david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Gosh - it's been what, a month, since you last > mentioned the good old money tree? > > Firstly, I'd suggest that the nudge theory that is > used on cycle scheme tax breaks can be equally as > valid on public transport. If it got people out of > cars then the wider benefits are clear. Also, > cycle scheme tax breaks are universal and not > means tested so I don't see why this would be > different. I've already shown that it could just > as likely pay for a miniumu-wage cleaner's bus > fare as it does a stockbroker's Surrey commute. > Universality also has the benefit of investing > everyone using the service with a stake in > ensuring it runs well. > > Secondly, on the issue of funding, it is no > different to any other spending decision. Is this > important or worthy enough to divert funding from > elsewhere. I'd say yes. I'd also happily see an > increase in road tax, petrol or other "eco-tax" to > fund it. > > Thirdly, I'm suggesting it as a political vote > winner by helping those suffering from excessive > fare rises yet again. See today's BBC report. > > I will ask again though. If not this, then what? > No one else has suggested any method for helping > tackle the cost of rail fare increases. Reasonable assumption for commuter from Guilford mainly in highervtax break: Season ticket from guilford annually = 3224 plus 1216 zone 1 = 4440' tax relief at 40 PC = 2604 tax relief Cleaner in central London, probably zone 1-3 no way anything than a basic rate tax payer. Annual 1-3 oyster cost= 1424, tax relief at 20pc = 284 Regressive, subsidising the middle classes and completely unaffordable....the money tree hasn't,t been mentioned for ages but until you demonstrate some understanding that money simply doesn't just grow on trees then it,s going to raise its head from time to time