On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:29:53 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
Like I said, not that much smaller unless you're going to suggest that extra
50 miles makes all the difference.

That's 25% difference.

No, its 20%. 50/250, yes? Hope you don't require maths in your job. And which
bit of "not that much smaller" are your clearly having trouble with?
FWIW the NYCS is almost the same route miles as london but has almost twice
the number of stations.

But if you want to split hairs - the
new york subway also has flat fares.

So?

So if it works in cities the size of moscow and new york it would work here
and special pleading about london being some unusual case due to its size is
specious at best.

Not as much as it should and its slowly being reduced as a percentage.


Are you willing to pay the extra taxes necessary to pay for an increased
subsidy?

Yes. Mainly because it would cost me less in the long run. I subsidise
buses and trains oop narf via my taxes which I'm never going to use, no reason
they can't subsidise the tube a bit more.

B2003