Re: Cars make more economic sense than transit: fact

["Michael Walker" <walker@hotkey.net.au>]

In fairness, despite the flames, I think Roger has a point. His example of
Cairns in that bus travel is twice as long timewise and more expensive is an
example of where public transport is a mug's game from the end users point
of view. And he doesn't say public transport is irrelevant, at the end he
gives three scenarios where PT is more use than using a car. (Well, two if
you don't count the greenie troll...).

My questions would be:
1. Is PT sustainable in Cairns if the 'express' buses need to stop at every
hamlet?
2. Why do people use the services if they are as crap as Roger says (or
rephrased, why don't Sunbus Cairns go out of business if there services are
so bad? or Why is there no financial incentive for Sunbus Cairns to run
better services that cater for people's preferred travel patterns?)
3. Is this a problem all rural cities face? Or is Cairns just a bad example?

I think even Roger and those who are far more car-centric and anti-PT would
have to face reality and admit without PT in the major cities, the roads
would be a nightmare and the situation unsustainable if everyone had to
drive (and make extra journeys to take kids to school, grandma to shopping,
etc).
However even the strongest PT-advocates must admit that there are places
where a car makes more sense than PT eg small towns except for those who
have no other way and then maybe a subsidised taxi scheme is cheaper and
more convenient for everybody from the few users who get quick transport and
the government who doesn't have to fund expensive alternatives eg town bus
service that carries hardly anyone as those who have cars use them because
the service is too slow and windy and infrequent.