chem1st Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 One of benefits of giving free bus passes to the elderly, is to take them off of the roads, and reduce the amount of accidents they cause as they age and become incapable of driving. Measuring the amount of lives saved by getting people off of the roads and stopping accidents from happening and resulting in serious injury/death is very difficult. With young males under the age of 25 being involved in many serious accidents, mightn't it be an idea to issue them free travel passes to get them off of the roads and prevent them causing accidents. Should the NHS fund free travel for males under 25? What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerrific Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 No, we shouldn't pay for lazy youths to do that. They should face stricter regulations regarding driving and the associated paperwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biotechpete Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 Personally I can't see the distinction between providing the benefit for OAPs or the young. Travel is more essential for the young, for work etc and the cost of driving for the young is far greater; whist I think statistically their income is lower. There's certainly a good logical argument to remove the provision from some pensioners to provide it to the under 25s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsafan Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I am not 100% convinced that the reason why OAPs get a free bus pass is to get them off the road. To be honest, I thought that a lot of the OAP's benefits is because they will retire and cannot afford the normal upkeep of transport or the running cost of it. If the government can provide this, then why should they not? As the individual may have paid enough tax in their lifetime such that they can be looked after a little when the commercial world means that they may not be able to find work. Between retirement age of 60/65 til a person pass away, there is a minimum of around 20+ years ! I think elderlies should indeed still be mobile and enjoy life so much more as to keep themselves active, and also to keep them entertained too. As they sure have earned it already as they have worked hard all their lives. That is what I think to be honest. That is why there are so many subsidised travelling, and this is actually a good thing for the elderlies, and not to be excluded from society, but they can still be socially mobile. The answer to the question is a "no". As you are young, you should learn to earn. So therefore the young should not be babied this way. If there is a reason why there the young cannot find jobs or be mobile, maybe the government should intervene and introduce apprenticeships again which are government run, so therefore to ensure that the young are employed for a minimum of a few years at least. What they are currently doing is quite high risk. i.e. pushing youngsters to start businesses instead to simulated the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fairyworld14 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 I agree that some young apologies for drivers should get free bus passes to get them off the road . Especially as just now one of the said " drivers " decided to turn on the road I live on & pull in & instead of indicating to turn right , he just did it anyway & I could have gone into him . The stupid moron . WHY DONT PEOPLE USE THEIR DAMN INDICATORS. Luckily , I left enough space for it not to happen . I didn't fancy damaging my brand new car . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epic Fail Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 No, we shouldn't pay for lazy youths to do that. They should face stricter regulations regarding driving and the associated paperwork. Surely they would more likely to be lazy if they took the car and not wanting to take public transport? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted February 9, 2014 Author Share Posted February 9, 2014 I am not 100% convinced that the reason why OAPs get a free bus pass is to get them off the road. It isn't. However, it is one of the great benefits of the pass, that has not been quantified. It must have saved countless lives. If more lives could be saved by getting the people statistically most likely to crash off of the roads, surely that would be a good thing? ---------- Post added 09-02-2014 at 20:46 ---------- Personally I can't see the distinction between providing the benefit for OAPs or the young. Travel is more essential for the young, for work etc and the cost of driving for the young is far greater; whist I think statistically their income is lower. There's certainly a good logical argument to remove the provision from some pensioners to provide it to the under 25s. Whilst I agree with that argument for extending free travel to under 25s and everyone else. I propose free travel for under 25 males purely on the basis of saving people's lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maz3 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 If you did that you'd have to give free travel to young women under 25 also, else they'd sue the ass off you in the European Court of Human Rights. Look what happened with car insurance premiums, where previously young men only had to pay extortionate rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perplexed Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It wouldn't be free. No such thing. It just means somebody else is paying for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollingJ Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It wouldn't be free. No such thing. It just means somebody else is paying for it. Took the words right out of my mouth!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.