The Politics Thread

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

It's impossible to project, but really if it had still been BR, your ticket would be nearer £800 rather than £200, never mind £20.

The company I work for can, for every single structure on the rail network, tell if your train will hit it or not. That system wasn't in place under BR. BR actively fought against such a system.
So I can confidently say that I've saved lives. Thousands of lives. I think that improves more than shit, actually.

And to get technical, most people imagine railway lines as being immobile. They're not. They move under pressure of train movement. Which means every single metre of track needs to be monitored so that the track doesn't move so far that a train hits a bridge or another train on a parallel track. You need to think about that when you next pass a train at speed going the opposite direction. You're still alive because the didn't hit, and they didn't hit because a private company wrote the software that keeps you safe. And another private company monitors that software to make sure you don't hit something.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

It's impossible to project, but really if it had still been BR, your ticket would be nearer £800 rather than £200, never mind £20.

The company I work for can, for every single structure on the rail network, tell if your train will hit it or not. That system wasn't in place under BR. BR actively fought against such a system.
So I can confidently say that I've saved lives. Thousands of lives. I think that improves more than shit, actually.

My train never fcuking turned up, so your system doesn't really matter

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

It's impossible to project, but really if it had still been BR, your ticket would be nearer £800 rather than £200, never mind £20.

The company I work for can, for every single structure on the rail network, tell if your train will hit it or not. That system wasn't in place under BR. BR actively fought against such a system.
So I can confidently say that I've saved lives. Thousands of lives. I think that improves more than shit, actually.

My train never fcuking turned up, so your system doesn't really matter

There's no arguing that. You do realise that the Quiraing on Skye is about as far as you can get from the rail network on Britain without the need for a boat?

[Harry Genshaw]

I once heard a proposal that our railway system was so fecked, we'd be better tarmaccing over the lot and creating new highways solely for the use of multi passenger and goods vehicles. I've often wondered if that could work

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

It's impossible to project, but really if it had still been BR, your ticket would be nearer £800 rather than £200, never mind £20.

The company I work for can, for every single structure on the rail network, tell if your train will hit it or not. That system wasn't in place under BR. BR actively fought against such a system.
So I can confidently say that I've saved lives. Thousands of lives. I think that improves more than shit, actually.

My train never fcuking turned up, so your system doesn't really matter

There's no arguing that. You do realise that the Quiraing on Skye is about as far as you can get from the rail network on Britain without the need for a boat?

I'll be living almost as far from the mainland as you can get on Skye we also looked at moving to Tiree but didn't have enough cash to do what we wanted. If the business falls through then there's another on Shetland we have an eye on. We're aiming to get as far away from trains as possible

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I once heard a proposal that our railway system was so fecked, we'd be better tarmaccing over the lot and creating new highways solely for the use of multi passenger and goods vehicles. I've often wondered if that could work

Without being controversial, and trying hard to cover my sources, I was actually involved in that proposal.
In seven words: Yes it could but at VAST cost.
To put it into perspective, there is an abandoned railway line between Matlock and Buxton. Some 17 miles. It has taken nearly 20 years to convert it into a footpath/cycle trail including the five tunnels it encompasses. To return it to a rail network would cost circa half a billion pounds. To convert it into a non rail freight network would cost in the that region plus an extra 500 million.
The estimated cost to convert all of our rail network to a dedicated road transport network is in the order of 15 years of GDP. I won't even bore you with the number that is.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The current system costs the tax payer significantly more, not to mention the customers too, than it did under BR. Even allowing for inflation. Having suffered for many years on the Thameslink route and regular travel between London and Manchester, I can tell you the service is as shit now as it was then. Difference being a walk up ticket costs about 200 quid rather than 25-30.

Nationalisation may not be the answer, but privatisation certainly isn't as it's more expensive and hasn't improved shit.

It's impossible to project, but really if it had still been BR, your ticket would be nearer £800 rather than £200, never mind £20.

The company I work for can, for every single structure on the rail network, tell if your train will hit it or not. That system wasn't in place under BR. BR actively fought against such a system.
So I can confidently say that I've saved lives. Thousands of lives. I think that improves more than shit, actually.

My train never fcuking turned up, so your system doesn't really matter

There's no arguing that. You do realise that the Quiraing on Skye is about as far as you can get from the rail network on Britain without the need for a boat?

I'll be living almost as far from the mainland as you can get on Skye we also looked at moving to Tiree but didn't have enough cash to do what we wanted. If the business falls through then there's another on Shetland we have an eye on. We're aiming to get as far away from trains as possible

I wondered which brewery was '5 minutes down the road'.
I now know that's not Cuillin Brewery.
My favourite up there is An Teallach, really good beer. But that should probably be on another thread...

[Prufrock]

Two things.

1) I think politicians are broadly hard done to. Most of them are bright, hard working and really do do their best in a game they can't win.

With that caveat, Chris Grayling is a grade A* cnut. The worst of the worst. Rees-Mogg level reactionary, with the brains of IDS and the soft touch of Gove. Pound for pound the worst minister this country has had in living memory. So bad Gove looked genuinely radiant at MoJ following him.

2) loath as I am to give Spots credit, he talks a lot of sense on the railways. Yes I think broadly that services that are run without competition don't benefit from market forces and so the public sector should be considered. However, one organisation running the entire rail network would be (and was) a disaster. If Corbyn's labour had any intellectual value they would be trying to set up small versatile state run mini corps to compete with the private sector in parts of the rail network. Instead they want to turn it into a nation-wide Rollercoaster Tycoon.

As for £200 walk up price... I find it hard to argue.. The only people who pay that are businesses (who are, and should be subsiding the rest of the network) and unorganised clots like me who don't trust themselves to get a specific train (and it isn't £200. It's about £90 from London-Bolton). Yes, the dearest ticket in Europe is miiiiiles cheaper, but the cheapest isn't. Our system is far from perfect but that reason isn't why.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

According to Interweb it costs over £300 for an open return to Manchester from Euston. There are myriad reasons why someone can't book weeks in advance for specific trains in order to access sensible prices. The system is intentionally complicated with an unnecessary amount of options and prices, designed exactly to screw the majority in return for a small number of cheap tickets. It should be simple with peak, off peak and cheaper advance versions with specific train times. Season tickets where applicable too.

[Prufrock]

That's only for a walk up peak time ticket (which is a very narrow window). I can think of very limited circumstances where a non-business user would have to pay that price at that short notice.

Walk up price outside that window is £90 which is still a lot but nowhere near the headline figure usually used.

I do totally agree though that the pricing structure is (quite probably deliberately) opaque and that many people get screwed because of it. There should be more consumer protection fur rail tickets. You should also be able to claim refunds more easily for late and overcrowded trains.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

All I know is it used to cost me around 30 quid or so to walk up and now it costs 300 for the equivalent.

[BWFC_Insane]

...and before you ramble on about "a unified national rail service" I'd just like to remind you in case you'd forgotten (actually that's code for you never knew in the first place), the insurmountable problems of third rail systems in the south being incompatible with overhead electrification systems in the north being incompatible with heritage systems in the midlands which can accommodate neither third rail or overhead electrification. And we haven't even started on the incompatibility with Scottish and Welsh routes. And that's all from an infrastructure perspective that takes no account of the problems with routes and timetables and ticketing.
Nationalisation isn't an answer, not if you want efficiency. All Nationalisation will do is bring us back to the inefficient behemoth that was BR - at taxpayer's expense.

Ha. The privatised rail network costs the taxpayer more than nationalised rail did. It costs the consumer more. The reliability of the services has decreased. Overcrowding is far higher than in virtually any major European country, many of which run public railway systems.

Its a complete joke to suggest its been anything other than a total and utter unmitigated disaster.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

[BWFC_Insane]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

In a week where the leader of the free world thinks the solution to school shootings is to arm teachers? Not so sure....

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

In a week where the leader of the free world thinks the solution to school shootings is to arm teachers? Not so sure....

We always knew Trump had that opinion. It comes as an unwelcome surprise that Trudeau is that big a tw@t, so I'll stick with my statement thank you very much...

[Montreal Wanderer]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

Which particular twatism are you referring to? His Indian dress sense?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

Which particular twatism are you referring to? His Indian dress sense?

That's a very small part of it. It's a desire, or preference for Khalistan. It's like, say, Merkel, came over to Canada wearing a Louis XVI bureau, eating croissants, and demanding that all the Eeeenglish be kicked out of Montreal.
It's beyond crass. It's fomentary (< I know!).

[Montreal Wanderer]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

Which particular twatism are you referring to? His Indian dress sense?

That's a very small part of it. It's a desire, or preference for Khalistan. It's like, say, Merkel, came over to Canada wearing a Louis XVI bureau, eating croissants, and demanding that all the Eeeenglish be kicked out of Montreal.
It's beyond crass. It's fomentary (< I know!).

But wait... de Gaulle did that in 1967 - (not sure what he was wearing though).

[Bruce Rioja]

There's little doubt left in my mind that, after Macron, Trudeau has triumphed as the most ridiculous tw@t in politics this week. He makes Kim look sincere.

Which particular twatism are you referring to? His Indian dress sense?

That's a very small part of it. It's a desire, or preference for Khalistan. It's like, say, Merkel, came over to Canada wearing a Louis XVI bureau, eating croissants, and demanding that all the Eeeenglish be kicked out of Montreal.
It's beyond crass. It's fomentary (< I know!).

But wait... de Gaulle did that in 1967 - (not sure what he was wearing though).

Are Canadians not more than a little embarrassed to see their PM dancing around like that?