up to the climate prognosticator's view that they need to reduce their CO2 output to zero. So what they and every other Western country has done is export their CO2 to other countries by making it too expensive for industry to survive inside their borders. Now they don't want you to use your car either, so are starting to tilt tax incentives/disincentives in that direction too.

      This makes first class idiots like Macron feel good but does absolutely fuck all to change the climate. Unfortunately for Macron the French like many other people in the West are started to get wise to this policy by middle-class virtue signal, designed to benefit the richest at the expense of the poor (think about it, who pays the carbon tax - big business? No. It's consumers - you and I - and is the Green movement a movement of the working class or the middle class? I think you know the answer). The Gilets Jaunes are in revolt against carbon taxes, amongst other things.

      Hopefully these idiots will be swept out of power soon.

    2. Re:Weird by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Reducing CO2 output to zero is a fine goal, but if they want to increase public transportation ridership, then they should focus on those who are most capable of using it — single people. People with children gain much more from having their own vehicle than people without.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Weird by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      The French actually did better than that. They're not cowards, so they continued to build nuclear power plants through the present -- 75% of their electrical power is electrical, and most of their railroads (for freight as well) are electrified. They're far ahead of other countries in squashing CO2 production.

    4. Re:Weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a proxy for dealing with disposable income inequality while increasing mobility, both physical and economic. Children typically have no income of their own, and are therefore dependent upon their parents. But those parents typically have less disposable income, and the more children they have, the more this is true.

      If you want to think about it in terms of subsidies, remember that it is a tiny reversal of the all-encompassing subsidy that parents provide to non-parents (essentially, the provision of society's raison d'etre and all economic activity within). Another is to see it as working toward removal of an externality that non-parents exploit by being childless.

    5. Re:Weird by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Another is to see it as working toward removal of an externality that non-parents exploit by being childless.

      Since we're using more natural capital than is being replenished year on year, it's the people making more people than their mere replacements who owe those of us choosing not to replicate. It scarcely matters that we could be more efficient, since we are not; we are way over Earth's carrying capacity as we are behaving, and as we tend to behave.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  25. Public services should be free in any case by Shaitan · · Score: 1

    Well obviously they aren't free but all public services should be tax funded with the only exceptions being to close abuse loopholes such as caps on number of rides per day or replacements of documents.

    Charging fees for these things is just a way of disproportionately taxing certain groups and income classes. Taxes aren't charged specifically to the group who uses a given service, that is on purpose, we all use different public services and the costs are pooled.

    If you can't afford the program with tax dollars either raise taxes or cut somewhere else. It's called a budget.

  26. If you're shopping in Leicester, UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And need mobility assistance (wheelchair/scooter) they offer a council run (donations welcomed!) free-to-use shopmobility membership scheme at both Highcross shopping centre and Haymarket bus station for the city centre...

    (I know of many people who come to Leicester for shopping just because of this, instead of Nottingham etc.)

    (Disclosure: I volunteer there on occasion)

  27. Toronto transit, and why free child fares by jddimarco · · Score: 1

    Toronto's transit system (www.ttc.ca) has allowed children twelve years and younger ride for free for a couple of years now. What this does is encourage families with children to take public transit rather than drive.There are already a number of good reasons for families traveling with children to prefer cars to public transit (e.g. no need to wait for vehicle arrival, easy transportation of items, etc.). Free child fares at least remove "cost savings" from being one of those reasons.

  28. It's never free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can be provided at taxpayer expense, but it's not free. Someone has to pay for it and the pool of money is finite.

  29. Should be done everywhere replacing school buses. by pavon · · Score: 1

    I understand the need/desire for separate school buses for special need students and young children, but I have long felt that in urban areas school buses for middle and high school should be eliminated and replaced with general purpose public transit buses, whose routes are boosted to accommodate school start/end times.

    It should decrease costs of running both services in parallel, and increase usage of public transit during those peak hours helping to solve the chicken/egg problem of nobody wanting to use public transit if the routes are too infrequent or far away on one hand, and not wanting to fund improvements in public transit if people aren't using them. It would also make transit easier for zero-hour and after-school extra-circular activities, which frequently don't get any bus service, making it harder for low-income families to participate.

    I also think it would be beneficial to give teens the extra freedom and responsibility that comes with using public transit vs a school bus. Yes, some will abuse it, but you can't expect young adults to take responsibility for themselves if you never give them responsibility.

  30. âoeFreeâ, someone is paying... by RyanRife8866 · · Score: 1

    Someone is paying for it and itâ(TM)s probably the parents.

  31. Finally, getting youth drivers off the road! by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    Finally there's a city that's taking action in getting those dangerous youth drivers off of the road with their difficulty to see over the steering wheel and hard time to reach the pedals.

  32. Better Idea: Remove the Obstacles to Child Labor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's unreasonable to make young people pay for transportation when governments have put obstacles in the way of employment. It's also unfair to those who do work to have to pay for those who don't work. It's one thing to cover people who genuinely can't work. There is something called charity and I'd encourage people to be charitable upon the dissolution of the corruption that is government. Children should not be treated as property and owned by parents, schools, government, or other "care"givers. It's one thing when a person depends on another through choices one can make (to work or not to work), to surrounded control of some aspect of ones life for parental welfare, but another when you take away the freedom of someone to work (ie all children below a certain age). At that point where a child has no choice in the matter it becomes child slavery and I for one do not support child slavery. It's time to end government government restriction on child labor.

  33. I can grok it, son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You talkin bout trump's wall?

  34. You've lost it again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I argue that you should move your self-entitled libertarian ass to Somalia where you can do what you want, when you want, and how you want (provided you have more and bigger guns, money, and balls than the local warlords).

    You are trolling. You already know all the arguments. You've lost every single one. The winning argument is : "It's the cost of living in society".

    Now get on outta here, you have a plane to catch.

  35. Black Kids by QuadEddie · · Score: 1

    Major US cities are doing this for kids as well in subways. Why? Because 95% of the fare beaters in places like Washington DC are black. It's part of 'criminal justice reform' which is code for: we have too many black people in prisons, so we need to change the laws that black people keep breaking. https://www.washingtonpost.com... Hilarious under any other circumstance, but this is no joke. Despite making subways now a conduit for more black crime (it follows that if you're bold enough to beat the fare, that's the tip of the iceberg) and increasing the load directly and indirectly on taxpayers, the politicians in those cities now can pat themselves on the back on a job well done to help the blacks.