| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 5:23 pm Post subject: Shinbundang Line to open October 28th |
 |
|
http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/html/718/2942718.html?cloc=joongangdaily|home|newslist1
| Quote: |
After six and a half years of construction, the Shinbundang Line will start service between Seoul and Bundang in Gyeonggi on Oct. 28, cutting dramatically the commute time between Gangnam Station and Jeongja Station.
Also called the DX Line, the latest addition to the Seoul metropolitan area�s subway network is fully automated - requiring no driver - and spans six stations: Gangnam, Yangjae, Yangjae Forest, Mount Cheonggye, Pangyo and Jeongja.
Passengers will be able to transfer to lines No. 2, 3 and the Bundang Line from Gangnam, Yangjae and Jeongja Stations, respectively.
The 1.23 trillion won ($1.05 billion) subway line is 17.3 kilometers (10.7 miles) long and takes only 16 minutes from Gangnam to Jeongja. The same commute currently takes 45 minutes on the Bundang Line and 35 to 45 minutes on an express bus.
|
Just remember this
| Quote: |
But the relatively high fare for the new Shinbundang Line has drawn criticism. Passengers will be charged 1,600 won ($1.37) on their T-money transit card - 700 won more than other subway lines.
Park Jong-hee, 57, an Anyang resident, said, �I think the new line is important for commuting, but it is too expensive.�
Transportation experts said that the high fare was unavoidable because the new line was entirely built by a private enterprise.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cdninkorea
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If the price is higher because it's built by private companies, that probably just means it's not (as?) subsidized. I think the subway and bus shouldn't be subsidized at all to reflect the true cost of taking transit. After all, why should someone who never uses public transit have to pay for those who do?
Anyway, this new line will be great. I also won't be surprised if real estate prices in Bundang go even higher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That price quote is misleading.
900 won is the standard rate for the subway, but if you are taking one from Gangnam to you will be paying MORE because of the distance. Yes, you get charges 900 won when you first scan your card, but I'm sure you will get charges another 300-500 won when you scan to get off the subway.
So, the new line would only be like 200-300 won more, not 700. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LOL 1,600 won = expensive for a subway ride. Try multiplying that by about 5 to go one stop on the London underground. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ThingsComeAround
Joined: 07 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think its great that there is a new line- but one thing I don't get... its automated and more expensive? Wasn't the whole idea behind automating the trains was to avoid paying for hiring & training new motormen?
Privatized, Schmivatized. Crooks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yaya
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The bad thing is, the rest of line 9 won't be finished until 2015. The line is supposed to go to Bangi-dong near Olympic Park. Oh well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patong Dong
Joined: 06 May 2003
Location: On Nut
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2011 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cdninkorea, I don't think you're really thinking this through.
After all, why should someone who never uses public transit have to pay for those who do? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cdninkorea wrote: |
If the price is higher because it's built by private companies, that probably just means it's not (as?) subsidized. I think the subway and bus shouldn't be subsidized at all to reflect the true cost of taking transit. After all, why should someone who never uses public transit have to pay for those who do?
Anyway, this new line will be great. I also won't be surprised if real estate prices in Bundang go even higher. |
Because Korea imports 100% of its energy, and it's cities are some of the most densely populated places in the developed world. The government subsidizes the public transit system to encourage people to use it instead of buying a car which 1) uses more energy and 2) creates more pollution and traffic congestion.
So, don't look at it as subsidizing public transit. People who never use public transit are either paying taxes to subsidize it, OR they are spending that money on higher gasoline prices/more time spent sitting in the heavier traffic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| cdninkorea wrote: |
If the price is higher because it's built by private companies, that probably just means it's not (as?) subsidized. I think the subway and bus shouldn't be subsidized at all to reflect the true cost of taking transit. After all, why should someone who never uses public transit have to pay for those who do?
Anyway, this new line will be great. I also won't be surprised if real estate prices in Bundang go even higher. |
Because Korea imports 100% of its energy, and it's cities are some of the most densely populated places in the developed world. The government subsidizes the public transit system to encourage people to use it instead of buying a car which 1) uses more energy and 2) creates more pollution and traffic congestion.
So, don't look at it as subsidizing public transit. People who never use public transit are either paying taxes to subsidize it, OR they are spending that money on higher gasoline prices/more time spent sitting in the heavier traffic. |
Precisely. Subsidizing public transport is more like putting a damper on externalities (particularly in Korea's case). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jc1257
Joined: 22 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was wondering when it would open. My school overlooks the Jeongja stop and I have been noticing a lot of activity. It appears that they have been doing some open trial runs, as I've seen adjummas, house wives, and kids coming out of the station.
Thanks for the update. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cdninkorea
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Why should it be government policy to reduce energy consumption? Let those who use the energy pay for it if they like, but give them the choice. Regarding pollution and congestion, a better way to take care of that externality would be by directly charging those who cause the pollution and congestion; gasoline taxes, toll roads, higher tolls to drive in Seoul during peak hours, etc. People out in the countryside and those who don't use public transit and those who don't own a car in the cities shouldn't bear the cost of those who do. Privatize public transit! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathanrutledge
Joined: 01 May 2008
Location: Marakesh
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2011 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cdninkorea wrote: |
| Why should it be government policy to reduce energy consumption? Let those who use the energy pay for it if they like, but give them the choice. Regarding pollution and congestion, a better way to take care of that externality would be by directly charging those who cause the pollution and congestion; gasoline taxes, toll roads, higher tolls to drive in Seoul during peak hours, etc. People out in the countryside and those who don't use public transit and those who don't own a car in the cities shouldn't bear the cost of those who do. Privatize public transit! |
Because the ROK Constitution specifically says that the government " may regulate and coordinate economic affairs in order to maintain balanced growth and stability of the national economy... to prevent... the abuse of economic power and to democratize the economy through harmony among the economic agents."
Since energy prices are so volatile, they easily disrupt "balanced growth" and a "stable national economy." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
An informative article-
http://asiancorrespondent.com/68096/life-in-korea-the-sinbundang-line-opens-seoul/
| Quote: |
■The line has six stations. From left to right: Gangnam station (line 2), Yangjae station (line 3), Yangjae Citizen�s Forest station, Cheonggyesan station, Pangyo station, and Jeongja station (Bundang line).
■Trains run at the same times as the rest of the subway system � from 5:30am to 1:00am during weekdays and until midnight on weekends and holidays.
■During weekday rush hours (7-9am and 6-8pm), trains arrive every 5 minutes; the rest of the day, trains arrive every 8 minutes.
■On weekends and holidays, trains arrive every 8 minutes.
■The subway�s fare is 1,600 won (using your T-money card), with a 50% discount given to children and 20% discount given to teenagers.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zyzyfer
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: who, what, where, when, why, how?
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nathanrutledge wrote: |
| cdninkorea wrote: |
| Why should it be government policy to reduce energy consumption? Let those who use the energy pay for it if they like, but give them the choice. Regarding pollution and congestion, a better way to take care of that externality would be by directly charging those who cause the pollution and congestion; gasoline taxes, toll roads, higher tolls to drive in Seoul during peak hours, etc. People out in the countryside and those who don't use public transit and those who don't own a car in the cities shouldn't bear the cost of those who do. Privatize public transit! |
Because the ROK Constitution specifically says that the government " may regulate and coordinate economic affairs in order to maintain balanced growth and stability of the national economy... to prevent... the abuse of economic power and to democratize the economy through harmony among the economic agents."
Since energy prices are so volatile, they easily disrupt "balanced growth" and a "stable national economy." |
pwnt
I really dislike the anti-public transport groveling about subsidizing something they don't use. It's a hot topic back in my hometown right now due to a recently-installed light rail system. The anti-PT crowd loathes the bloody thing.
Me, I'm all for fewer cars on the road. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bekinseki
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zyzyfer wrote: |
Me, I'm all for fewer cars on the road. |
As am I. And the people who continue driving cars should also support having fewer cars to share the road with.
If you drive a car, would you rather share a road with one bus, or 16 more cars? Everyone benefits from having less traffic. Would you rather be stuck in traffic every day, or have a fraction of your taxes go toward making your drive significantly more pleasant? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
