Dublin Bus - Major Service Expansion Announced

Stephen15 wrote: »

The proposed route 45 sounds almost exactly like the proposed Bus Connects E1. I wonder what it's frequency will be it sounds like a potential replacement for the 145 eventually.

It's every 15 minutes, was told it would be number 155 instead of 45 so not to cause any confusion.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Hopefully this expansion will be taken into when the revised Bus Connects route plans are being drawn up.

The 155 (45) is scheduled to start at the beginning of January when the last of the 10%are handed over to go ahead.

What are they doing with the 16? It would be great if it ran a) earlier and b) later, so it would be possible to reach 8am flights in time, and to get home to the southwestside after flights coming in at 11pm.

Mostly the 16 is great, in my experience (though the horrid Bus Connects plan may make it far worse) - but as an airport bus it needs early-morning and late-night runs, and not dumping out old ladies and helpless foreigners into O'Connell Street or College Green, thank you very much, but continuing south to Tallaght.

It's P by stealth. They'll see if people will put up with it, and then sneak in more and more - unless there's anger and resistance.

devnull wrote: »

Personally I couldn't care less if the operator is public or private, I just care about the quality of the service.

You'll find that is most people. But we know if we privatized it totally we'd end up with ruthless cut throat competition and one private monopoly (and we already have enough issues with du-opolies and cartels in insurance and communications in this country). I consider myself, broadly, on the centre left, but the reason I am where I am is because nobody in my group will ask "is this really the socialist thing to do / the conservative thing to do" they'll ask how it's gonna work, if it's gonna work, how much it will cost, what about this bit, what about that bit. Ideology should be a set of principles, not a cage you trap yourself in.
I oppose co-location in the health service because it's stupid and does not work, I oppose the mixed two tier health service we have cos I know single payer works better, not because it's less right wing or more left wing just.



People on here joke about people calling the CIE unions marxist or socialist, well indeed they are not, if they were they'd be in favor of the interest of the people at large not an interest group, but we know unions are a sectional interest group not unlike special interest groups that lobby for banks or employers in the sense that they want what they want for their own people not the public at large. Sure, what unions want can be in the public interest at large, is in the public interest more often than what IBEC wants, and it used to be in the public interest all the time, but unions, starting in the 70s when they got out of control in the PS and got us Thatcher, Reagan and the PDs, has kinda decayed in the last few decades and instead of being out for workers rights they de-facto, meaning to or not, protect inefficiency and sloth. That's what most people think, thats one of the reason private sector workers don't join, and that's one of many reasons why they need to be started over from scratch.


I hate the way unions are not not because I think they're getting too big a slice of cake for workers (though for some that IS true, in some parts of the PS) I don't want European pilots to be paid the way US pilots are, or any transport worker, I don't want the guy flying my plane or driving the bus I'm on or driving the train I'm careering down the track on at 100km/h worrying about money and getting his kids school books. I would like to see certain PS workers (cops, nurses, firefighters, teachers) get paid 100k a year cos that's what their jobs worth (yes, I think it is, think about where society would be without those 4, now imagine where we'd be without a broker at Irish Life or an executive at the HSE who makes way more than them), but the second I proposed tying any changes in working conditions or getting rid of outmoted or stupid working conditions to that, or better performance, I'd get an outraged "ah here!" from some of them.



Their attitude is going to destroy the concept of unions and then, contrary to what people think, labour laws won't protect us, collective power is needed, without it were f---d, but it will be gone, and if we suggest bringing it back it won't be weekends and minimum wages people picture in their heads it will be GoBe drivers being threatened for doing their job, rail strikes over new trains, blue flu over new computers and Luas drivers striking for a pay rise that was absurd even as a negotiating tactic.


What unions want and whats in workers interest is not always one in the same, remember their actions can damage not only future workers as I argue above, but other workers in other jobs with far less secure conditions.