GreenShed wrote:
Better still the train is faster and you can use that time to work in, even more benefit to the economy.
Only when considered in isolation.
There are considerable restrictions when using public transport (can’t take many tools or consumables), and plenty of time overhead too (waiting for trains, waiting for connects, getting to the station, getting to the destination afterwards). There is also no chance for mission creep (can't really pick up dinner/kids on the way back).
I wouldn’t want to get my laptop out on a train for fear of it getting nicked (and I suffer from motion sickness). It is difficult to get a good wi-fi signal too.
All considered, forcing everyone to go by (already overloaded) trains would be
phenomenally bad for the economy.
I speak from personal experience, I went without a car for 8 months (now that I hardly drive). I soon realised that it is cheaper and faster (and easier and more flexible) to own a car than to take trains. I know my experience won't be representative for everyone, but I reckon your point is applicable only to a small minority.
GreenShed wrote:
If your journey is shorter that 100 miles on the motorway then you are not creating enough time to add sufficient benefit to make a brew.
Benefit to the economy? Taking the pi55 me thinks.
It all adds up, especially to those whose costs are dependent on time on the road – twice or more a day. I agree this isn't particularly significant, but ...
GreenShed wrote:
Of course it will take a number of drivers out of the penalty system so is this a reason to move to the new limit.
Not in itself.
However, it is always good to remove a needless restriction, thus reducing disrespect for law.
Also, as I said earlier: there is also a
system-wide casualty benefit – now this IS a benefit to the economy!