<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: No access all areas. Who hasn&#8217;t the use of a car?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://racfoundation.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/no-access-all-areas-who-hasnt-the-use-of-a-car/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://racfoundation.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/no-access-all-areas-who-hasnt-the-use-of-a-car/</link>
	<description>Economics, environment, mobility, safety</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 07:28:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://racfoundation.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/no-access-all-areas-who-hasnt-the-use-of-a-car/#comment-2492</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:24:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://racfoundation.wordpress.com/?p=817#comment-2492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even if some of the 25% figure is people who don&#039;t want a car, they still probably use public transport which is arguably more deserving of subsidy because it has lower social costs than car transport. So I don&#039;t think what Sustrans were saying is as off the mark as you say.

Also, your argument that rail gets a disproportionate amount of public transport expenditure is itself somewhat misleading. Buses require less &#039;public transport subsidy&#039; because the vast majority of their &#039;infrastructure&#039; costs are paid for by general roads expenditure. When you factor this in the split between spending on rail and on buses is more even.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even if some of the 25% figure is people who don&#8217;t want a car, they still probably use public transport which is arguably more deserving of subsidy because it has lower social costs than car transport. So I don&#8217;t think what Sustrans were saying is as off the mark as you say.</p>
<p>Also, your argument that rail gets a disproportionate amount of public transport expenditure is itself somewhat misleading. Buses require less &#8216;public transport subsidy&#8217; because the vast majority of their &#8216;infrastructure&#8217; costs are paid for by general roads expenditure. When you factor this in the split between spending on rail and on buses is more even.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
