Equity is a belief that I hold firmly as a desired value of human civilisation. The economic rationalism of the early 1990’s has seen an incredible explosion of ‘User Pay’ systems in the theory that a free market society finds a balance towards equity. At first I saw virtue in this new ideology, especially as a user. But, when that same philosophy was introduced within the outcomes of my daily sweat and toil, it has made me think otherwise.
The organisation that I was employed with was very much embedded with the ‘can I help you’ attitude of past generations, done without cost to the inquirer, except the time taken to hear us answer their requests. I see the ‘good will’ of helping someone an incredible human, or could this be a truly civil, response based on social values.
The feeling I got from understanding the gratitude people expressed when help was provided stays with you, all day and night, it becomes apart of who you are. Now when a request is made unless they are financially linked to our ‘brains trust’ the plea for help is answered with ‘I’m sorry but since you are not a financial member, this information will cost (this much)’.
The ‘User Pay’ structure has now entered not only our work environment but also our own frame of reference to social encounters. Unless you can contribute to the reality that is created you do not receive the assistance in understanding it.
I find it hard then that my abhorrence of the ‘User Pay’ phenomena has lead me to prescribe to it as a main armory to fight for sustainable use of motor vehicles in the city. If the supporting road structure for the vehicle was based upon a user pay system, I’m sure that lack of social cohesion of this approach will not bother the greatest non-military destroyer of civilised social structure.
I’m sure there will be many arguing that the car has brought us great flexibility and mobility, yes a wonderful achievement – but at what costs? There is not one contemporary critic of urban development who openly supports the continued dominance of the car over the citizens as a good policy to a healthy society. In fact, they all say it is the main cause of most of our existing and future urban problems.
The loudest supporters of continual dominance are from people who have vested interests in maintaining the cultural reliance of the car and its associated supporting structures. These may be outer suburban property developers, traffic engineers, car manufacturers, fossil fuel industries, drive-thru food industries, and even the car drivers themselves to name a few.
While trying to appease what could become a general revolt among the powerful car culture society, how could a user pay system be implemented?
A simple approach would be to remove the ‘one price’ state registration system and replace it with a rate based upon yearly kilometre use. And how do we start by working out a rate per kilometre. The Brisbane City Council already rate the roads on an hourly schedule. For instance, in the City CBD it cost $4 per hour to park in a space no bigger than three metres by two (1 lane) metres. Most roads are four lanes wide, therefore it would cost roughly $5320 per hour for every kilometre. The rate for registration would be a simple formula of dividing cars numbers by hourly rate, this is not a huge problem as most roads now have traffic counts or at least could be added.
While the car culture society are nailing my hands to a cross the ‘socialists’ are helping to secure my legs. However, there is hope yet, where the typical response ‘only the people who have money will benefit’ may not come true. For sure is the fact that if this user pay system were enforced many would seek alternative transport options. While there would be more political incentive to provide adequate outcomes and perhaps increases in public or private money to these projects and decreases in road spending.
I’m sure the people who surely believe in an open free market society do not believe in the socialist system that governs their car culture – shouldn’t it really be based upon a user pay. What makes the car culture so special that it is above its own philosophy that created it. If equity becomes our mantra then the need for approximately 30% of the city to be under asphalt may diminish and the car and its supporting structure – tamed, while society may then re-value what is truly important.
The feeling I got from understanding the gratitude people expressed when help was provided stays with you, all day and night, it becomes apart of who you are. Now when a request is made unless they are financially linked to our ‘brains trust’ the plea for help is answered with ‘I’m sorry but since you are not a financial member, this information will cost (this much)’.
The ‘User Pay’ structure has now entered not only our work environment but also our own frame of reference to social encounters. Unless you can contribute to the reality that is created you do not receive the assistance in understanding it.
I find it hard then that my abhorrence of the ‘User Pay’ phenomena has lead me to prescribe to it as a main armory to fight for sustainable use of motor vehicles in the city. If the supporting road structure for the vehicle was based upon a user pay system, I’m sure that lack of social cohesion of this approach will not bother the greatest non-military destroyer of civilised social structure.
I’m sure there will be many arguing that the car has brought us great flexibility and mobility, yes a wonderful achievement – but at what costs? There is not one contemporary critic of urban development who openly supports the continued dominance of the car over the citizens as a good policy to a healthy society. In fact, they all say it is the main cause of most of our existing and future urban problems.
The loudest supporters of continual dominance are from people who have vested interests in maintaining the cultural reliance of the car and its associated supporting structures. These may be outer suburban property developers, traffic engineers, car manufacturers, fossil fuel industries, drive-thru food industries, and even the car drivers themselves to name a few.
While trying to appease what could become a general revolt among the powerful car culture society, how could a user pay system be implemented?
A simple approach would be to remove the ‘one price’ state registration system and replace it with a rate based upon yearly kilometre use. And how do we start by working out a rate per kilometre. The Brisbane City Council already rate the roads on an hourly schedule. For instance, in the City CBD it cost $4 per hour to park in a space no bigger than three metres by two (1 lane) metres. Most roads are four lanes wide, therefore it would cost roughly $5320 per hour for every kilometre. The rate for registration would be a simple formula of dividing cars numbers by hourly rate, this is not a huge problem as most roads now have traffic counts or at least could be added.
While the car culture society are nailing my hands to a cross the ‘socialists’ are helping to secure my legs. However, there is hope yet, where the typical response ‘only the people who have money will benefit’ may not come true. For sure is the fact that if this user pay system were enforced many would seek alternative transport options. While there would be more political incentive to provide adequate outcomes and perhaps increases in public or private money to these projects and decreases in road spending.
I’m sure the people who surely believe in an open free market society do not believe in the socialist system that governs their car culture – shouldn’t it really be based upon a user pay. What makes the car culture so special that it is above its own philosophy that created it. If equity becomes our mantra then the need for approximately 30% of the city to be under asphalt may diminish and the car and its supporting structure – tamed, while society may then re-value what is truly important.
No comments:
Post a Comment