Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Metro Express Not Needed, For Now

We should do it now otherwise it will cost more later I hear you say. The correct yardstick is its share of GDP otherwise we're blindsided by money illusion. Besides there are better choices. The first one is obviously to beef up the number and quality of buses -- fitting a number of them with catalytic converters will also improve air quality -- on our roads. And improving their schedules. Plus letting congestion pricing do a little bit of its magic. After making cars more expensive. Especially the larger ones. While making the smaller hybrid ones even cheaper. This should improve flow. And GDP. But not as much as restoring progressive taxation. Which should be the topmost priority.

Not sure whether a metro should run between Port-Louis and Curepipe. When it will be the right time to do it we might find it obvious to exclude these two cities. 

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Correct, R.S also said the same thing today in L'express.

Sanjay Jagatsingh said...

That progressive taxation would improve GDP? He's been an unmitigated mess as MoF. And we haven't even started talking about his fake simulations :)

Anonymous said...

He (R.S) didn't say that (progressive taxation improves GDP! He just said we don't need the Metro ...

Anonymous 2

Sanjay Jagatsingh said...

Stumbled on this. 6 billions 25 years later at let's say 6% inflation is worth about 25 billions. Not the first example of money illusion.

Sanjay Jagatsingh said...

Congestion pricing reduced traffic in Stockholm by 20-30% while bus use increased a lot in London. In Singapore car ownership has been made very expensive. Which was the case in Mauritius at one point in time. Now wouldn't we have had a very manageable situation if congestion pricing was properly done let's say beginning 2006?

Sanjay Jagatsingh said...

Tann sa bann eksplikasyon la enn ku. Parey kuma so depresyasyon konpetitif indolor.