Are you passionate about policy?

Politics International Politics
1

Hello,

I am a French man, living in Taiwan for 16 years.

And I am passionate about politics, and especially about policy.
In Taiwan, whatever the policy discussion I may be having with other people, I hear them say: “Mei BanFa” (there is no solution / there is no way!). I always reply: “You BanFa”: Yes, there is!

I like talking about social, political, environmental problems and their solutions!!

I am especially interested in US politics and US policies, although my favourite polices are applicable throughout the world and I long to see them applied in Taiwan, in France, in the US or in any other country…

And you?
Are you interested in politics and policy discussion?

2

Welcome to IP augustin, you have a very positive outlook.

[quote=“augustin”] I always reply: “You BanFa”: Yes, there is!
[/quote]

I was jokingly going to point you in the direction of Global Warming, But I see you found it. :whistle:

3

Thanks for the welcome!

Bah, yes, Global warming is a [strike]horny[/strike] delicate and complicated issue. But my take is to start where we could, where it makes sense. One of the options in the poll I mention in the other thread is to start with promoting carfree cities. Car and motorcycles are major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, motorized traffic is noisy, smelly, polluting, inefficient and slow. So, I am definitely in favour of carfree cities where we have a really modern transportation system with electric buses that would take you from point A to point B much more quickly than a car would take you today.

Anyway, this is only one example of creative solutions that beg to be implemented!

4

Hey Augustin… “horny” doesn’t mean “épineux”! :laughing:
You probably want to say complicated/delicate issue :wink:

5

Hi The boss:
Thanks for pointing out my mistake. What an embarrassing (but funny) mistake to make! Many kudos to you for figuring out what I actually meant. :slight_smile: Thanks.

6

I think you may have confused thorny and horny, but never mind, you have excellent English.

I am also a long-term resident here interested in policy, especially with regards to how it could be applied to problems in Taiwan. I feel frustrated about many wrong turns here and the continuation of old thinking, especially outside of Taipei city.

7

If we had carfree cities, where would I park my car? Hey?

You’ve got to think these things through, man.

8

Precisely! :aiyo:

I certainly agree, although your comment is very non-specific. Do you have something specific in mind, some examples?

9

[quote=“urodacus”]If we had carfree cities, where would I park my car? Hey?

You’ve got to think these things through, man.[/quote]

:slight_smile: LOL!

I have got a good news for you, urodacus:
In a car-free city, you wouldn’t have a need for a car in the first place!

You would save plenty of money:

  • you’d save money on the car purchase.
  • you’d save money on gas.
  • you’d save money on car insurance.
  • you’d save money on parking fees.
  • you’d save money on parking tickets!
  • you’d save money on speeding tickets!
  • you’d save money on car maintenance.

You could use a portion of your above savings taking the occasional taxi or renting a vehicle (car, scooter) for out-of-town holiday trips.

You would save a lot of time

  • you’d save time looking for parking spaces.
  • you’d save time travelling from A to B (in my scenario, going by bus would be quicker than it is now by car).

There would be more space for people to actually live in the city:

  • more green spaces.
  • more playing areas for the kids.

And we’d have a much safer environment:
much less noise, much less pollution, much less traffic accidents (thousands of deaths every year!!)

So, who would need a parking space to park one’s car??

As you see, I (and many other people before me) have thought it through!

10

Precisely! :aiyo:

I certainly agree, although your comment is very non-specific. Do you have something specific in mind, some examples?[/quote]

I’ve got tonnes of examples, from air and water pollution control to pavements for the streets.

But using more non-polluting public transportation would be an excellent start to dealing with some of these issues. Outside of Taipei public transportation options are very poor, almost non existent in Taichung city and county. Taichung city has been talking about a mythical Bus Transit System for years…as if it was something that was hard to do!!!

I mean all you have to do is buy some decent buses, put in things called BUS STOPS, stop people parking at bus stops, maybe even start with having actual bus routes, and charge for scooter parking. It’s not hard…but they don’t want to do it it seems. Most people Taichung are happy to take their polluting scooters and cars everywhere and park them all over the pavement, they don’t see the need to change. Mentality problem, they just keep sucking in all the air pollution everyday and go on with their lives.

But when a city can’t even get flat and clear pavements on main roads or bury the sewer rivers…well you know there a lot of things to do.

11

Mei Ban Fa!! :slight_smile:

We’re closer to living on Mars than living in a car free city in Taiwan.

Is a taxi not a car? What difference does it make if I drop my car at the city limits(or don’t buy one at all) and then hire another car, with driver?

I honestly hate driving, but with a child and limited public transportation, I simply have to.

12

I have two kids and we simply need the car to do almost anything, but I agree that this is a policy problem, the infrastructure and services aren’t there to support be giving the car up.

Transportation pollution is one of the major causes of air pollution , just look at Beijing now which has been adding something like 500,000 cars a year!

It’s also a major cause of air pollution in Taiwan but it seems to be almost completely ignored.

13

Funnily enough, it isn’t. A “Car” is a private vehicle, which spends 95% of its time doing nothing (except rusting and taking up valuable space). It’s dead capital. All things considered, it’s a bloody stupid solution to a relatively trivial problem.

“Taxi” means a shared vehicle. It’s not perfect, but it makes much better use of the cost of the car, and one taxi - which can serve many people - takes up far less space than individually-owned cars. Obviously, the trip-related pollution is basically the same, but in theory taxis could be more expensive (=more efficient) machines simply because their capital cost is better utilized.

And as augustin already said, there are all sorts of financial advantages, as you’ll find out if you give it a try.

Car ownership is heavily promoted for a very good reason: they allow governments to shift most of the burden of transportation provision onto individual shoulders (roads are paid for from road tax in the UK - it’s a grossly inadequate amount, but the tax take does cover the budgeted maintenance allowance). I was speaking to a guy from Thailand the other day: he told me that the government subsidizes cars and turns a blind eye to rampant illegal activity in loan applications, such that poor people are taking on car loans that they can’t possibly afford. If you were looking for a guaranteed way to keep a country poor, this would be an excellent part of your plan.

If you live in Taipei, taxis are everywhere. If you don’t, I can understand this view.

14

I’m with you, as i’ve been known to go on a rant or two about things I’m passionate about ( Economics, Religion, Politics, etc ) Welcome :laughing:

15

Funnily enough, it isn’t. A “Car” is a private vehicle, which spends 95% of its time doing nothing (except rusting and taking up valuable space). It’s dead capital. All things considered, it’s a bloody stupid solution to a relatively trivial problem.

“Taxi” means a shared vehicle. It’s not perfect, but it makes much better use of the cost of the car, and one taxi - which can serve many people - takes up far less space than individually-owned cars. Obviously, the trip-related pollution is basically the same, but in theory taxis could be more expensive (=more efficient) machines simply because their capital cost is better utilized.

And as augustin already said, there are all sorts of financial advantages, as you’ll find out if you give it a try.

Car ownership is heavily promoted for a very good reason: they allow governments to shift most of the burden of transportation provision onto individual shoulders (roads are paid for from road tax in the UK - it’s a grossly inadequate amount, but the tax take does cover the budgeted maintenance allowance). I was speaking to a guy from Thailand the other day: he told me that the government subsidizes cars and turns a blind eye to rampant illegal activity in loan applications, such that poor people are taking on car loans that they can’t possibly afford. If you were looking for a guaranteed way to keep a country poor, this would be an excellent part of your plan.

If you live in Taipei, taxis are everywhere. If you don’t, I can understand this view.[/quote]

But even in Taipei, which has better public transport than anywhere else in Taiwan (though I really don’t know how it compares to other cities its size), if you have to bring your kids to school, then go to work, pick the kids up, bring them to piano/English/karate class, go to the supermarket, maybe run a couple of more errands, you could be spending well over a thousand NT a day on public transportation. And Taipei seems to have very low fares for public transportation. Granted, I’m using Calgary as a comparison, where it costs C$3.00 (~NT90)to get on the bus or train. It seems very unlikely that even if everyone were to convert to the MRT that the fares could go much lower.

I’d really like to hear some opinions, particularly from the OP, on how you think this “car free city” could work. I’ve also thought a lot about this subject. Specifically when it comes to delivery of goods. Who is allowed permission to own a vehicle for the purpose of transporting goods? Or must there only be delivery companies?

16

[quote=“headhonchoII”]
I’ve got tonnes of examples, from air and water pollution control to pavements for the streets.

But using more non-polluting public transportation would be an excellent start to dealing with some of these issues. Outside of Taipei public transportation options are very poor, almost non existent in Taichung city and county. Taichung city has been talking about a mythical Bus Transit System for years…as if it was something that was hard to do!!!

I mean all you have to do is buy some decent buses, put in things called BUS STOPS, stop people parking at bus stops, maybe even start with having actual bus routes, and charge for scooter parking. It’s not hard…but they don’t want to do it it seems. Most people Taichung are happy to take their polluting scooters and cars everywhere and park them all over the pavement, they don’t see the need to change. Mentality problem, they just keep sucking in all the air pollution everyday and go on with their lives.

But when a city can’t even get flat and clear pavements on main roads or bury the sewer rivers…well you know there a lot of things to do.[/quote]

Hi headhonchoII,

I am 100% with you on all of the above!

I live in Taichung and the public transportation here is a disgrace to any city its size (over a million inhabitants!). There are many, much smaller, poor South American cities that have much better public transportation system than Taichung has.

But even Taipei, by my standards, is very bad, although it is definitely much better than Taichung!

You know what?
You Ban Fa!
This thread is part of the solution. We have to raise awareness. If like-minded people never talk about it among themselves, then there is certainly no chance that the concept with spread to other people, like a meme. Only when a vocal, large minority of people ask for something will the elected officials start to take notice and consider doing something about it.

If there is a specific issue that you especially care about, let me know: I am willing to do what I can to spread the message!

17

[quote=“navillus”][quote=“augustin”]
In a car-free city…
[/quote]

Mei Ban Fa!! :slight_smile:

We’re closer to living on Mars than living in a car free city in Taiwan.

[/quote]

Regarding your second statement, I certainly agree with you!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_One
youtube.com/user/MarsOneProject
applicants.mars-one.com/

In a way, it’s very sad: it reflects the warped sense of priorities that our society has!
There may soon be intelligent life on Mars, but it’s still doubtful if there is any on Earth!!

Still, You Ban Fa!

I never said it would be easy nor that it could happen overnight. The Mars project, if successful would have been 20 years in the making. The Apollo project (Moon landing project) took a full 10 years of dedicated commitment by the US government.

We have to start somewhere! Why not start in this very thread?? Raise awareness about the issues! More importantly, as I said in my first post, raise awareness about the solutions!!

[quote=“navillus”]

Is a taxi not a car? What difference does it make if I drop my car at the city limits(or don’t buy one at all) and then hire another car, with driver?

I honestly hate driving, but with a child and limited public transportation, I simply have to.[/quote]

I refer you to Finley’s answer. His answer is spot on and covers many important points. He spoke much more eloquently than I would have.

In addition to what he said, I would add:

  • First, I spoke of occasional use of the taxi, not as a full time replacement for a car. For everyday use, public transportation should suffice. But when you have an odd trip to make to a place far from any bus stop, then a taxi can be a welcome alternative to owning a car full-time (will all the worries that that entails: parking, maintenance, fear of theft…).

-Secondly, I see the use of taxis only as an intermediary solution, between the deplorable situation that we have now and the ideal car-free society. It would be when the public transportation would start to be good enough and the ownership of a car inconvenient and expensive enough that more and more people would be willing to forego owning a private vehicle, but also a time when the occasional taxi would be, as I said, a welcome relief for some odd trips.

-Thirdly, there is a huge psychological difference between taking a taxi and taking one’s car. If you take your car because “you might need to take the taxi anyway”, there there is 100% chances you’ll end up using the car for every single trip. If you don’t own a car and rely on the occasional taxis, you’ll end up taking most of your trips by bus.

Having said that, I am not speaking about today. I hear that in Taipei, more and more people give up their cars to take the MRT, because it’s more convenient that way. That’s a small step in the right direction. But depending on where you live and your daily activities, there may not be an alternative to owning a car, at least not today.

18

And you think a car is cheaper? Run the numbers. Include everything. You’ll surprise yourself. The AAA and the RAC (UK) publish typical cost estimates for car ownership - they both come out with similar figures (about US$7000 per year) despite differing fuel costs in those two countries. That’s NT$575/day. Taiwan would be a bit cheaper (lower insurance requirements, for example) but not a lot. As augustin said, you don’t need to use a taxi all the time because public transport in Taipei will get you to most of the places you need to go, but $575 buys a lot of travel (four taxi trips, worst-case), even with a family. And so convenient la!

I agree. MRT services are not cheap to construct or to run. There are much better solutions, but no government on the planet would touch them with a bargepole. Everybody (including policymakers) sees cars as the ideal to strive for. Trains and buses are for the plebs.

My opinion (FWIW) is that we need to eliminate drivers and have a fully-automated transport network. Once you make that decision, a whole load of other design decisions just drop neatly into place. Transport of goods becomes so cheap and simple - because only the goods themselves travel, unaccompanied by a driver - that whole new business models would spring up. You could order your new TV or your weekly shopping from the internet and have an automated vehicle drop it off the same afternoon. Low-value, bulky items - things that are often considered “waste” and end up being dumped - would suddenly acquire a value. For example, food waste could be collected automatically, composted, and then delivered automatically to farmers or smallholders, with very low overheads.

The same automated system would work fine for human passengers. No more traffic jams. No more bloody deaths and amputations. No more drunk drivers. Energy efficiency would be vastly improved - by my own estimates, solar power would be not just feasible, but cheaper (much cheaper) than our current expenditure on gasoline-fuelled cars. It will happen, I’m sure of it, but governments will be decades behind the curve. It was private companies that laid down the US railways, and I think the same thing will happen with automated transport networks, most likely in “developing” countries which really can’t afford cars, trucks, and trains, and don’t already have significant sunk costs in those systems.

19

As I mentioned already, there are so many things that need to be done before car free cities could become a reality, but mainly it’s a mentality problem.

Now it does happen that a car free city is more feasible in Taiwan’s densely populated cities and towns than many other countries AS LONG as simple things like pavements are constructed, bus systems and other public transport systems were implemented. Right now in Taichung we’ve still got many places were cars park on the pavement. Crazy. Yes perfectly feasible, but getting people out of their air conditioned cars and off their fat arses and walking and cycling around will be a challenge for some. Scooter riding needs to be looked at too, scooters can be more polluting than cars! Getting people walking around more is a big one.

Japanese cities should be looked at as they seem to depend on public transport and walking more than anywhere I have been. They don’t have pavements on their side streets but all the main streets have clear and wide pavements and bikes are commonly seen sharing pavements with pedestrians.

To be car-free I would have to move back closer to the city centre where there are better pavements and more shops and services. A bus system would have to exist for us to get around easily in the city or else get taxis (and then it’s not really car-free and a pain in the arse for us). Then if the pavements and the bus system existed and I got rid of the car one idea would be to hire a car on weekends to visit the in-laws or get out of the city (public transport doesn’t seem like a good option for this). We probably would save some money in terms of not having to rent a space, maintenance, car tax and fuel…but not a major saving in outer cities compared to Taipei…owning a car in Taipei could be twice as expensive as Taichung if you take into account parking fees and traffic cameras.

20

Given that pretty much every country / city / municipality in the world is essentially living paycheck to paycheck right now, quite a lot indeed would have to change. I suppose if we had a lot more Elon Musk type thinkers and far less John McCain types we’d have a chance. But as it stands, we can’t even make the switch to natural gas let alone entire car free cities.