Paul1405 Taking your last comment into account okay but now it raises some important issues.

Quote "Meaning of Subsidise; support financially. There is no financial cost, so therefore there is no subsidy. Got it Phil?"

** That statement is absolutely false.
1st Most train and buses are guaranteed a certain level of profit by the government, if 6,000 refugees get cheaper travel the overall revenue the operator earns is less. Which means taxpayers have to make up the shortfall.

I don't know if you really are unaware of this or making things up in the hope no one knows the truth. ** Got it Paul1405? **

Further Quote "The excess capacity of the public transport system in NSW easily accommodates this at no additional cost."

** Another stupid statement if trains and buses were not subsidized the services that operate out of peak hours, that usually only carry a few passengers would be discontinued, economics of business 101.

Also
Quote "Blowfly" is a journalistic term to describe the reporter given the task of buzzing around some bit of filth, generally a non story like this one, and slanting it in such a way that the simpletons are going to read it and believe it.

** So by this part "given the task of buzzing around some bit of filth" you think that asylum seekers are filth, because they are the ones being subsidized which is what the articles is about. **

Totally ignorant of the facts Phil.

// 1st Most train and buses are guaranteed a certain level of profit by the government,// Public transport is a service not a profit making business.

Nonsense buses are either operated by 'State Transit' or a private contractor, passenger trains are operated by 'State Rail'. STA tender every 5 years, for the operational rights to run government bus services. Although recently for philosophical reasons the Tory government in NSW has promoted private tendering at the expense of the STA. A case in point is the privatising of inner west bus services in Sydney, where the STA (The previous operator) was excluded from the tendering process by the goverernment.

Now hear this one, no revenue goes to the operator, it is all collected by State Treasury, every last cent. Consolidated revenue meets the operational costs of bus, ferry and rail services in NSW. The government also meets the replacement costs of all three. There is no profit in public transport, unless of course you artificially manufacture one for the private operator, which they do. There was a hullabaloo a while back when it was discovered a private operator was running a $1,000/trip service in Western Sydney several times a day without any passengers. Well that was the contract he had with the Government. he had to run the service to get paid, the number of passengers did not matter.

The service is run with a holistic approach, where it is the overall service that has to be provided, not the individual runs or journeys that are of account. There is no account of how many passengers travel on any particular train. The only known figure is the approximate number on a particular line, at particular times, which is the number of paying passenger plus a gustimate of the number on non-payers.

Phil can you show how Treasury falked out an extra $4million because 6,000 extra passengers were let onto public transport system, I would say you can't. Revenue remained the same, operational costs remain the same, where is the extra $4million being put in?

Paul1405.
So if it is not subsidized why this. One of these project could be given $4 million less if the asylum seekers paid what others paid.

NSW Budget pledges $20 billion for roads and rail.
"Sydney Metro rail project: $6.2 billion over four years to progress the 30km metro line from Chatswood to the CBD and Bankstown. There will also be $5.8 billion for the northwest line

Other rail projects: $64 million in 2016-17 to continue planning for the Parramatta Light Rail system. More than $1 billion over four years for the suburban rail network and $518.4 million for the new trains"

The above figures show how heavily the subsidy to rail transport

Quote "show how Treasury falked out an extra $4million because 6,000 extra passengers were let onto public transport system, I would say you can't. Revenue remained the same, operational costs remain the same, where is the extra $4million being put in?"

** Paul please try to get your head around this simple analyses.

If those 6,000 asylum seekers were not receiving the subsidized transport which is estimated at $4 million, Railcorps financial statement would be + $4 million thus needing that amount not having to be given to them from the taxpayers.
_____________________________________________

I wrote "1st Most train and buses are guaranteed a certain level of profit by the government"

You wrote "Public transport is a service not a profit making business."

** Not all public transport is run by Government some are run by private businesses. **

Also.
** If it is fake why has the article including the figures been picked up by.
http://railpage.com.au/news/s/taxpayers-shell-out-4-million-for-asylum-seekers-to-receive-discounts-on-public-transpor

Corrected link
http://railpage.com.au/news/s/taxpayers-shell-out-4-million-for-asylum-seekers-to-receive-discounts-on-public-transport

Phil, given your rabid hatred of asylum seekers, you obviously don't want to see them to be given anything. No free ride on the bus, they can walk as far as you are concerned, while you drive by in your fancy automobile. Just as you had no choice to be born into a well off society, these people had no choice as to the situation they came into.
Well, you keep your hatred burning, I'll just stick with what I believe in.