John Rowland wrote:
Why? The tube is full in rush hour. Making it fuller *and* cutting revenue
coming into the system seems like a double bad idea.

Well I suppose if you put it like that, then "freezing" the prices could
be seen as a good thing, but this may also discourage people from
offPeak travel, or even worse, get them driving.
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For railway information, news and photos see http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk
"You love railways online"

In article ,
(John Rowland) wrote:

"Joe" wrote in message
...

- 3-year price freeze on Tube fares

Agree

Why? The tube is full in rush hour. Making it fuller *and* cutting
revenue coming into the system seems like a double bad idea.

The roads are full in the rush hour yet motorists expect governments to
freeze petrol prices. They can't have it both ways.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , Huge
writes

The Tube is subsidised. By the vast tax take from motorists.

It's hardly "both ways".
Whilst this might be true, just imagine what it would be like trying to
get around in London without the tube, I think the motorists would soon
scream for it's return.
--
Clive.

Clive Coleman wrote:
In message , Huge
writes


The Tube is subsidised. By the vast tax take from motorists.

It's hardly "both ways".

Whilst this might be true, just imagine what it would be like trying to
get around in London without the tube, I think the motorists would soon
scream for it's return.

Why imagine when you can experience the real thing on a strike day...

Anyway, I was under the impression that the Tube was not particularly
heavily subsidised compared to other metro systems.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London