| Labour's plans for the trains. 17:03 - Dec 2 with 16870 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 12:45 - Dec 4 with 1448 views | giant_stow |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:32 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
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. |
I will just have to live your disgust, rather than more head against a wall stuff. And no, I'm not going to eat your sh1t. no sir. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 23:21 - Dec 4 with 1389 views | Bogblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:22 - Dec 4 by BrixtonBlue |
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. |
Yours is a very Londoncentric view, when did you last live in the countryside proper, if ever? Only half those living in rural areas live in towns where there is more than one shop, and many towns don't have train stations. Even less of the rural population live on bus routes and even if they do, hourly buses from 7am to 7pm don't get you and your family to the cinema, kids multiple activities, work overtime. Taxis are £2 a mile and unaffordable on a regular basis. The rural population is increasingly elderly and even for fit people, cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening isn't practical. Living rurally is also not a choice for many who are tied to jobs, elderly parents and so on. |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 00:12 - Dec 5 with 1365 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 23:21 - Dec 4 by Bogblue |
Yours is a very Londoncentric view, when did you last live in the countryside proper, if ever? Only half those living in rural areas live in towns where there is more than one shop, and many towns don't have train stations. Even less of the rural population live on bus routes and even if they do, hourly buses from 7am to 7pm don't get you and your family to the cinema, kids multiple activities, work overtime. Taxis are £2 a mile and unaffordable on a regular basis. The rural population is increasingly elderly and even for fit people, cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening isn't practical. Living rurally is also not a choice for many who are tied to jobs, elderly parents and so on. |
Ok I give up. Train fares are absolutely fine - put them up if anything - and disabled people should be grateful they don't live somewhere remote.
50% of all rural people only have one shop?!? Jesus, I'm going to open a shop.
Read that sentence again - HALF of all people who live in a rural community ONLY HAVE ONE SHOP!!!
Then you talk about going to the cinema when I was talking about people WHO HAVE TO DRIVE FOR WORK.
And I've suggested reasonable travel. But you've taken that and thrown in "cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening." Clearly unreasonable.
The way you've made up huge swathes of what I've said, rather than what I actually said, is almost impressive. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 04:54 - Dec 5 with 1331 views | TractorWood |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 23:21 - Dec 4 by Bogblue |
Yours is a very Londoncentric view, when did you last live in the countryside proper, if ever? Only half those living in rural areas live in towns where there is more than one shop, and many towns don't have train stations. Even less of the rural population live on bus routes and even if they do, hourly buses from 7am to 7pm don't get you and your family to the cinema, kids multiple activities, work overtime. Taxis are £2 a mile and unaffordable on a regular basis. The rural population is increasingly elderly and even for fit people, cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening isn't practical. Living rurally is also not a choice for many who are tied to jobs, elderly parents and so on. |
I live 20 miles from Cambridge and drive everyday which takes 20-30 minutes barring catastrophic jams. Public transport including me thrashing the foldup bike for 4 miles each way takes an hour and costs £13. Actually taking public transport door to door would take 2 hours and involve 2 buses and a train and cost about £20 (citation needed).
The reality of rural (rural ish for me) public transport is that it's not actually remotely reasonable. Outside of big cities, the infrastructure just isn't there to make it viable every day.
Any Londoner who has come up for Newmarket nights on the train will have some frame of reference. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 09:25 - Dec 5 with 1293 views | WeWereZombies |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 00:12 - Dec 5 by BrixtonBlue |
Ok I give up. Train fares are absolutely fine - put them up if anything - and disabled people should be grateful they don't live somewhere remote.
50% of all rural people only have one shop?!? Jesus, I'm going to open a shop.
Read that sentence again - HALF of all people who live in a rural community ONLY HAVE ONE SHOP!!!
Then you talk about going to the cinema when I was talking about people WHO HAVE TO DRIVE FOR WORK.
And I've suggested reasonable travel. But you've taken that and thrown in "cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening." Clearly unreasonable.
The way you've made up huge swathes of what I've said, rather than what I actually said, is almost impressive. |
Listen sunshine, this was my reality until a few weeks ago:
Nearest shop - just under four miles. The shop is under threat of closure though, and not always practical for a variety of produce, especially fruit and veg. So without a driving licence (mine was withdrawn due to a head injury) an eight mile bicycle ride to get milk...
Nearest supermarket - twenty one miles. Luckily there is a bus route - from the village that is four miles away. But four services a day - during term times, three otherwise. And only one on Saturday. And none on Sunday. Last bus back - quarter to six...
I started to feel a lot more sympathy for les Gilets Jaunes in the last few months. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 10:56 - Dec 5 with 1280 views | Leaky |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 19:14 - Dec 2 by StokieBlue |
Not to be a pedant but this isn't correct.
This is outside the manifesto spending which is what you are referring to.
This will be directly paid for by vehicle excise duty, Labour said so today when they announced it. Well, 1.5bn from that and alledgedly 2.5bn from extra people using the trains.
I like the policy in general but it's entirely right to point out it's yet more spending, not in the manifesto, paid for by an unknown quantity of new passengers and less road expenditure.
It can be a good policy and also be subject to financial scrutiny.
SB |
So, why should someone like myself, who relies on a van to work localy pay more in vehicle excise duty to subsidise an individual who wants to work a 80 miles away in London & get higher wages for doing it. |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:08 - Dec 5 with 1259 views | jeera |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 10:56 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
So, why should someone like myself, who relies on a van to work localy pay more in vehicle excise duty to subsidise an individual who wants to work a 80 miles away in London & get higher wages for doing it. |
If this really is the gist then I have to wholeheartedly agree.
Plenty of people need vehicles for whatever reason and owners have been the easy target for long enough without adding to their woes for the ease of non-car owners.
General taxation, maybe, but not more targeting of people who have no choice in their own form of transport and independence. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:14 - Dec 5 with 1253 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 10:56 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
So, why should someone like myself, who relies on a van to work localy pay more in vehicle excise duty to subsidise an individual who wants to work a 80 miles away in London & get higher wages for doing it. |
Can I interest you in a Swanners BikoCaddy? Zero rated for VED, carbon neutral, and able to accommodate larger loads than any standard Transit van...
It's a good question. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:27 - Dec 5 with 1241 views | Radlett_blue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:08 - Dec 5 by jeera |
If this really is the gist then I have to wholeheartedly agree.
Plenty of people need vehicles for whatever reason and owners have been the easy target for long enough without adding to their woes for the ease of non-car owners.
General taxation, maybe, but not more targeting of people who have no choice in their own form of transport and independence. |
Income tax is far & away the fairest way of raising money as it is related to ability to pay & is hard to avoid. However, governments have preferred to try to keep the headline rate of basic income tax constant and raise money from umpteen regressive indirect taxes. Poor form. |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:58 - Dec 5 with 1218 views | Leaky |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:14 - Dec 5 by Swansea_Blue |
Can I interest you in a Swanners BikoCaddy? Zero rated for VED, carbon neutral, and able to accommodate larger loads than any standard Transit van...
It's a good question. |
Can,t see it holding 100m copper tube but will look into it !!!! Although proberbly not for long. | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 13:35 - Dec 5 with 1199 views | jeera |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:58 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
Can,t see it holding 100m copper tube but will look into it !!!! Although proberbly not for long. |
You're not thinking this through.
You could make bikes from copper tubing and transport them that way.
Pablo Escobar-esque. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:05 - Dec 5 with 1187 views | Funge |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 00:12 - Dec 5 by BrixtonBlue |
Ok I give up. Train fares are absolutely fine - put them up if anything - and disabled people should be grateful they don't live somewhere remote.
50% of all rural people only have one shop?!? Jesus, I'm going to open a shop.
Read that sentence again - HALF of all people who live in a rural community ONLY HAVE ONE SHOP!!!
Then you talk about going to the cinema when I was talking about people WHO HAVE TO DRIVE FOR WORK.
And I've suggested reasonable travel. But you've taken that and thrown in "cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening." Clearly unreasonable.
The way you've made up huge swathes of what I've said, rather than what I actually said, is almost impressive. |
Fam, you do this from time to time.
You don't appear to know very much at all about rural living. That's fair enough, London is bigger than Hoxne.
Buses in Suffolk are pretty weak, unless you live in Ipswich (urban, quite good) or near to the A14, or the bottom end of the A12 (N). Buses to Woodbridge, Bury, Stow or Fuluxstoo aren't great, but, at least, are serviceable.
If you want to go onto the Shotley peninsula (a good example, as it is both rural, and relatively close to Ipswich), the last bus leaves town at 5.45. I suppose one could get a bus to Langer Road in Fuluxstoo, and swim, mind....
There is a very real argument to be made for subsidising bus services in rural areas, but, of course, austerity doesn't sit too comfortably with that one.
Frankly, there is no way that you can live in rural Suffolk without a car.
As pointed out elsewhere, the above applies to the majority of rural dwellers; 'for the many, not the few', indeed. |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:10 - Dec 5 with 1181 views | Leaky |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 00:12 - Dec 5 by BrixtonBlue |
Ok I give up. Train fares are absolutely fine - put them up if anything - and disabled people should be grateful they don't live somewhere remote.
50% of all rural people only have one shop?!? Jesus, I'm going to open a shop.
Read that sentence again - HALF of all people who live in a rural community ONLY HAVE ONE SHOP!!!
Then you talk about going to the cinema when I was talking about people WHO HAVE TO DRIVE FOR WORK.
And I've suggested reasonable travel. But you've taken that and thrown in "cycling 10 miles home from work on a wet dark winter evening." Clearly unreasonable.
The way you've made up huge swathes of what I've said, rather than what I actually said, is almost impressive. |
I don't have 1 shop just pub & a church | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:12 - Dec 5 with 1177 views | jeera |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:10 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
I don't have 1 shop just pub & a church |
At least that's most aspects of retirement sorted then.
In fact, end of life too when you think about it. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:14 - Dec 5 with 1171 views | Leaky |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 13:35 - Dec 5 by jeera |
You're not thinking this through.
You could make bikes from copper tubing and transport them that way.
Pablo Escobar-esque. |
I think you have uncovered a marketing opportunity, centrally heated bikes. just pump hot water through the frame. | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:16 - Dec 5 with 1167 views | jeera |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:14 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
I think you have uncovered a marketing opportunity, centrally heated bikes. just pump hot water through the frame. |
You get scribbling and I'll ring Dragons Den immediately. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:20 - Dec 5 with 1166 views | leitrimblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:10 - Dec 5 by Leaky |
I don't have 1 shop just pub & a church |
1 shop, 4 pubs, a butchers and a funeral parlour in village 4 miles away |  | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:24 - Dec 5 with 1163 views | Leaky |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:12 - Dec 5 by jeera |
At least that's most aspects of retirement sorted then.
In fact, end of life too when you think about it. |
Yes that's funeral & wake sorted may need a car if I go cremation!!!!!! | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:51 - Dec 5 with 1156 views | Ryorry |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 12:14 - Dec 5 by Swansea_Blue |
Can I interest you in a Swanners BikoCaddy? Zero rated for VED, carbon neutral, and able to accommodate larger loads than any standard Transit van...
It's a good question. |
Have you taken over the $15.99 franchise ..? |  |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:54 - Dec 5 with 1150 views | Ryorry |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:20 - Dec 5 by leitrimblue |
1 shop, 4 pubs, a butchers and a funeral parlour in village 4 miles away |
1 shop 3 miles away, only 1 pub 2 miles away :( | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:02 - Dec 5 with 1141 views | leitrimblue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:54 - Dec 5 by Ryorry |
1 shop 3 miles away, only 1 pub 2 miles away :( |
You could just about manage to walk/stagger back from the pub 2 miles away though | | | |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:13 - Dec 5 with 1126 views | Ryorry |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 15:02 - Dec 5 by leitrimblue |
You could just about manage to walk/stagger back from the pub 2 miles away though |
... or get a literal dog-cart made, he's big & it's about time he started earning his dinners ... | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:03 - Dec 6 with 1048 views | TractorWood |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:54 - Dec 5 by Ryorry |
1 shop 3 miles away, only 1 pub 2 miles away :( |
Drinkstone in Suffolk is like this. Its biggest amenities are a post box and a bus stop. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 10:18 - Dec 6 with 1016 views | jeera |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 06:03 - Dec 6 by TractorWood |
Drinkstone in Suffolk is like this. Its biggest amenities are a post box and a bus stop. |
It's pretty around there though.
I like Rattlesden next door- that is one nice place and is hogging all the pubs. | |
| |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 10:25 - Dec 6 with 1009 views | BrixtonBlue |
| Labour's plans for the trains. on 14:05 - Dec 5 by Funge |
Fam, you do this from time to time.
You don't appear to know very much at all about rural living. That's fair enough, London is bigger than Hoxne.
Buses in Suffolk are pretty weak, unless you live in Ipswich (urban, quite good) or near to the A14, or the bottom end of the A12 (N). Buses to Woodbridge, Bury, Stow or Fuluxstoo aren't great, but, at least, are serviceable.
If you want to go onto the Shotley peninsula (a good example, as it is both rural, and relatively close to Ipswich), the last bus leaves town at 5.45. I suppose one could get a bus to Langer Road in Fuluxstoo, and swim, mind....
There is a very real argument to be made for subsidising bus services in rural areas, but, of course, austerity doesn't sit too comfortably with that one.
Frankly, there is no way that you can live in rural Suffolk without a car.
As pointed out elsewhere, the above applies to the majority of rural dwellers; 'for the many, not the few', indeed. |
Fair enough. I guess I've got this one wrong. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
