
Free Public Transport in Estonia - dullgiulio
https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/05/11/free-public-transport-in-estonia
======
start123
As an expat living as Tallinn resident for a couple of years, here are my two
cents

1\. Having public transport has a remarkable effect on the quality of life -
At any time of the day, I can hop on go to any part of the city without
worrying about costs involved. I have started to go out more than sitting at
home simply because it's hassle-free.

2\. Connectivity and frequency are quite poor if you don't reside in the city
centre. It gets even worse (even in the city centre) at night. Majority of
residents tend to live in the outskirts and they continue to use private
vehicles in spite of free public transport.

3\. Short journeys that were covered by foot are now covered by public
transport defeating the purpose. Most of the times, I use a bus for half a km
even though I can walk that distance quite easily.

4\. The population is very low so one can easily find empty seats on most
routes.

~~~
mb_72
Re: 2 - I can't agree. Yes, the trams and trains stop running soon after
midnight and start up ~5am or so, however that is pretty good time coverage.
Many people in Tallinn don't own cars, and use the free public transport a
lot, plus the coverage up to the city limits is also quite good:
[https://www.visittallinn.ee/static/files/063/2018_tallinn_tr...](https://www.visittallinn.ee/static/files/063/2018_tallinn_transportation_map_eng.pdf)

One 'problem' here is that Taxify / Bolt is so cheap. I'll not even think
about dropping 5EUR on a fare if it means slightly less hassle / time getting
somewhere.

~~~
start123
I cannot imagine going out at night if there was no Bolt/Uber. I pretty much
have to walk home or some distance to get a bus. The weather doesn't help
either - standing at a bus stop in winter when the next bus is in 20 mins or
so is not a pleasant experience.

~~~
NeedMoreTea
My 20s weekends consisted of getting the bus into town, getting drunk or going
to a movie or club, then getting the night bus home. Some of the most
entertaining times were actually on that journey home - as just about everyone
was having a good laugh, singing badly, or talking to everyone else. Standing
at the bus stop is no worse than queuing at the taxi rank or waiting for the
Uber to show up once the bar or club has closed.

~~~
TomMarius
Sorry but I won't spend 30 minutes waiting outside in snow, then getting on a
bus for 10 minutes, then waiting some 10 more minutes, then getting on a bus
for 15 minutes and then 25 minutes of walking through snow, when I can just be
there within 15 minutes by car. It's not far, it's just uphill (the bus is too
long to fit on these narrow uphill roads).

I can't wait for autonomous cars. I just hope that someone in charge will
realise that not everyone lives near a frequented bus stop before they limit
all transportation to public transport (as they plan in many places). I
noticed that many people talking about the great benefit of public transport
live in the wider city centre - but most people live outside that!

~~~
thatfrenchguy
> I can't wait for autonomous cars.

So that the US can build more ugly boring car suburbs ? Autonomous cars have
the potential to make american cities much worse transit-wise.

~~~
TomMarius
Sorry but IMHO your perception of beauty has no priority over allowing people
to live a fulfilling live...

~~~
thatfrenchguy
And one can argue fairly easily that not spending life in traffic is more
fulfilling.

~~~
TomMarius
That's what autonomous vehicles solve. So we're back to square one - your
perception of beauty is not a standard.

~~~
thatfrenchguy
But autonomous vehicles will mean a flood of them on the highway... Stuck in
traffic.

------
novaRom
My city started to provide free public transportation every Saturday. As
result, more people visit central shops and restaurants in historical center.
They discuss now to make it too on Sundays.

~~~
baroffoos
That makes a lot of sense. I imagine public transport is largely underutilized
on weekends without everyone trying to get to work.

------
nabla9
The reason why free is good in public transport is because more people move
around for work and fun, better it is for the whole area. Abusing the system
is not a problem. It improves the quality of life even if it's done just for
fun. Free electricity or water for residents would lead to waste.

You still want to maintain the markets. Giving every resident free card to use
in public transport does that. When government pays according to the use, bus
companies will respond to user demand. The local government can still
subsidize unprofitable routes etc. but it's good that those things must be
decided separately.

~~~
luckylion
> You still want to maintain the markets. Giving every resident free card to
> use in public transport does that.

Why not give them money instead? They can choose to buy a ticket or choose to
ride a bike/walk and use the money elsewhere. You might keep the market for
public transportation (though I have my doubts: why would the provider need to
respond to demand if he's paid no matter what?), but you're strongly
intervening in the transportation market in general.

~~~
OskarS
Why does one preclude the other? "Free public transport" and "give poor people
money" can both be excellent policies, there's no reason one should only pick
one.

The point with specifically making public transport free is because using
public transport instead of using cars is A Good Thing. It's like a reverse
pigouvian tax: we want to encourage people using public transport, so lets
make it free. Instead of charging for it, tax something we don't like (i.e.
cars) and pay for it that way.

~~~
luckylion
We're not just making cars relatively worse, but also walking and cycling, and
we're encouraging (medium distance) travel in general. I don't know that this
is a good idea, though I do agree that if you want to encourage travelling,
it's fair to not only make it available to the rich.

I'd much prefer people to use any form of transportation when required and not
spend their leisure time by descending upon the inner city, but that's a
personal preference.

------
danans
The brilliant thing about making public transit free is that unlike many other
things that can be government subsidized, free public transit can't be stolen
or arbitraged.

~~~
mherdeg
Yeah I grew up hearing that "The optimal price of public transit is free".

The one pitfall I was told about was something called a "free-rider problem",
which in this specific context doesn't have its normal economic meaning and
refers to people taking up public-transit resources while not actually trying
to get from Point A to Point B.

Just for example, if your transit is clean, safe, supervised, a moderate
temperature, and has long journeys, what fraction of its users will be using
it to get somewhere vs. using it because it is a safe place to be?

In the Bay Area, there is "Hotel 22", the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority #22 bus from Eastridge Transit Center to Palo Alto Transit Center,
about a two-hour ride running 24 hours a day (see e.g.
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11249291/The-
dark-side-of-Silicon-Valley.html) or
[https://www.mercurynews.com/2013/10/31/homeless-turn-
overnig...](https://www.mercurynews.com/2013/10/31/homeless-turn-overnight-
bus-route-into-hotel-22/) \- a safe warm place to sleep for $6).

In Pynchon's "V" there is Benny Profane "yo-yoing" on the 42nd Street Shuttle
from Grand Central to Times Square, but his contemporaries were certainly
finding shelter there: [https://harpers.org/archive/1956/03/subways-are-for-
sleeping...](https://harpers.org/archive/1956/03/subways-are-for-sleeping/)

These aren't necessarily _bad_ side effects but understanding how folks will
use the system when it's free is an important part of making the policy
decision to make it free.

~~~
iknowstuff
Ahh, there it is, the US can never have nice and clean things because of its
massive inequality. Judging by European countries it would seem like there are
ways to fix that.

~~~
baroffoos
Reminds me of a comment I saw on HN a while ago about an American shocked that
other countries have public toilets that aren't covered in shit, blood and
needles. It seems like so many Americans are not even aware that the problems
they face are not global and they just take it as a fact of life.

~~~
WanderPanda
This is absolutely against my experience. When I visited the US last year I
was surprised by how clean and well maintained public toilets were. I am not
used to this, as in Germany public toilets (if they even exist) are totally
disgusting.

~~~
tomjakubowski
The pay public toilets I used in German train stations (Freiburg, Munich
Hauptbahnhof) were clean and fine.

~~~
majewsky
I think "paid" is the significant word here.

That said, the toilets on German trains (not in train stations) are generally
ok as well, even though they're not paywalled.

~~~
icebraining
Well, they're paywalled by the train ticket, no?

~~~
_nalply
Probably not, because in Germany you can walk on the railway platforms even if
you don't have a train ticket, so the toilets should be free access, too, and
probably this is why many railway stations have pay toilets only.

~~~
NikkiA
Yes, but the post you're responding to, was responding to this:

> German trains ( __not in train stations __)

------
pisipisipisi
Idea of free public transport (for rural areas: to add mobility to shrinking
(age) and city-moving population) is interesting, to combat the otherwise
natural process of urbanization and centralization.

Same for the cities that actually have meaningful public transit needs and
solutions (Tallinn, maybe Tartu and Pärnu). Implementation as a "FREE stuff,
vote for me" is total fail - bad timetables, pointless long routes etc.

Flexible and on-demand transportation is required for rural areas (right now
money gets wasted on subsidies rather than real problem) and for dense areas
different approaches than just throwing money at a sub-optimal solution (maybe
"use a bicycle" would be better than "success if you don't take a car but take
stinking and smoking bus instead").

------
msla
Fully free public transport isn't that rare in the US: My home city, Missoula,
Montana, has had it for years.[1] No passes, no metering. Wikipedia has a
list, of course. [2] However, some of those routes aren't fully free, just
free to some and, therefore, still incur metering costs. I wonder how much
metering a bus route costs, overall, inclusive of enforcement of laws against
"turnstile-jumping" or whatever you'd call it.

[1] [https://www.mountainline.com/mountain-line-to-operate-
zero-f...](https://www.mountainline.com/mountain-line-to-operate-zero-fare-
beginning-january-2015/)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transport](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transport)

------
jpatokal
[https://outline.com/WLYEMW](https://outline.com/WLYEMW)

------
Doubl
Estonia seems to be a great country for these sorts of initiatives. Is it
because vested interests are less of a thing there? Also being small might
help, I suppose, more agile perhaps?

~~~
Tankenstein
The small <-> agile thing is very real. I've seen it take very little time
(2-5y after conception) for big ideas to be implemented in reality,
countrywide, whereas doing it somewhere like the US would be next to
impossible.

~~~
rimliu
What forbids to do it on a state level? City level?

~~~
Doubl
Depends on how much local autonomy there is which in turn depends on how much
taxation is raised by local government. In some countries local governments
are funded from central taxation and are more or less instructed on what they
can or can't do with it.

------
lambdadmitry
This is a good example of policy makers not falling for the fallacy of
"efficient public transport system = financially self-sufficient". A good
public transport system has to be cash-negative because of its positive
externalities. If it's cash-positive, it's either too expensive, under-
investing, or both. It's a government's job to price the externalities in by
reaping the fruits of economical growth (via taxes) and investing it back into
public transport.

------
lqet
I am a huge fan of public transportation, and I think using it should be as
easy as possible. But here is a possible problem with this idea: if you make
public transport free, you change the social structure of the riders. As the
cost of public transportation does not depend on income, free rides have far
greater benefits for the lower classes, and this may lead to public
transportation having the image of "transportation for the poor", which may
then lead to vast parts of society avoiding riding on it. After some time, it
may even become a stigma, and the lower classes will also avoid using it.

I fear that free public transport may lead to lower passenger numbers in the
long run, except in areas with a homogeneous population.

~~~
Strom
In Tallinn's case this doesn't seem to be true. What's more, having lived in
Tallinn for decades, I can say that the poorest of people have been always
riding for free (illegally) - it's either worth the risk of having to run away
from ticket checkers or they're so poor that they deal only in cash and don't
have a bank account that the government can take fine money from. Thus making
the transport free in Tallinn hasn't really changed the demographics of
passengers.

There's no fear of safety in the public spaces (including transport) in
Tallinn either. It's standard practice for kids to go to school alone. So you
have 7 year olds waddling around the city on their own, taking various public
transports etc, and everyone is happy.

Additionally, if the wealthier people are too snobby to ride with lower
classes, then there's always the possibility to raise car taxes. I think
that's a much better solution compared to depriving lower classes of mobility.

Also I think you might be hanging out with very wrong crowds if you think that
_the majority of society_ would not go on public transport because some lower
class people might be on it. _(Ed: I see you changed it to vast parts instead
of majority now. Better, but I 'd bet still overestimated.)_

Then there's the completely bonkers idea that lower class people themselves
stop riding the bus because lower class people are on it. There are many
reasons why I think that's never going to happen, but the biggest one is
practical - poor people have no alternatives! A minimum wage worker needs to
get to their workplace or they won't have food. The idea of them skipping the
busride because there are other similar people on the bus is ridiculous.

~~~
start123
"So you have 7-year-olds waddling around the city on their own" This. I have
seen so many kids going to school alone in Tallinn - quite the opposite of the
current generation's helicopter parenting.

~~~
scatters
Those kids are in the current generation, or am I missing something?

~~~
Strom
You could read it as kids being the next generation, young adults being
current generation, and helicopter parenting happening en masse in places
other than Estonia.

As an Estonian currently living in Demark, the contrast is very stark. Kids in
Copenhagen don't have any freedom at all. Parents are climbing playground
equipment alongside them, touching their playballs every 10 seconds etc. On
top of that they are holding protests that this isn't enough.

> _aim is to persuade the government to introduce a minimum ratio of 1 adult
> to 3 children in nurseries (roughly 0-3 year olds), and 1 adult to 6
> children in kindergartens (roughly 3-5 year olds)_

[https://outline.com/KRFf33](https://outline.com/KRFf33)

~~~
kwhitefoot
That's very odd, and very un-Scandinavian. Here in Norway small children take
buses to school. Even on the same buses as high school students which I think
would not be reckoned safe these days in my birth country (UK). Quite a few do
get delivered by car though. But schools and society generally encourages
children to walk or cycle to school.

------
jyriand
There was one additional reason why city wanted to create a free public
transportation only for local residents. So that all the people who were
working in Tallinn, but whose(?) place of residence was outside of city, would
register themselves as Tallinn's official residents, and that means more tax
payer money coming to city budget. Win-win.

Edit: improved spelling

------
oikos
Everyone gets a seat because the whole population is around million and the
capital 400K. It's less complex to manage than, say, London. Less dense.

The whole idea was a mayor's election campaign. Rest of the parties were all
against it.

Referendum: ask any population if they'd prefer free transport. There: 75.5%.

The money comes from somewhere. Although Estonia had average less national
debt, their infrastructure (health service, education etc) is post2008 screwed
like everywhere else.

~~~
jfoster
The money certainly comes from somewhere, but is it more efficient this way?
No ticket sales overhead, no enforcement overhead, etc. Seems smarter given
that public transport is something that you would want the population to use
instead of their own vehicles.

~~~
maccard
> No ticket sales overhead, no enforcement overhead, etc.

There are still ticket sales in this (and most like this) programs. Usually
they only apply to nationals/residents of the city/town, and others have to
buy tickets.

~~~
jfoster
It seems like a missed opportunity if they're doing it that way. They get a
bit of revenue, but they could otherwise have been more tourism friendly and
done away with unnecessary ticketing infrastructure.

------
Quarrelsome
It is worth noting that as far as I know enforcement of ticketing was _super_
low in the first place. To an extent this is just accepting the reality that
some people will just bunk the fare given that the system is self-managed,
i.e. you validate your own ticket. When I've been in Tallinn in the past I've
seen people not pay as a matter of habit.

This is arguably the logical outcome of public transport. Ticket inspecting is
expensive, inefficient and barely effective (without effectively doubling the
staff costs of each service) and stopping the bus for the drivers to collect
fares impacts the efficiency of the service (e.g. the "classic" old person
paying in pennies slowing the bus down).

Given that transport is often heavily subsidised by the government anyway this
is just giving up on the problem as its hard to find a cost-effective means of
enforcing the collection of fares while keeping those fares affordable.

------
StanislavPetrov
This seems like a very good and logical idea in places that have the capacity,
especially those with high poverty rates. In some places, however, such as
here in New York, free public transportation would make a bad problem already
worse. Our public transit systems are badly over capacity already and
literally falling apart at the seams, with much of the infrastructure being
literally over 100 years old. The systems simply weren't designed to carry
this many people, and making these systems free would make accelerate the
decay and make the overcrowding even worse.

------
cambaceres
It is not free, Estonians pay for it with raised taxes.

Good for the ones with low income you would think, except of course those with
low income that does not use public transport but still has to pay for it.

------
known
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886337](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19886337)

------
PrimeDirective
Tallinn resident for the past 30 years, here.

I don't know what the heck this article is talking about.

> The buses are on time, the trams are shiny and new, and passengers usually
> get a seat.

The buses are not on time. They are constantly leaving early, a problem that
has been brought up numerous times but just doesn't get fixed. The trams and
buses are indeed new(ish) but not shiny. There is a problem with funds
allocated for cleaning the public transportation. Although it's not the worst
by far, but it's also not a rule that they are clean. Especially in the
winter. [1][2][3]

> Tallinn’s city government came up with the idea of free transport after the
> 2008 financial crisis. Estonia was hit badly, and even though the city paid
> more than 70% of public-transport costs, ticket prices were still too high
> for poorer residents.

No, it was for the 2009 local election campaign. Initially the idea was to
keep it for a short duration. Literally no-one had complained about the ticket
prices. They were not expensive, even if our economy was in a bad state. The
same party did this same ploy for the rest of the country too. Literally no-
one asked for this and cost is not the biggest problem, by far.[5][6]

> Since Estonia regained independence in 1991, car ownership rates have
> doubled.

Interesting side note, ever since the Tallinn introduced the free public
transport, car ownership rates have soared.[4][8]

> Opponents branded the idea populist and unaffordable. Estonia was pushing
> through tough austerity measures at the time, including a 10% pay cut for
> public-sector workers. Critics predicted the transport system would become
> overcrowded and underfunded. The row was only resolved by a referendum.

A referendum where 20% of the eligible population only voted.[7] The
referendum was phrased in way where saying "no" didn't make sense. It was a
populist move and the voter turnout mirrors that. Also, I can't remember any
other referendums happening in Tallinn.

> Surprisingly, though, instead of collapsing, public transport has improved,
> despite a €12m hit to the system’s finances from lost ticket sales.
> Tallinn’s population has grown, leading to a boost in local tax intake.
> Additional revenue comes from tourists and non-Tallinn residents, who still
> have to buy tickets. The use of public transport in Tallinn has gone up by
> 10%, while the number of cars in the city centre has gone down by 10%,
> meaning less congestion.

Again, not entirely true. I don't know where the decrease of 10% cars figure
comes from and also the city center is so small, even if it were true, it's
literally a drop in the ocean. I have to pass the city center every day,
actually the way the transportation lines are built up, most people have to
pass the city center.[4][8]

> Free public transport on its own is not enough to stop people driving,
> though the evidence is that it helps. In Tallinn higher parking fees and
> reduced space for cars also played a part in cutting city-centre traffic:
> on-street parking now costs €6 an hour, and some parking spaces and car
> lanes have been replaced by bus lanes. Officials say providing a free
> alternative allowed them to avoid a backlash when driving in the capital was
> made more expensive and less convenient.

Yet the car ownership keeps growing. You'll see the problem clearer when you
compare transportation lines from the Soviet era (30-50 years ago) and realize
the lines have barely changed. Yes, there are some new lines but there are
buses that drive the same route for decades now, when the jobs have shifted
locations.

Also, by funding the "free" public transportation, Tallinn has left schools
and kindergardens underfunded. I do agree that people have definitely gotten
used to it and it is comfortable. I like that they have also included trains
within city limits to this. People are riding trains and we are actually
buying new trains.

TL;DR: * this article is mostly a fluff piece

* spend a day in Tallinn and ride the trams and buses and then to same in Helsinki. We have much to strive for

* it isn't free, we all pay for it and get a crappy experience

* the city has awful pedestrian roads (they are narrow and cars are king) and non-existent bike lanes (especially in the city center)

* they need to modernize the routes

* etc, there's literally a 1000 page book that can be written about Tallinn's transport woes

[1] [https://www.postimees.ee/1790081/bussid-ja-trollid-
valjuvad-...](https://www.postimees.ee/1790081/bussid-ja-trollid-valjuvad-
peatustest-liiga-vara)

[2]
[https://www.delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/rahvahaal/eksperiment...](https://www.delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/rahvahaal/eksperiment-
paljud-tallinna-bussid-soidavad-pidevalt-graafikust-ette?id=69971065)

[3] [https://www.delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/rahvahaal/anna-
teada-...](https://www.delfi.ee/news/paevauudised/rahvahaal/anna-teada-
uhistranspordist-mis-lahkub-peatusest-liiga-vara?id=69733639)

[4] [https://longread.delfi.ee/artiklid/tallinnasse-voorib-iga-
pa...](https://longread.delfi.ee/artiklid/tallinnasse-voorib-iga-paev-
juurde-50-000-autot-linn-jaab-neile-kitsaks?id=83978754)

[5] [https://news.err.ee/833235/survey-free-bus-plan-unpopular-
am...](https://news.err.ee/833235/survey-free-bus-plan-unpopular-among-target-
rural-demographic)

[6] [https://news.err.ee/861958/county-buses-often-overcrowded-
si...](https://news.err.ee/861958/county-buses-often-overcrowded-since-free-
transport-introduced)

[7] [https://news.err.ee/103737/75-vote-for-free-public-
transit-i...](https://news.err.ee/103737/75-vote-for-free-public-transit-in-
tallinn-referendum)

[8] [https://blog.stat.ee/tag/auto/](https://blog.stat.ee/tag/auto/)

~~~
Strom
> _The buses are not on time._

As a fellow long-time Tallinn transport user, I can say that this statement
can be both true and false. It's true in the strictest sense that yes buses
sometimes don't come exactly at the scheduled minute. Also very rarely, but it
does happen, a bus doesn't come at all and you need the next one, which is
usually 5-10min of waiting.

However when we compare it to other places, I think Tallinn is actually very
much among the leaders in reliability. Take something like Italy. It's a
miracle if anything arrives as scheduled. Buses are +/\- 3min wrong as a
standard and often much more. Even the Rome metro doesn't run on schedule!
That one is the most bizzare to me, the metro train could just sit in a
station and not worry about traffic. However they don't and just speed along,
going ahead of schedule.

Then there's the cross-country or even international buses that go through
Estonia. Very much on time, sometimes +/\- 5-10min of their schedule. Now
compare this to something like the US greyhound buses in the northeast. Want
to go from New Haven to Boston? Better be prepared for the scenario where your
bus is delayed 2 hours because of traffic near NYC.

~~~
PrimeDirective
I agree. Italy is definitely a wildcard

------
sebcat
Is it free even if you have to pay for it?

~~~
icebraining
For that matter, is anything free when TANSTAAFL?

The concept still makes sense in context; it's free for people in the user
role, even if they also have the taxpayer role.

