8 ms·

That’s the introductory price. It’ll be €127,95 after that period is over. Kids travel for free, though, so that’s pretty nice. In hindsight, I think I underes

• muyuu 3mo ago
  Even at that price, the British mind cannot comprehend such good a deal. An equivalent pass in the UK would be easily 10x that to even cover just a much smaller region than The Netherlands.
  • netule 3mo ago
    For sure. I currently live in the US (fairly rural) and I would kill to have my transportation-related costs reduced to about $150/mo. But where I live, I simply need to have a car to do any basic thing since the moment I step off my driveway, there aren’t even footpaths.
    • usrnm 3mo ago
      I live in the Netherlands and have absolutely no need for this ticket. When I need to go somewhere, I just walk or bike there, never takes more than 20 minutes. I cannot even imagine living in American suburbia
      • netule 3mo ago
        I moved here from The Netherlands in 2004, and have now lived in Florida, California, and Mississippi and stayed for prolonged periods in many US cities for my job. I wouldn’t feel safe riding a bicycle anywhere here considering the speed of traffic, the size of the vehicles, and lack of dedicated biking infrastructure. It’s a completely different world when you share the road with angry F150 drivers blasting past you at 80 MPH. No, thank you.
        • joe_mamba 3mo ago
          [flagged]
          • netule 3mo ago
            And? What's the gotcha you're implying?
            • vel0city 3mo ago
              That you clearly value other things the US offers over the transit situation. If the transit matters that much, making the US such an unlivable hellscape, why stay? I think that's probably the point they're trying to make. IMO that doesn't mean we shouldn't bother to make the transit better, but some people think its somehow related. A lot of people think the "success" of the US is strongly correlated to this suburbia design somehow.
              • netule 3mo ago
                Right, I assumed the same argument. I've spent over half my life here, so it's obviously not that important to me, nor was it a factor in my decision to move here. Yet it's an observation I can make, having two distinct perspectives to compare, not a judgment on America. Ugh. It's the whole "yet you participate in society" meme, or the "well, if you don't like it, why not go home?" argument, which could well both be logical fallacies I don't know the names of. Anyway, more public transit for the people and all that.
          • CalRobert 3mo ago
            I’m from the US and moved to the Netherlands but there are still some things I prefer about the US (bug screens on windows for instance)
            • joe_mamba 3mo ago
              >bug screens on windows for instance You can retrofit those on the cheap even in rentals. Hardly something major.
      • deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
      • rootusrootus 3mo ago
        I live in American suburbia and that's how I live. I can walk or bike whenever I feel like it, drive if it suits me. I sometimes wonder what the average European assumes American suburbia to be. Endless tract homes? Such places do exist, true. But that is far from universal.
        • MagnumOpus 3mo ago
          Of course you can walk. But can you walk to your workplace, your kid’s nursery, your local bakery/supermarket, your doctor, your dentist, the pharmacy?
          • bluGill 3mo ago
            I bike to all of those. Only work is typically so far away that you need to drive, the rest exists in every suburb and is in bike distance.
            • CalRobert 3mo ago
              Absolutely not in every suburb. I used to live in a suburb in Sacramento and just walking to the closest grocery store was over an hour
              • bluGill 3mo ago
                I said bike distance not walk distance. Typically bike speeds are about four times faster than walking speed so your hour walk is fifteen minutes. I don't know Sacramento, but if it is as hilly as San Francisco you want an ebike which makes the hills level and is even faster.
                • dredmorbius 3mo ago
                  Sacramento is largely flat. Topo view w/ bike routes indicated: <https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sacramento,+CA/@38.5615711,-121.5029478,13z/data=!4m6!3m5!1s0x809ac672b28397f9:0x921f6aaa74197fdb!8m2!3d38.5781342!4d-121.4944209!16zL20vMDdiY24!5m2!1e3!1e4?hl=en&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYxNi4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sacramento,+CA/@38.5615711...> It has reasonably good biking infrastructure, for the US, but suffers badly from sprawl. There's also the summer heat. San Francisco is hilly (tough riding), but quite compact. It's generally possible to avoid the worst climbs with modest detours. Sacramento's sprawl means that it has roughly 1/4 the population density of Sacramento. Travel distances are correspondingly longer, and much commercial development (office, retail) is in suburban hubs / malls / office parks, rather than either downtown or in neighbourhood shopping districts, as with SF.
      • JamesTRexx 3mo ago
        I already have the NS Flex free weekend subscription (with 1st class addition) and it's the only way for me to travel longer distances. It's also just about the only available public transport in the neighbourhood because I live in a polder. Nearest train station is a 35 minute walk, nearest supermarkets are almost an hour walk. One advantage, before Covid and I had groceries delivered, mandatory walking back and forth three times a week to the village did wonders for losing weight.
      • sandworm101 3mo ago
        I work with a guy from holland. There, he lived in a condo. Here, he owns 40-acers, a couple horses and is trying to grow his own corn. He can play out his rural lifestyle dreams and still work a desk in a city, something that isnt an option without personal transportation. (I would say "car", but he rides an R1 to work most days.)
      • brnt 3mo ago
        That means you never leave your town of residence. I am Dutch too, and I walk and cycle (of course), but I have friend and family elsewhere too, want to visit other nature, cities and countries as well. I mostly use a car since it's so much cheaper and faster than public transport, but I bought this ticket in order to do some longer distance journeys as well. I don't really like driving.
    • pfannkuchen 3mo ago
      > I would kill to have my transportation-related costs reduced to about $150/mo Lots of people have had their transportation-related costs reduced to $0 by killing! Just be sure to get caught or it won’t work.
      • JSR_FDED 3mo ago
        Oh man that’s dark
  • stuaxo 3mo ago
    Can we get some commitment from Andy Burnham for something like this?
    • muyuu 3mo ago
      It would be nice, but sadly a much deeper restructuring of the system is needed than just offering cheap season tickets, presumably by heavy subsidies.
  • mytailorisrich 3mo ago
    To be a little provocative, yes British train prices are very expensive in comparison but they perhaps also show that heavy subisidies to make tickets dirt cheap may not be the most useful use of resources: People can pay and will pay more than a few tens of euros per month. As long as that holds true what is the case for more subsidies?
    • ralferoo 3mo ago
      As a resident of the UK, and reasonably well off, I can definitely attest that the price definitely changes my usage. I will always get the slow 2 hour train into London rather than the faster 1.25 hour train because it's 1/2 to 1/3 the price. The peak hours slow train is approximately double the price, the peak hours fast train is about triple the price compared to off peak. The local train to the next city (20 miles away) is £7.50 return if you want to arrive any time before 7.15pm. After that it's £3.50 for the same journey. Almost every time I travel on British trains, it feels like I'm being ripped off. And then to add insult to injury, probably 50% of the times I travel, there's some problem that causes the trains to be delayed or cancelled. Or then there's often the first off-peak train of the day that is so full, it's not only standing room only, it's so packed you can't even move in the aisle. It's just 2 hours of standing, hoping that the train doesn't break down again and that the aircon keeps working. And then you go abroad, everything seems to run on time, everything is cheap - often priced by kilometre of track travelled regardless what time of day it is, and the experience just feels pleasant. As long as that happens what is the case for reaming the customer for as much as they can afford to pay, possibly forcing some customers to choose not travel at all even when there are plenty of empty seats?
      • mytailorisrich 3mo ago
        > I will always get the slow 2 hour train into London rather than the faster 1.25 hour train because it's 1/2 to 1/3 the price. The peak hours slow train is approximately double the price, the peak hours fast train is about triple the price compared to off peak. So you still take the train? Fast trains into London (which are indeed very expensive, I won't dare state the price not to shock our European friends) are completely packed at rush hour and busy all the time, in my experience. My point is that there is quite a bit of elasticity, especially for commute so that as long as people can afford the tickets and do use the service then subsidies to lower the price drastically probably aren't a productive use of resources when taxpayer's money could be put to better use because nothing is actually free ("because cheaper tickets" is not a valid justification for subsidies). There may be a sweet spot but I really think that beyond a certain point taxes and subsidies to reduce prices are just a waste and don't make any differences, and I think we are in that territory in a number of locations in Europe.
• andrepd 3mo ago
  Note that 128€ is the monthly price for 100% discount, but 6€ is the monthly price for 40% discount. It brings the prices of rail travel in the Netherlands from "fucking ludicrous" to just "reasonably expensive".
  • CalRobert 3mo ago
    Kids under 12 free, too. I don't look forward to having to pay for both of them. Utrecht to Amsterdam round trip for a family of 4 is €80 for a family of 4, or €48 with the discount.
    • CalRobert 3mo ago
      oops, "full fare" replaces one of those "family of 4"
  • Gys 3mo ago
    Try Switzerland
  • hfsh 3mo ago
    100% discount outside of peak hours. That's a small, but quite important difference. Actual 100% discount is €399,95/month.
  • gib444 3mo ago
    > It brings the prices of rail travel in the Netherlands from "fucking ludicrous" Haha I can't help but feel the Dutch firmly believe rail should be completely free Isn't it fairly common for your employer to pay half to all of your commuting cost too...? (Almost unheard of in the UK for comparison, with people regularly paying £2,000-£10,000/year to commute) And the Netherlands is like 10th in Europe for on-the-day return costs per km https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/01/09/rail-fares-across-europe-the-countries-with-the-most-expensive-train-tickets https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/01/09/rail-fares-across... Though to be fare I think it's some shorter journeys that are quite expensive right? Eg Utrecht to Amsterdam is 20 EUR return which is pricey. But paying €6/mo to save 40% seems a pretty good deal if you travel a lot off peak