Why is it that no world leader theses days, or none which affects us, is prepared to take drastic measures in order to get rid of a problem?

I am interested to know other members ideas for how they would solve Bangkok's traffic blight, should they have the power to do so.

Mine is simple:

Increase the amount of taxis by 80% and ban all non public transport except for police and VIP transportation.

Anyone still wishing to show everyone that they are rich enough to own a car can have the added pleasure of showing everyone that they have a sticker on their winshield advertising the fact that they have paid bt 50,000 a month for the privaledge of entering outer centeral Bangkok which would be the only exception.

Finally, is it me or were ther no pink taxis when I was here six months ago?

IMHO the taxis in Bangkok are wonderful, mostly brand new and more colours than Jellybabies... Let's give them more room.

I suppose it'll solve itself once the roads are full and traffic comes to a complete gridlock 24hrs/day.

I suppose it'll solve itself once the roads are full and traffic comes to a complete gridlock 24hrs/day.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's how we usually solve things - wait until it can't get any worse, by then it's usually too late.

I wish I had the first page of Ben Elton's Gridlock on hand to quote.

When the subway is spread across the whole city it will help.

I suppose it'll solve itself once the roads are full and traffic comes to a complete gridlock 24hrs/day.

That's how we usually solve things - wait until it can't get any worse, by then it's usually too late.

I wish I had the first page of Ben Elton's Gridlock on hand to quote.

You're right ofcourse and as BKK mentioned extension of the subway etc. might help. But as long as owing a car (and driving it) is considered a symbol of wealth and freedom a lot of people will prefer to waste their time in gridlock. At least I think so

When the subway is spread across the whole city it will help.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Will it?

It didn't help much this time - nobody left their cars to join the 'common people'.

People, especially Thai's, want a status symbol and that which is more difficult to obtain is more of a higher status symbol, be it Armani sunglasses or Lamborghini Diablo's.

But as long as owing a car (and driving it) is considered a symbol of wealth and freedom a lot of people will prefer to waste their time in gridlock. At least I think so

You are probably right... Despite time being money, a very valid saying, they would rather put up with it than lose their symbol of how better they are then the next man... The next man being bumper to bumper either side.

Maybe when they realize the notion 'Quality not quantity' will things change.

Incedentally, last night I saw a Thai man who must have been baking hot, but his leather jacket was really cool and looked expensive, probably Hermes.

The subway does not reach enough of the city yet Scamp. And what about all the people that need to have a car and use it for practical purposes? What will they do with your proposed scheme?

Perhaps you should leave out your

People, especially Thai's, want a status symbol

comments, not only unfounded but it just comes across as you moaning about Thai greed all the time which is obviously upsetting you a great deal considering you mention it in many of your posts.

Powerfull lobby groups worked against public transport in the USA. I should think things would be the same here.

And what about all the people that need to have a car and use it for practical purposes?

&lt;deleted&gt;*k 'em, you can't please evryone.

Something which our Tony Blair needs to be told before being kicked out of office.

Incedentally, last night I saw a Thai man who must have been baking hot, but his leather jacket was really cool and looked expensive, probably Hermes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sometimes you just have to laugh i hope you had a good chuckle at his expense.

An interesting idea but sadly one that wouldn't work and in fact would likely make traffic worse.

Let's say for example that there are 10,000 vehicles on Bangkok roads at a certain time. Say (again hypothetically) that 2,000 of these are buses, 2,000 are taxis and 6,000 are personal cars (I'm ignoring tuk tuks, motorbikes, delivery vehicles etc as you didn't say in your original post what would hapen to these).

If you remove all of the personal cars, then you are left with 6,000 (assuming there is only 1 person in each car) car owners wanting/needing to travel at that time. Do you think they are going to start taking the bus? I doubt it. If they can afford to run cars (and are the kind of people that prefer cars despite the traffic), then they could most likely afford and want taxis. Demand for taxis will far exceed supply and as a result in a very short space of time new taxis will start appearing to meet that supply (far in excess of the 80% taxi increase you mention) until that supply is met. So the new ratio from our hypothetical 10,000 vehicles would most likely be 2,000 buses and 8,000 taxis which hasn't reduced the traffic at all.

I would guess that such events would make the traffic much worse than now. At present many of the cars on the road are probably only making a couple of journeys per day (once to work/do shopping etc and once to return home after work/shopping) and the rest of the time they are parked somewhere off the road. The taxis that replace these cars however, won't make just 2 journeys a day and will spend most of the day on the road trawling for customers.

A better solution to reduce the number of vehicles on the road would be to also ban taxis and hugely increase the fleet and network of buses and other forms of mass transport.