| Labour's plans for the trains. 17:03 - Dec 2 with 16862 views | monytowbray |
✂ï¸Cut rail fares by 33% from Jan 2020
ðŸ‘Save the average commuter £1097/yr
✔ï¸Fair fares for part-time workers
🎫Deliver a simple, London-style ticketing system nationwide
👛Free rail travel for under 16s
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/labour-rail-fares-cut-train
Backed, I think a 3rd off is fair for investment back if public owned. At the minute they charge double the cost of transporting commuters on a sh1te service to line the pockets of shareholders. Part time tickets have also needed to be a thing for far too long, as well as a simplier ticket/price structure.
I'd actually happily pay for trains knowing it was for the greater good of the nation.
|  |
| |  |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:54 - Dec 3 with 2178 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:31 - Dec 3 by lowhouseblue |
the point here is that the people in rural areas doing the driving don't live in marginal constituencies, whereas lots of the people doing the commuting on trains do. it's simple electoral / bribery maths. |
You literally have a negative spin on everything suggested by Labour. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:55 - Dec 3 with 2174 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:39 - Dec 3 by lowhouseblue |
if it diminishes your credibility- yes. trust and credibility is political gold dust.
just imagine a party being less trusted than boris. wowzer. |
There's no such thing as a party less trusted than Boris. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:57 - Dec 3 with 2172 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:54 - Dec 3 by BrixtonBlue |
You literally have a negative spin on everything suggested by Labour. |
you don't get elected unless people trust you on spending and tax.
everything that labour has said under corbyn and mcdonnell has destroyed trust on spending and tax. you have more fiscal credibility than they do. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:25 - Dec 3 with 2115 views | Ryorry |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:22 - Dec 3 by jeera |
"Adding wheelchair access a) Is for people who can't help it (rural dwellers could at least choose not to live there),"
Holy crap. Did you really just type that? |
Wow. Perhaps he thinks the countryside should just be cleared of all human habitation, without having thought about agriculture, food production, rural industries such as wealth-creating tourism, support services for people working in those sectors (medical, machinery, schools etc), overcrowding in towns/cities causing health problems etc etc etc. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:29 - Dec 3 with 2103 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:25 - Dec 3 by Ryorry |
Wow. Perhaps he thinks the countryside should just be cleared of all human habitation, without having thought about agriculture, food production, rural industries such as wealth-creating tourism, support services for people working in those sectors (medical, machinery, schools etc), overcrowding in towns/cities causing health problems etc etc etc. |
stop being sane and rational - you're showing the rest of up. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:42 - Dec 3 with 2088 views | TractorWood |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:47 - Dec 3 by GaryCooper |
Get two flights a year at the current rate, the next two say plus 20%, anything after that 200% more expensive, frequent flyers are polluting the world. |
The majority of frequent flyers have no choice as they will be on business. The big listed businesses will either then travel less which is good for the environment or travel the same and give some more buntz to the exchequer. Happy days. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:46 - Dec 3 with 2083 views | footers |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:25 - Dec 3 by Ryorry |
Wow. Perhaps he thinks the countryside should just be cleared of all human habitation, without having thought about agriculture, food production, rural industries such as wealth-creating tourism, support services for people working in those sectors (medical, machinery, schools etc), overcrowding in towns/cities causing health problems etc etc etc. |
If we continue with privatised rail networks that's exactly what's happening to rural places, thanks to them being not 'cost-effective' enough for them to service.
Just anecdotally, the Lowestoft-Norwich line used to stop at places like Somerleyton, Haddiscoe, Buckenham, etc far more regularly than they do now (Buckenham altogether). What have the good folk of these places done to deserve that? Why should they be punished with ever-diminishing services simply for living in smaller towns or villages?
A nationalised rail service wouldn't have to account for pure profitability in these terms, keeping more rural places alive with important transport links :) |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:46 - Dec 3 with 2082 views | footers |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:42 - Dec 3 by TractorWood |
The majority of frequent flyers have no choice as they will be on business. The big listed businesses will either then travel less which is good for the environment or travel the same and give some more buntz to the exchequer. Happy days. |
I wonder if they've heard of Skype. We seem to do OK with it :) | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:57 - Dec 3 with 2067 views | TractorWood |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:46 - Dec 3 by footers |
I wonder if they've heard of Skype. We seem to do OK with it :) |
Depends on the timezone. If you are trying to do a full days work with Singaporean/Japanese/Oz colleagues from the UK you will struggle. You'd have to effectively do a night shift from home. [Post edited 3 Dec 2019 18:59]
| |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 19:00 - Dec 3 with 2061 views | Ryorry |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:46 - Dec 3 by footers |
If we continue with privatised rail networks that's exactly what's happening to rural places, thanks to them being not 'cost-effective' enough for them to service.
Just anecdotally, the Lowestoft-Norwich line used to stop at places like Somerleyton, Haddiscoe, Buckenham, etc far more regularly than they do now (Buckenham altogether). What have the good folk of these places done to deserve that? Why should they be punished with ever-diminishing services simply for living in smaller towns or villages?
A nationalised rail service wouldn't have to account for pure profitability in these terms, keeping more rural places alive with important transport links :) |
Well made points :) Has to be properly costed tho.
What you describe already happened back in the day with Beeching of course; and more recently is happening right now with rural bus services being cut. The effect is then compounded when you have local GP surgeries being shut down/amalgamated, requiring more cars on the road to get to the now further away essential services (whether people buy their own cars & drive themselves, or depend on volunteers to help).
It's been a beef of mine for decades that no Govt. of any hue ever seems to give any thought to services in the UK actually being integrated (e.g health services & transport as above). Possibly because it requires too much common sense & thinking about the future :/ | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 19:07 - Dec 3 with 2052 views | longtimefan |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:46 - Dec 3 by footers |
I wonder if they've heard of Skype. We seem to do OK with it :) |
Skype for Business is great. Use it daily for international collaboration. Not looking forward to it’s replacement by Teams in the near future which I find far less intuitive. |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:50 - Dec 4 with 1982 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 18:25 - Dec 3 by Ryorry |
Wow. Perhaps he thinks the countryside should just be cleared of all human habitation, without having thought about agriculture, food production, rural industries such as wealth-creating tourism, support services for people working in those sectors (medical, machinery, schools etc), overcrowding in towns/cities causing health problems etc etc etc. |
Disingenuous and taking it personally as per usual. I've even clarified that I don't mean that but you still went there anywhere to follow the crowd and score a cheap Internet point.
Funny how you always claim to have me on ignore but you're always there to get offended at my posts. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:59 - Dec 4 with 1977 views | BrixtonBlue |
As I suspected before I clicked the link, you've just lazily linked to rural population figures (and no figures about train usage). Anyone can do that to look like they've provided a link that wins an argument.
And I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 07:58 - Dec 4 with 1955 views | Bogblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:59 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
As I suspected before I clicked the link, you've just lazily linked to rural population figures (and no figures about train usage). Anyone can do that to look like they've provided a link that wins an argument.
And I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. |
someone posted a link earler showing train users were about 9% and healey's official rural population stats showed about 16% so it was pretty easy sums tbh | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 08:00 - Dec 4 with 1954 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:59 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
As I suspected before I clicked the link, you've just lazily linked to rural population figures (and no figures about train usage). Anyone can do that to look like they've provided a link that wins an argument.
And I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. |
Regular train usage is 9% of the population, as already noted in this thread. Even if they were all rural dwellers (and clearly they are not), there would be more rural dwellers that don’t use trains
‘Only option to drive’ is misleading - technically anyone could walk/cycle several miles to a train station. However I would again suggest it is fairly obvious that those living in them will not have immediate access to a train station, and those that do at best have a very limited service which rules out train travel for most things
Your original point was also that this policy was ok if it appeals to the majority - by any stretch of the imagination I can’t see how 9% is anywhere close the majority
Sometimes it’s ok to admit you were wrong |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:14 - Dec 4 with 1912 views | ChiefXL |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 19:07 - Dec 3 by longtimefan |
Skype for Business is great. Use it daily for international collaboration. Not looking forward to it’s replacement by Teams in the near future which I find far less intuitive. |
Skype for business is a poor, poor replacement for developing a rapport with someone. I'd happily pay the additional tax for flying to meet someone because of the additional profits that face to face contact generates.
You need to look them in the eye, shake them by the hand. Maybe give their bum a little squeeze.....
*Disclaimer, my first point is serious. My second one not so much.... |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:16 - Dec 4 with 1906 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 07:58 - Dec 4 by Bogblue |
someone posted a link earler showing train users were about 9% and healey's official rural population stats showed about 16% so it was pretty easy sums tbh |
Again, I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:19 - Dec 4 with 1904 views | ChiefXL |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:16 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
Again, I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. |
You said that they should move, right? | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:22 - Dec 4 with 1894 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 08:00 - Dec 4 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Regular train usage is 9% of the population, as already noted in this thread. Even if they were all rural dwellers (and clearly they are not), there would be more rural dwellers that don’t use trains
‘Only option to drive’ is misleading - technically anyone could walk/cycle several miles to a train station. However I would again suggest it is fairly obvious that those living in them will not have immediate access to a train station, and those that do at best have a very limited service which rules out train travel for most things
Your original point was also that this policy was ok if it appeals to the majority - by any stretch of the imagination I can’t see how 9% is anywhere close the majority
Sometimes it’s ok to admit you were wrong |
You're exclusively talking about trains here and not mentioning other options such as buses and taxis - even bicycles.
There's nothing misleading in what I've posted. Clearly if someone had to walk miles to get to work that wouldn't be acceptable.
I'll happily admit I'm wrong when someone proves to me that there are more people who HAVE to drive to work (no other reasonable option) than there are train users in the UK.
I can't believe we're having a discussion on lower train fares being a bad idea, frankly. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:23 - Dec 4 with 1892 views | giant_stow |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:16 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
Again, I specifically said people in very rural places whose only option is to drive. Not all rural dwellers. |
We all say stupid things sometimes mr - I had to eat Darth's sh1t last week over a stupid comment i made for instance - tasted sweet and spicey. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:26 - Dec 4 with 1881 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:19 - Dec 4 by ChiefXL |
You said that they should move, right? |
No, I didn't say that. Try reading it again. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:27 - Dec 4 with 1879 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:23 - Dec 4 by giant_stow |
We all say stupid things sometimes mr - I had to eat Darth's sh1t last week over a stupid comment i made for instance - tasted sweet and spicey. |
I feel for you, but I don't know what it's got to do with me. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:27 - Dec 4 with 1878 views | giant_stow |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:27 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
I feel for you, but I don't know what it's got to do with me. |
Well you've just had a bit of mare on this thread really - best to stand down. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:32 - Dec 4 with 1859 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:27 - Dec 4 by giant_stow |
Well you've just had a bit of mare on this thread really - best to stand down. |
No I haven't. I said a thing, people wanted me to have said something different, but I didn't so they just went with what they wanted.
I admit when I'm wrong.
Disability isn't a choice. Where you live is. That's not to say people should just move. I've been quite clear I don't mean that. And I've even suggested a subsidy for people who have no other option but to drive. But equating them with disabled people is wrong... and disgusting frankly.
I'm still pretty confident I'm right with that opinion. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
