This coming from someone employed in our newer universities as a travel policy analyst:
Nicole Badstuber is a transport policy and travel behaviour researcher at University College London and the University of Westminster
OK, airlines all going bust, they need – at least desire – bailing out and so on. So, how should government so this?
Our brave researcher then talks about how emissions must fall anyway and therefore:
With a stake in the airlines, the government could directly oversee a policy of reducing air travel, which would be part of a wider low-carbon transport strategy. Applying pricing tools such as a frequent flyer penalty, carbon emissions-based tax or airport user surcharge would discourage air travel.
Real brainbox stuff, don’t you think? For if you own the airlines then you don’t need the pricing tools, do you? You own the airlines so you can just jack up prices anyway. Or, as would actually happen, get government running them and prices will rise, quality fall and the job would be done anyway. We do actually have experience of this, we used to have state run airlines and they got wiped by the lower prices and better service of the independents when they were allowed. Yes, hard to believe, but Ryanair service is actually better than BA’s used to be. In the full and in the round that is, the proof being the growth of Ryanair as a result of people freely choosing it.
The pricing tools are what you do to a service that you don’t own, that you’re not directly in charge of. Because only be interfering in those prices can you influence the decision to fly or not.
That expansion of the universities was a bad idea, wasn’t it?
No, it gets worse. Of her three pricing policy proposals she does seem to have missed that we’ve got the latter two anyway.
I dislike it even more when you are legally compelled to buy something at a price dictated by the government. I’m thinking of renewables of course.
Or health or education.
I’m not even flowing the first step – why are we bailing them out if we don’t want them to exist?
“pricing tools such as a frequent flyer penalty”
That already exists. Flying twice as much costs twice as much as flying once. Just like driving twice as far costs twice as much, just as eating twice as much costs twice as much. Idiot is idiot.
But the other part of her argument is “we must make travel MORE EXPENSIVE!!!! because reasons”. In other words, how *DARE* the oiks be able to afford to travel!!! They’ll want more than one pair of underoos next.
Driving twice as far is not twice as expensive in the same way as flying twice as far is, as generally driving would require the purchase and upkeep of the vehicle which has certain fixed costs regardless of the distance driven. Airlines will amortise this cost into ticket prices so a better analogy would be taking a taxi ride.
“That expansion of the universities was a bad idea, wasn’t it?” Arguably, yes. Like most of my generation (93pct), I didn’t attend university. We did, however, attend technical and commercial colleges, either on day release and/or of the evening after work. It was enough. Throughout our careers we followed up with countless courses to supplement our knowledge. In reality I spent more years as a hirer and firer than a foot soldier, and as an employer – during and post the Blair years – rightly or wrongly, came to the understanding that education in general had been so dumbed down,… Read more »
From my experience, even some of those that *did* get into uni couldn’t functionally read and write.
And what about those bright young things that decide they’ve had enough brainwashing by academia and want to make their own way in the world?
Bernie, have to agree. Last young bloke I mentored before retiring help an intelligent young bloke improve hos skills in IT. Three years of IT degree to be a sysadmin or programmer and only taught one language. Back when I was in Tech college we were taught at least 3 languages. Tools in toolbox sort of thing. As for communication skills, I am still astonished at the small vocabulary of those under 45. Almost as if Orwells NewSpeak was intentionally implemented by the academics universities and elected stooges.