PalQ

London Mayor 'Red' Ken Livingstone (Red for his once militant left-wing tendacies, the reason he was vigorously opposed in election for mayor by Clintonesque Tony Blair!)has instituted a 'congestion charge' of 5 pounds, or nearly $10 a day for vehicles wishing to enter central London, raised tube prices for solo rides and Travelcards; both the first meaasures meant to provide revenues to upgrade transportation in London, especially the long deteriorating tube; and he has actually lowered bus fares, such as the bargain-basement 2 pound/day bus pass good for travel throughout the greater London area. According to an article i read in London newspaper last September this has created a class system in London regarding type of transport - the wealthy can afford to drive in, the middle class can afford to tube fares and the lower class is relegated to the buses. So after reading this I began to look at the bus crowd and after several rides it was apparent that bus riders hardely looked British at all, but a multi-national brigade of immigrants, definitely blue collar who were left to use buses that were often overcrowded in my experience. Not only were the buses mobbed but they tended to be dirty, with all kinds of detritus on the floor - tin cans, old newspapers, etc. with graffiti marred and at times torn seats. So it seems to be true that 'Red' Ken indeed has ended up far from the egalitarian leftist he once was. Is the London transit class system symbolic of a strong class system in the UK that has for long been the case?

sheila

Geez Louise, what a lot of nonsense. Speaking as a died in the wool political opponent of Livingstone (and I think the real reason he didn't ahve Blair's backing is because he was too big a threat to him), you are in cloud cuckoo land if that's what you think it's all about.

see http://www.cclondon.com/whatis.shtml

Patrick

And some people say this site is no longer funny!! This is hysterical.

m_kingdom2

My dear, the congestion charge has been in place for several years now, you've lots more running to do to catch up with that bandwagon.

PalQ

So poor folk have to endure tediously slow-moving packed dirty buses to get to work because the swifter tube has been priced off limits to them - isn't this an ironic effect of Red Ken's policies in light of his once radical background? Red Ken a threat to Red, white and blue Blair - i don't think so - Ken would be the opposition's handpicked candidate if they had they choice - anyone from Old Labour would be doomed - unfortunately in my opinion.

mvor

Crikey, where is ThinG when you need him most.

m_kingdom2

My dear, I live in London, judging from the state of people I see emerging from Green Park station, it looks as if all but the homeless can use the tubes. Don't worry your head over it.

billy_goat

The Oyster card allows you to travel on both bus and tube, so for Londoners the price is the same. You pays for your season ticket and you takes your choice.
What do you mean by "the wealthy" as opposed to the "middle class". Some members of the middle class are wealthy and some are fairly hard up. Some members of the working class e.g. plumbers can be pretty comfortably off.

Patrick

How unlike New York, London must be. I rode the subway (spotlessly clean so early in the morning) during rush hour going down to the Wall Street area. The subway was filled with very well dressed and obviously wealthy businessmen and ladies. Later I tried to grab a taxi from near the Port Authority. I saw many "immigrants" and "blue collar workers already in many of the cabs. What's more when people opened the doors I could often see trash in the floors of the taxis.

So the opposite must be true in New York. The clean subway is reserved for the wealthy. Those trash filled taxis are only for the poor and working class.

Observations are so factual aren't they?

PatrickLondon

I think PalQ has this upside down and arsey-versey, as my dear old pater would have said. The pricing pattern reflects pre-existing social trends, rather than the other way around.

The buses had been relegated to those people who either didn't have the money or the time pressures for the tube (or a car). Livingstone (for whom I have never voted) concentrated his transport investment on the buses before the congestion charge, mainly for those social reasons (but also because of long political wrangling with national government over the funding for upgrading the tube). The result was a marked improvement in buses, which really hit home when the congestion charge cut car traffic by more than was expected. The result was that the buses have attracted far more middle-class commuters back, because they are more plentiful, comfortable and reliable. But the congestion charge was so successful it didn't raise as much as expected. So more money has to be raised from somewhere else. Don't forget that the financing of tube improvements has nothing to do with Livingstone - that was set by the government and their damnfool insistence on over-complicated private financing packages, over which London government has very little room to manoeuvre.

Call it class war if you must, but frankly, for anyone with the use of their legs to keep a car in London is as much of a self-delusion as it is a self-indulgence. The idea that bus users should have extra price hikes to reduce costs to car-owners would be something even Margaret Thatcher might have been forced to reconsider.