I don't know why you're being downvoted. Anyone who followed the various public debates in France or is slightly familiar with the country knows that will be paid via a high tax.
The parent is downvoted because they are making an obvious statement that is not productive to the discussion and doing so in a condescending tone.
Free public transport in the title clearly means that using public transport will incur no cost, not that the entirety of the public transport network would require zero funding.
Funding a system by introducing new taxes is a choice, not necessarily the obvious one. There are other solutions. But it's very likely to be a high tax on local citizens in this specific case, because that's how France work, generally speaking, and what involved politicians suggested in public interviews.
Funding a system by introducing new taxes is a choice, not necessarily the obvious one. There are other solutions. But it's very likely to be a high tax in this specific case, because that's how France work, generally speaking, and what involved politicians suggested in public interviews.
It's condescending because I look down on these types of articles.
Journalists should stick to the truth.
I realize you are able to interpret what is says so that "free" means "using public transport will incur no [additional] cost, but people shouldn't have to do that.
Enough people believe exactly that to make such statements problematic. If we expand this beyond economist, there are literally people who believe in magic. If we expand magic to include religion, a vast majority believe in magic. Journalism should inform.
Sure, a lot of people have irrational beliefs. But I doubt that a significant share of (adult) people isn't aware that free things still have to be funded somehow. Do you know of any research about that question?
The thing is, for a lot of people it is really free.
Poor people pay very little tax, rich people (admitting they wanted to use public transport for whatever reason) use offshore tricks to pay very little tax.
So you have a vocal poor majority of people telling a minority of marginally richer middle class to foot the bill and a handful of rich people who pay the government to make sure things stay the same and they don't need to start paying.
Free public transport in the title clearly means that using public transport will incur no cost, not that the entirety of the public transport network would require zero funding.