Most people own cars and then they don't use buses. They are however used heavily by low-income folks, pensioners and day trippers. Why not just give those groups extra cash regardless of where they live, because the behavioural response to bus subsidies among people who already own cars will be the square root of squat.
OT: (I value reading the comments on PB because most of you are of a different political hue than me. I'm interested in debating what I write below, particularly if you disagree with it. If you're not interested and frustrated that it's off-topic and non-betting-related, apologies.)
I've just finished Natasha Brown's excellent short novel Assembly - thoroughly recommended.
My reading of Brown's novel is that it is about the near impossibility of forming (assembling) a coherent identity as a young black woman. To my mind it is very persuasive - the book is very short but laced with examples where the protagonist has to self-censor her thoughts and views in order to assimilate into a culture that has been largely created by white men and that resists discussing a significant historical aspect of its creation (imperialism).
I recognise that the process of assimilation into a shared culture requires everyone to self-censor somewhat, but I am persuaded by the argument that, at the intersection of specific groups (women and black people, for example) the need for self-censorship is particularly acute, and therefore damaging to one's social- and self-identity.
I'm really interested in the responses of those of you who would describe this thinking as woke and so dismiss it. Putting aside the disingenuous elements of the usage of woke (i.e. encouraging a culture war), for those of you who write on here about wokeness as an ideology, what is it that you disagree with in the above? And what reaction do you think individuals, society and government in UK (and elsewhere) should have to such strong feelings of alienation and self-censorship amongst a a significant proportion of that society's members?
Don't especially disagree with any of this, which is partly true of any individual in a dissonant or liminal situation. Reflect on what a proportion of interesting and challenging literature (and other achievements) of the last 100 years is done by people who are exiles, refugees, dislocated, minority etc.
Self-censorship is normal to a civilized community, and universal. However taken beyond a certain point it is damaging rather than essential. But in our world is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored.
But one neglected issue is this. A friend of mine's late wife was a member of a particular marginal identity in India who regarded the Indian state as it now is as the occupying imperial power. This is one personal example of a global fact. Imperial history is the norm not the exception, at virtually all times and places. Reflect upon the Greeks, Macedonians, Persians, Romans, the history of Ukraine, China etc, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Russians etc.
The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone. A think we need an agenda of more genuine diversity and inclusion, but hesitate to think we shall get one.
"...is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored." Yes, imo. However, as a generalisation I doubt that the person who is self-censoring in this way is needing to do so as broadly or as often as many young black women. What I took from the book is how a constant need to assimilate wears one down. (I do think there are parallels with those who saw their communities changing around them in the last 40 years and saw no choice but to assimilate into the new orthodoxy of globalisation, and were similarly worn down).
"The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone." Completely agree, and with your previous paragraph. To me the interesting question at the heart of it (and imo one of the genuine dividing lines between progressives and conservatives), is whether we are capable of genuine social progress globally, such that imperialism can be beaten back permanently, or whether we are just in a brief period of more benign (American-led) imperialism that we should hang on to for as long as we can before we get the Chinese version, that is likely less benign.
The notion that American imperialism is more benign than the British version is an 'interesting' one.
Show me a path to today's 21st Century world with its international rules-based order, and ascendancy of liberal democracy, that doesn't go through the British Empire please.
The slave trade doesn't count, do you hear, because it happened to BLACK PEOPLE. Phew. Because if it had been whiteys we'd have to face the fact that it was up there with the holocaust as an atrocity, on many measures (% of humanity at the time who were victims, multi generation knock on effects) very arguably worse.
Bollocks
Slavery has happened to all kinds of people at all times
White “British” people were enslaved by the Romans, the Vikings, the Barbary slavers and the Ottomans
Arabs have enslaved people from all over for centuries. Black people have enslaved black people. Africans have enslaved Africans. The Romans enslaved everyone. The Chinese enslaved Mongolians and the Mongolians enslaved Chinese. Russians enslaved Russians and called them serfs. The greatest slave trade of all was probably that done throughout Africa by Islam over a thousand years, right into the 20th century, and so on, and so forth
Yes, slavery is probably the single greatest evil of human history, but the idea it was mainly done by white Western Europeans on blacks is silly and wrong
Last country to outlaw slavery was Mauretania in... 1981.
I don't know about other countries, but slavery is still legal in US prisons for convicts. Forced labour is deemed constitutional.
13th Amendment
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation
I think it was John Oliver who noted that an amendment abolishing slavery is really not one when you want it to include 'except'.
In fairness I have no idea what prison was like or how widespread at the time, and therefore what they expected the convicted to do all day.
The “except” really refers to “involuntary servitude” - working in prison farms, seeing mail bags, etc. that’s why in the Uk prisoners are paid for their work
There are a whole coterie of far left sites and bloggers out there who cannot reconcile themselves to Starmer's achievement in rescuing Labour from it's near death experience under "Jeremy" and seem to make it their business to undermine him at every turn. They appear to yearn for nothing more than self-vindication in the form of a heavy Labour defeat under Starmer at the next GE, if they haven't removed him by then.
It's actually quite hard to find a left leaning website that doesn't go out of its way to promote the opponents of Starmer from the left. Even Labour List seems obsessed with reporting every talking point of Momentum in amongst other mainstream reports, which is perhaps to be expected given that its main sponsors are the Unite, Community and FBU unions.
Since he's come up vaguely positively what is Corbyn even up to at the moment? Personally I think his Peace & Justice project might be a bit ambitious, he might need to focus on just one.
(Amusingly the url for the site is still thecorbynproject.com)
Most people own cars and then they don't use buses. They are however used heavily by low-income folks, pensioners and day trippers. Why not just give those groups extra cash regardless of where they live, because the behavioural response to bus subsidies among people who already own cars will be the square root of squat.
Disagree. Middle classes, car owners, etc. use the buses a lot in Lothian.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
It would be interesting to run buses on the Russian (and Ukrainian, and much of the former USSR) lines.
The marshrutka is essentially a private minibus that stops off on a planned route. So sort of half bus, half taxi (but much cheaper).
Allow anyone who wants to (with reasonable licensing in place) to run a minibus along the planned route, and let the free market sort it out.
Buses have been deregulated in much of the UK for, I think, decades now, but that hasn't happened?
I'm guessing it's not actually legal at the moment, but it would be perfectly possible to allow anyone with a taxi/minicab license to drive a minibus between any existing bus stops, picking up passengers and charging a set fee.
Popular routes would soon form, and it would be easy to increase supply as drivers would be self employed small businesses, so more popular routes would attract more drivers.
Would quicker, nimbler services that respond organically to supply and demand be more efficient? I dunno, but it seems like an idea worth trying.
I know it is because while the West is very much helping (if not as much as it could), it doesn't want to be seen to be helping too much and provoke Russia, but really this does point out the ridiculousness of setting the line as it has, even if its all because Russia has the capability of responding with nukes if it went even crazier.
Kind of amazing that there’s this big controversy about Ukraine gaining the capacity to strike inside Russia, meanwhile Russia is launching missiles at Ukrainian cities 500km from the frontlines.
At the risk of sounding like @TSE when it comes to modesty, i did point out several days back that the Ukrainian strategy looked to be to essentially make Severdonetsk a kill zone for Russian forces and then use that distraction as a way to launch a counter offensive in the South to retake Kherson. Which exactly looks like their plan…
There are a whole coterie of far left sites and bloggers out there who cannot reconcile themselves to Starmer's achievement in rescuing Labour from it's near death experience under "Jeremy" and seem to make it their business to undermine him at every turn. They appear to yearn for nothing more than self-vindication in the form of a heavy Labour defeat under Starmer at the next GE, if they haven't removed him by then.
It's actually quite hard to find a left leaning website that doesn't go out of its way to promote the opponents of Starmer from the left. Even Labour List seems obsessed with reporting every talking point of Momentum in amongst other mainstream reports, which is perhaps to be expected given that its main sponsors are the Unite, Community and FBU unions.
Many were prepared to give him a chance as he ran on a platform of continuity with the Corbyn project, or at least aspects of it.
It has become clear over time he has moved well away from that and the removal of the whip from Jezza has antagonised them.
A heavy labour defeat followed by a move to purity with a socialist agenda seems to be the preferred course of action if Starmer does not go.
It’s crazy. You can’t change a great deal in opposition.
OT: (I value reading the comments on PB because most of you are of a different political hue than me. I'm interested in debating what I write below, particularly if you disagree with it. If you're not interested and frustrated that it's off-topic and non-betting-related, apologies.)
I've just finished Natasha Brown's excellent short novel Assembly - thoroughly recommended.
My reading of Brown's novel is that it is about the near impossibility of forming (assembling) a coherent identity as a young black woman. To my mind it is very persuasive - the book is very short but laced with examples where the protagonist has to self-censor her thoughts and views in order to assimilate into a culture that has been largely created by white men and that resists discussing a significant historical aspect of its creation (imperialism).
I recognise that the process of assimilation into a shared culture requires everyone to self-censor somewhat, but I am persuaded by the argument that, at the intersection of specific groups (women and black people, for example) the need for self-censorship is particularly acute, and therefore damaging to one's social- and self-identity.
I'm really interested in the responses of those of you who would describe this thinking as woke and so dismiss it. Putting aside the disingenuous elements of the usage of woke (i.e. encouraging a culture war), for those of you who write on here about wokeness as an ideology, what is it that you disagree with in the above? And what reaction do you think individuals, society and government in UK (and elsewhere) should have to such strong feelings of alienation and self-censorship amongst a a significant proportion of that society's members?
Don't especially disagree with any of this, which is partly true of any individual in a dissonant or liminal situation. Reflect on what a proportion of interesting and challenging literature (and other achievements) of the last 100 years is done by people who are exiles, refugees, dislocated, minority etc.
Self-censorship is normal to a civilized community, and universal. However taken beyond a certain point it is damaging rather than essential. But in our world is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored.
But one neglected issue is this. A friend of mine's late wife was a member of a particular marginal identity in India who regarded the Indian state as it now is as the occupying imperial power. This is one personal example of a global fact. Imperial history is the norm not the exception, at virtually all times and places. Reflect upon the Greeks, Macedonians, Persians, Romans, the history of Ukraine, China etc, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Russians etc.
The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone. A think we need an agenda of more genuine diversity and inclusion, but hesitate to think we shall get one.
"...is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored." Yes, imo. However, as a generalisation I doubt that the person who is self-censoring in this way is needing to do so as broadly or as often as many young black women. What I took from the book is how a constant need to assimilate wears one down. (I do think there are parallels with those who saw their communities changing around them in the last 40 years and saw no choice but to assimilate into the new orthodoxy of globalisation, and were similarly worn down).
"The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone." Completely agree, and with your previous paragraph. To me the interesting question at the heart of it (and imo one of the genuine dividing lines between progressives and conservatives), is whether we are capable of genuine social progress globally, such that imperialism can be beaten back permanently, or whether we are just in a brief period of more benign (American-led) imperialism that we should hang on to for as long as we can before we get the Chinese version, that is likely less benign.
I think the idea we're currently living under an American imperium is a nonsense.
Sure, they are the dominant Western power, and act in their national interest accordingly, which sometimes is reflected in lopsided trade deals and alliances that reflect that, but it's not remotely comparable to what China is doing or wants to do.
So, you've posted me an article showing me the history of the US intervening in regime change over the last 200 years and that's supposed to be evidence of an American empire we live under today, is it?
We (and they) both were interested in regime change in Iraq, Syria and Libya in just the last 10 years - and, although unofficial, we're both very interested in regime change away from Putin in Russia today.
That's not "empire". It's foreign policy.
Posted in response to "what China is doing", which I took to mean its sour-faced meddling and leveraged of finance and infrastructure to exert control over other countries. My response was intended as a rebuke to anyone who thinks America is innocent of similar.
If you mean something different, then spit it out.
My view on imperialism is that the concept doesn't just wink into being past some magical red line; it's a continuum. America has done a lot on that spectrum, from outright colonisation and extermination, through to benign and charitable interventions to help allies. And literally everything in between. America has an imperial history, such a fact cannot reasonably be disputed. And I think it's totally fair to say we still live in an American world. It is a hegemonic power you don't want to be on the wrong side of. Would I call it "imperium"? No. But such descriptions don't fall away as obvious nonsense either.
I don't accept that caricature but even if I did I'd take American control of finances and infrastructure over Chinese any day of the week, thank you.
America doesn't threaten to grind you up and crush your bones, and then proceed to do exactly that.
I mean..
The US Department of Defense charged eleven soldiers over those abuses, and they were court-martialled, convicted, sentenced to military prison, and dishonourably discharged.
China is committing genocide against the Uighurs as a matter of state policy.
They are not remotely comparable.
Well, they are to @Farooq, which might suggest something….
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
The bus service to our village stopped in 2015.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
Most people own cars and then they don't use buses. They are however used heavily by low-income folks, pensioners and day trippers. Why not just give those groups extra cash regardless of where they live, because the behavioural response to bus subsidies among people who already own cars will be the square root of squat.
Disagree. Middle classes, car owners, etc. use the buses a lot in Lothian.
I think they are used quite widely in congested cities, particularly those without much urban rail.
The current privatised system doesn't work though. There needs to be interchange between companies, and through ticketing (like in London, and now Greater Manchester, I think) with planned routes for interchange rather than a purely radial pattern. Frequent services at peak times etc.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
OT: (I value reading the comments on PB because most of you are of a different political hue than me. I'm interested in debating what I write below, particularly if you disagree with it. If you're not interested and frustrated that it's off-topic and non-betting-related, apologies.)
I've just finished Natasha Brown's excellent short novel Assembly - thoroughly recommended.
My reading of Brown's novel is that it is about the near impossibility of forming (assembling) a coherent identity as a young black woman. To my mind it is very persuasive - the book is very short but laced with examples where the protagonist has to self-censor her thoughts and views in order to assimilate into a culture that has been largely created by white men and that resists discussing a significant historical aspect of its creation (imperialism).
I recognise that the process of assimilation into a shared culture requires everyone to self-censor somewhat, but I am persuaded by the argument that, at the intersection of specific groups (women and black people, for example) the need for self-censorship is particularly acute, and therefore damaging to one's social- and self-identity.
I'm really interested in the responses of those of you who would describe this thinking as woke and so dismiss it. Putting aside the disingenuous elements of the usage of woke (i.e. encouraging a culture war), for those of you who write on here about wokeness as an ideology, what is it that you disagree with in the above? And what reaction do you think individuals, society and government in UK (and elsewhere) should have to such strong feelings of alienation and self-censorship amongst a a significant proportion of that society's members?
Don't especially disagree with any of this, which is partly true of any individual in a dissonant or liminal situation. Reflect on what a proportion of interesting and challenging literature (and other achievements) of the last 100 years is done by people who are exiles, refugees, dislocated, minority etc.
Self-censorship is normal to a civilized community, and universal. However taken beyond a certain point it is damaging rather than essential. But in our world is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored.
But one neglected issue is this. A friend of mine's late wife was a member of a particular marginal identity in India who regarded the Indian state as it now is as the occupying imperial power. This is one personal example of a global fact. Imperial history is the norm not the exception, at virtually all times and places. Reflect upon the Greeks, Macedonians, Persians, Romans, the history of Ukraine, China etc, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Russians etc.
The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone. A think we need an agenda of more genuine diversity and inclusion, but hesitate to think we shall get one.
"...is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored." Yes, imo. However, as a generalisation I doubt that the person who is self-censoring in this way is needing to do so as broadly or as often as many young black women. What I took from the book is how a constant need to assimilate wears one down. (I do think there are parallels with those who saw their communities changing around them in the last 40 years and saw no choice but to assimilate into the new orthodoxy of globalisation, and were similarly worn down).
"The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone." Completely agree, and with your previous paragraph. To me the interesting question at the heart of it (and imo one of the genuine dividing lines between progressives and conservatives), is whether we are capable of genuine social progress globally, such that imperialism can be beaten back permanently, or whether we are just in a brief period of more benign (American-led) imperialism that we should hang on to for as long as we can before we get the Chinese version, that is likely less benign.
I think the idea we're currently living under an American imperium is a nonsense.
Sure, they are the dominant Western power, and act in their national interest accordingly, which sometimes is reflected in lopsided trade deals and alliances that reflect that, but it's not remotely comparable to what China is doing or wants to do.
So, you've posted me an article showing me the history of the US intervening in regime change over the last 200 years and that's supposed to be evidence of an American empire we live under today, is it?
We (and they) both were interested in regime change in Iraq, Syria and Libya in just the last 10 years - and, although unofficial, we're both very interested in regime change away from Putin in Russia today.
That's not "empire". It's foreign policy.
Posted in response to "what China is doing", which I took to mean its sour-faced meddling and leveraged of finance and infrastructure to exert control over other countries. My response was intended as a rebuke to anyone who thinks America is innocent of similar.
If you mean something different, then spit it out.
My view on imperialism is that the concept doesn't just wink into being past some magical red line; it's a continuum. America has done a lot on that spectrum, from outright colonisation and extermination, through to benign and charitable interventions to help allies. And literally everything in between. America has an imperial history, such a fact cannot reasonably be disputed. And I think it's totally fair to say we still live in an American world. It is a hegemonic power you don't want to be on the wrong side of. Would I call it "imperium"? No. But such descriptions don't fall away as obvious nonsense either.
I don't accept that caricature but even if I did I'd take American control of finances and infrastructure over Chinese any day of the week, thank you.
America doesn't threaten to grind you up and crush your bones, and then proceed to do exactly that.
I mean..
The US Department of Defense charged eleven soldiers over those abuses, and they were court-martialled, convicted, sentenced to military prison, and dishonourably discharged.
China is committing genocide against the Uighurs as a matter of state policy.
They are not remotely comparable.
Well, they are to @Farooq, which might suggest something….
Indeed. It's fascinating that he started off on Thursday with a firm "Republic. Now." and then moved through rampant europhilia over the weekend and onto classic anti-Western tropes and whatabboutery this evening."
It's almost as if treason comes as a package, isn't it?
So... How likely is as Tory leadershit VONC this week?
I saw a political commentator on twitter referencing some (anonymous) MP I think that the odds were 55%, which just made me think 'Just say you have no bloody idea'.
They certainly have ramped up expectations higher than they've been since just before the Russian invasion ramping up in February, so if it doesn't happen right soon they will look very silly.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
The bus service to our village stopped in 2015.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
Yes. My old village had 2 buses a day into Newcastle. Now it has one a week to Hexham. Several people who couldn't drive for medical reasons had to move house. It's an issue for only a small minority, sure. But it's a pretty major, vote switching one for some.
Most people own cars and then they don't use buses. They are however used heavily by low-income folks, pensioners and day trippers. Why not just give those groups extra cash regardless of where they live, because the behavioural response to bus subsidies among people who already own cars will be the square root of squat.
Disagree. Middle classes, car owners, etc. use the buses a lot in Lothian.
I think they are used quite widely in congested cities, particularly those without much urban rail.
The current privatised system doesn't work though. There needs to be interchange between companies, and through ticketing (like in London, and now Greater Manchester, I think) with planned routes for interchange rather than a purely radial pattern. Frequent services at peak times etc.
Quite; not a lot of urban rail in Lothian, though this is improving slowly. Lothian Buses tend to be dominant locally but there is no common ticketing with the private companies. Also circumferential routes are still a weakness.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
The bus service to our village stopped in 2015.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
Yes. My old village had 2 buses a day into Newcastle. Now it has one a week to Hexham. Several people who couldn't drive for medical reasons had to move house. It's an issue for only a small minority, sure. But it's a pretty major, vote switching one for some.
The bus service from my part of Newcastle has gone to shit since COVID and is only getting worse, and this is within the city boundary!
Most people own cars and then they don't use buses. They are however used heavily by low-income folks, pensioners and day trippers. Why not just give those groups extra cash regardless of where they live, because the behavioural response to bus subsidies among people who already own cars will be the square root of squat.
19% of British households do not have access to a car, and even in the remainder with a car, may within the household such as working age children have very limited access.
At the risk of sounding like @TSE when it comes to modesty, i did point out several days back that the Ukrainian strategy looked to be to essentially make Severdonetsk a kill zone for Russian forces and then use that distraction as a way to launch a counter offensive in the South to retake Kherson. Which exactly looks like their plan…
Here's hoping you are right MrEd. I worry I am susceptible to wishful thinking when it comes to assessing Ukraine success in the war.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
You must live in rural Leicestershire then? I can’t believe a city of 300,000 has no Sunday bus service?
At the risk of sounding like @TSE when it comes to modesty, i did point out several days back that the Ukrainian strategy looked to be to essentially make Severdonetsk a kill zone for Russian forces and then use that distraction as a way to launch a counter offensive in the South to retake Kherson. Which exactly looks like their plan…
Here's hoping you are right MrEd. I worry I am susceptible to wishful thinking when it comes to assessing Ukraine success in the war.
So do I Benpointer. i’m optimistic on the Ukrainian chances but let’s see
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
You must live in rural Leicestershire then? I can’t believe a city of 300,000 has no Sunday bus service?
I live 6 miles from the centre of the city. There are buses at night that will take me 4 of those miles, then there is a long walk.
The whole UK needs a bus service like London has. Labour policy should be that, that is levelling up
There are a lot of things transport-wise London has that many elsewhere claim not to want or need despite the obvious benefits, a regular publicly owned and subsidised bus service being one of them. I use buses quite often, and I also drive, cycle, walk and take the train. Unfortunately policymakers too often seem to assume people are either drivers or cyclists or pedestrians or public transport users, rather than all of the above.
OT: (I value reading the comments on PB because most of you are of a different political hue than me. I'm interested in debating what I write below, particularly if you disagree with it. If you're not interested and frustrated that it's off-topic and non-betting-related, apologies.)
I've just finished Natasha Brown's excellent short novel Assembly - thoroughly recommended.
My reading of Brown's novel is that it is about the near impossibility of forming (assembling) a coherent identity as a young black woman. To my mind it is very persuasive - the book is very short but laced with examples where the protagonist has to self-censor her thoughts and views in order to assimilate into a culture that has been largely created by white men and that resists discussing a significant historical aspect of its creation (imperialism).
I recognise that the process of assimilation into a shared culture requires everyone to self-censor somewhat, but I am persuaded by the argument that, at the intersection of specific groups (women and black people, for example) the need for self-censorship is particularly acute, and therefore damaging to one's social- and self-identity.
I'm really interested in the responses of those of you who would describe this thinking as woke and so dismiss it. Putting aside the disingenuous elements of the usage of woke (i.e. encouraging a culture war), for those of you who write on here about wokeness as an ideology, what is it that you disagree with in the above? And what reaction do you think individuals, society and government in UK (and elsewhere) should have to such strong feelings of alienation and self-censorship amongst a a significant proportion of that society's members?
Don't especially disagree with any of this, which is partly true of any individual in a dissonant or liminal situation. Reflect on what a proportion of interesting and challenging literature (and other achievements) of the last 100 years is done by people who are exiles, refugees, dislocated, minority etc.
Self-censorship is normal to a civilized community, and universal. However taken beyond a certain point it is damaging rather than essential. But in our world is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored.
But one neglected issue is this. A friend of mine's late wife was a member of a particular marginal identity in India who regarded the Indian state as it now is as the occupying imperial power. This is one personal example of a global fact. Imperial history is the norm not the exception, at virtually all times and places. Reflect upon the Greeks, Macedonians, Persians, Romans, the history of Ukraine, China etc, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Russians etc.
The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone. A think we need an agenda of more genuine diversity and inclusion, but hesitate to think we shall get one.
"...is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored." Yes, imo. However, as a generalisation I doubt that the person who is self-censoring in this way is needing to do so as broadly or as often as many young black women. What I took from the book is how a constant need to assimilate wears one down. (I do think there are parallels with those who saw their communities changing around them in the last 40 years and saw no choice but to assimilate into the new orthodoxy of globalisation, and were similarly worn down).
"The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone." Completely agree, and with your previous paragraph. To me the interesting question at the heart of it (and imo one of the genuine dividing lines between progressives and conservatives), is whether we are capable of genuine social progress globally, such that imperialism can be beaten back permanently, or whether we are just in a brief period of more benign (American-led) imperialism that we should hang on to for as long as we can before we get the Chinese version, that is likely less benign.
I think the idea we're currently living under an American imperium is a nonsense.
Sure, they are the dominant Western power, and act in their national interest accordingly, which sometimes is reflected in lopsided trade deals and alliances that reflect that, but it's not remotely comparable to what China is doing or wants to do.
So, you've posted me an article showing me the history of the US intervening in regime change over the last 200 years and that's supposed to be evidence of an American empire we live under today, is it?
We (and they) both were interested in regime change in Iraq, Syria and Libya in just the last 10 years - and, although unofficial, we're both very interested in regime change away from Putin in Russia today.
That's not "empire". It's foreign policy.
Posted in response to "what China is doing", which I took to mean its sour-faced meddling and leveraged of finance and infrastructure to exert control over other countries. My response was intended as a rebuke to anyone who thinks America is innocent of similar.
If you mean something different, then spit it out.
My view on imperialism is that the concept doesn't just wink into being past some magical red line; it's a continuum. America has done a lot on that spectrum, from outright colonisation and extermination, through to benign and charitable interventions to help allies. And literally everything in between. America has an imperial history, such a fact cannot reasonably be disputed. And I think it's totally fair to say we still live in an American world. It is a hegemonic power you don't want to be on the wrong side of. Would I call it "imperium"? No. But such descriptions don't fall away as obvious nonsense either.
I don't accept that caricature but even if I did I'd take American control of finances and infrastructure over Chinese any day of the week, thank you.
America doesn't threaten to grind you up and crush your bones, and then proceed to do exactly that.
I mean..
The US Department of Defense charged eleven soldiers over those abuses, and they were court-martialled, convicted, sentenced to military prison, and dishonourably discharged.
China is committing genocide against the Uighurs as a matter of state policy.
They are not remotely comparable.
Well, they are to @Farooq, which might suggest something….
Indeed. It's fascinating that he started off on Thursday with a firm "Republic. Now." and then moved through rampant europhilia over the weekend and onto classic anti-Western tropes and whatabboutery this evening."
It's almost as if treason comes as a package, isn't it?
Not that i’d like to start casting aspersions Casino but one does wonder at times what is their true agenda….
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Butd they are obviously, around here, working pretty well for people whether they pay or have a bus pass. And I can't see that the laws of physics or mathematics change on the local government boundaries.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Butd they are obviously, around here, working pretty well for people whether they pay or have a bus pass. And I can't see that the laws of physics or mathematics change on the local government boundaries.
Not saying the laws of physics change merely saying that in small places of under 150k not enough use to bus to justify it. I have once had a job where part of it was a bus journey to get there. I quit after a year because most days I either had to get a taxi there or back or sometimes both purely because the bus didnt turn up and that got expensive
Boris plans to visit the by election seats. Is he trying to lose?
No, Boris is trying to postpone the vonc till after the by-elections. That is what he does: kick the can down the road; not tomorrow, wait till the by-elections. Then if the blue team holds Tiverton, which it might anyway, that will be held up as proof of Boris's campaigning prowess.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Butd they are obviously, around here, working pretty well for people whether they pay or have a bus pass. And I can't see that the laws of physics or mathematics change on the local government boundaries.
I'm at Halbeath P&R (again). Reckon it's about 80% full, 10.30 on a Sunday. Weird.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
The bus service to our village stopped in 2015.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
Yes. My old village had 2 buses a day into Newcastle. Now it has one a week to Hexham. Several people who couldn't drive for medical reasons had to move house. It's an issue for only a small minority, sure. But it's a pretty major, vote switching one for some.
I know you get it but it's surprising how many people think that if "it's only an issue for a small minority", it's not really a problem.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
The bus service to our village stopped in 2015.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
Yes. My old village had 2 buses a day into Newcastle. Now it has one a week to Hexham. Several people who couldn't drive for medical reasons had to move house. It's an issue for only a small minority, sure. But it's a pretty major, vote switching one for some.
I know you get it but it's surprising how many people think that if "it's only an issue for a small minority", it's not really a problem.
I have a car but that's not much help when I want to go out on the raz in the toon, is it?
Let’s just call it what it is, which is essentially Muslim factions in Nigeria deliberately targeting and killing Christians. This whole “well, it’s a tribal thing blah blah” fails to mention the tribe involved (Faluna) is 99% Sunni Muslim. If we are going to deal with shit like this, we are going to have confront some uncomfortable truths, one of which is that is a relatively significant proportion of Muslims essentially want to see Christians dead as they see them as non-righteous. As with Hitler, you don’t appease these people, you confront them.
The whole UK needs a bus service like London has. Labour policy should be that, that is levelling up
The difference is because London is gridlocked, the bus is as fast (or faster) than driving, without the congestion charge + parking charges on top.
Outside of london a 15 minute car journey quickly turns into an hour long bus journey, and prices aren't that cheap.
I paid £4.90 the other day for a 12 minute bus ride (15 minutes waiting at stop, plus 15 minutes walk at the other end) - it would have been 10 minutes door to door by car. And since I already own the car, the marginal cost of the extra miles is a lot less than the £4.90 bus fare was.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Butd they are obviously, around here, working pretty well for people whether they pay or have a bus pass. And I can't see that the laws of physics or mathematics change on the local government boundaries.
Unfortunately, the laws of geography do. If you have enough people living sufficiently close to each other, it's pretty easy to run a viable public transport service, especially if their likely destinations are all close to each other as well. Traditional towns and cities were like that. Now we spread the houses and jobs out, we have created a setup that only really works with cars. Which is fine when fuel is cheap, but not when it's expensive.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Macron is a total fucking cock. if Putin rules the world, EM would be his b1tch.
There is a special place in purgatory for people like Macron.
Isn't this just politicking? The French are fairly pro-Russian if I recall correctly.
How can you be pro-Putin? Would you in the 30s have been condoning my supporting Hitler by saying “well, the XXX are fairly pro-German if i recall correctly”?
recognise evil for what it is and stop making excuses for apologists.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Running them for private profit doesn't seem to be working.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Macron is a total fucking cock. if Putin rules the world, EM would be his b1tch.
There is a special place in purgatory for people like Macron.
Isn't this just politicking? The French are fairly pro-Russian if I recall correctly.
How can you be pro-Putin? Would you in the 30s have been condoning my supporting Hitler by saying “well, the XXX are fairly pro-German if i recall correctly”?
recognise evil for what it is and stop making excuses for apologists.
I'm not making excuses - I'm just expanding the discussion.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
You must live in rural Leicestershire then? I can’t believe a city of 300,000 has no Sunday bus service?
I live 6 miles from the centre of the city. There are buses at night that will take me 4 of those miles, then there is a long walk.
That really is quite poor. I have a big car but use the bus regularly here in London - they are great. But deregulation outside London has been a unmitigated disaster.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Macron is a total fucking cock. if Putin rules the world, EM would be his b1tch.
There is a special place in purgatory for people like Macron.
Isn't this just politicking? The French are fairly pro-Russian if I recall correctly.
Though have provided 18 self propelled 155mm precision howitzers, a quarter of their stock.
The #Ukrainian 55th Artillery Brigade shared photos of the #French self-propelled 155mm howitzers Ceasar at work in #Ukraine firing at Russian invaders. #StandWithUkraine #France https://t.co/zdGI09tImX
Some people seem to want to turn the Ukraine war into a conflict between NATO partners, particularly with Germany, France and Italy. I am sure that they do not intend to do Putin's work.
Let’s just call it what it is, which is essentially Muslim factions in Nigeria deliberately targeting and killing Christians. This whole “well, it’s a tribal thing blah blah” fails to mention the tribe involved (Faluna) is 99% Sunni Muslim. If we are going to deal with shit like this, we are going to have confront some uncomfortable truths, one of which is that is a relatively significant proportion of Muslims essentially want to see Christians dead as they see them as non-righteous. As with Hitler, you don’t appease these people, you confront them.
The "we" here being fruities who believe a significant proportion of Muslims want to see Christians murdered?
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
I agree totally I am not saying buses can never work, I am saying as they are they dont work for people for what they want to do and making them free wont change that.
Butd they are obviously, around here, working pretty well for people whether they pay or have a bus pass. And I can't see that the laws of physics or mathematics change on the local government boundaries.
Not saying the laws of physics change merely saying that in small places of under 150k not enough use to bus to justify it. I have once had a job where part of it was a bus journey to get there. I quit after a year because most days I either had to get a taxi there or back or sometimes both purely because the bus didnt turn up and that got expensive
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
I can tell you that the buses here often are standing room only in the busiest times. And often pretty full at other times of day. Plus the service has to continue, or else youd moan even more. .
Ofd course, if you refuse to use them anyway then you won't be riding in them.
I don't use them because they are expensive , slow and unreliable. I don't have a car so mostly use public transport ie trainsor taxi's. I would not even consider us as an option as its too slow too expensive and too unreliable
I don't have a car. Unfortunately, here, we don't have trains either. Well we do. The line goes slap through the middle of town. But there are no stations. So fat lot of use they are.
I don't have a car either and use mostly trains and yes we have a station.
The difference to me is using a bus I have to tailor my life and my work hours around the bus. I don't need to nearly to the same extent with a train and certainly don't need to with a car.
Before covid our office moved and they said to all of us that got there by trains ( the old one was 5 minutes walk from the train station) oh dont worry there is a bus from the station that way (about 2 miles away) 90% of the train users didn't even bother with the bus and immediately got fold up bikes, electric scooters etc. Anything but rely on the bus.
Well. You see. You've hit on the nub of the issue. There aren't buses at the times folk want to use them. Or even need. This comes back to a point I labour. No one in this country ever starts with an issue from first principles. What is the purpose of a bus service? This applies to your DBS complaints too. What are they for? We just seem to hate such "philosophical" questions. So tinker at the edges.
The issue of buses at the times some people need them will only get worse with the service cuts.
For some people in some of the villages in north Durham reliant on buses to get to work they are losing their early morning services. It’s crazy.
I presume you are affected in your part of Northumberland ?
Fortunately. We aren't served by Go Northeast, so no. Not as yet. However. You can get a bus into toon from 5:05 in the morning to hold down a job. Unless you work Sundays. The first doesn't get in till 9:55. As I said. No one considers what they are actually for.
No bus at all on a Sunday for me.
You must live in rural Leicestershire then? I can’t believe a city of 300,000 has no Sunday bus service?
I live 6 miles from the centre of the city. There are buses at night that will take me 4 of those miles, then there is a long walk.
I remember seeing a Tory transport minister being interviewed on TV after bus privatisation. Proudly explaining that he'd seen three empty buses go over the bridge outside Westminster and thought 'Something Must Be Done'.
And the result was to privatise the buses everywhere except the area around the bridge by Westminster.
The whole UK needs a bus service like London has. Labour policy should be that, that is levelling up
Yet it's Manchester with the busiest road served by buses.
Manchester is 'not the whole UK', just saying.
But it's oop north, just sayin'.
A pedant writes: Manchester is not 'oop' north, it is 'up' north. No-one in the north or anywhere else pronounces 'up' to rhyme with 'coop' or 'loop' or 'hoop' or any other word ending in oop. What it is not is 'ap' north.
On buses, Manchester does indeed have the busiest bus corridor in Europe, which is excellent if you cannot wait more than 60 second for a bus and are prepared to pay any price to ride the first bus that comes, but isn't great if you want an affordable overall bus service. Manchester's buses are, contrary to popular belief here, actually quite affordable, but only in the narrow situation that you get the same bus five days a week. Weekly tickets are actually quite cheap. So bus deregulation hasn't been an unmitigated disaster. Buses also became considerably cleaner and more pleasant to ride on deregulation. But it you want to make one-off journeys they are very expensive, and that's also a result of deregulation. Franchising is not a panacea, because deregulation was not all bad. But on balance, I believe franchising will give GM a much better public transport offer.
One of the economic advantages the UK has is that it is densely populated.
It was an advantage when transportation was difficult and expensive, centuries ago.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
Macron is a total fucking cock. if Putin rules the world, EM would be his b1tch.
There is a special place in purgatory for people like Macron.
Isn't this just politicking? The French are fairly pro-Russian if I recall correctly.
How can you be pro-Putin? Would you in the 30s have been condoning my supporting Hitler by saying “well, the XXX are fairly pro-German if i recall correctly”?
recognise evil for what it is and stop making excuses for apologists.
Says someone who is in love with Trump. Both nasty pieces of work.
One of the economic advantages the UK has is that it is densely populated.
It was an advantage when transportation was difficult and expensive, centuries ago.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
Why then has the Netherlands (pop density 508 per km2) got such good infrastructure compare to England (pop density 276 per km2)?
One of the economic advantages the UK has is that it is densely populated.
It was an advantage when transportation was difficult and expensive, centuries ago.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
Why then has the Netherlands (pop density 508 per km2) got such good infrastructure compare to England (pop density 276 per km2)?
I imagine it’s because the Dutch pay no attention to people like @Fishing.
OT: (I value reading the comments on PB because most of you are of a different political hue than me. I'm interested in debating what I write below, particularly if you disagree with it. If you're not interested and frustrated that it's off-topic and non-betting-related, apologies.)
I've just finished Natasha Brown's excellent short novel Assembly - thoroughly recommended.
My reading of Brown's novel is that it is about the near impossibility of forming (assembling) a coherent identity as a young black woman. To my mind it is very persuasive - the book is very short but laced with examples where the protagonist has to self-censor her thoughts and views in order to assimilate into a culture that has been largely created by white men and that resists discussing a significant historical aspect of its creation (imperialism).
I recognise that the process of assimilation into a shared culture requires everyone to self-censor somewhat, but I am persuaded by the argument that, at the intersection of specific groups (women and black people, for example) the need for self-censorship is particularly acute, and therefore damaging to one's social- and self-identity.
I'm really interested in the responses of those of you who would describe this thinking as woke and so dismiss it. Putting aside the disingenuous elements of the usage of woke (i.e. encouraging a culture war), for those of you who write on here about wokeness as an ideology, what is it that you disagree with in the above? And what reaction do you think individuals, society and government in UK (and elsewhere) should have to such strong feelings of alienation and self-censorship amongst a a significant proportion of that society's members?
Don't especially disagree with any of this, which is partly true of any individual in a dissonant or liminal situation. Reflect on what a proportion of interesting and challenging literature (and other achievements) of the last 100 years is done by people who are exiles, refugees, dislocated, minority etc.
Self-censorship is normal to a civilized community, and universal. However taken beyond a certain point it is damaging rather than essential. But in our world is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored.
But one neglected issue is this. A friend of mine's late wife was a member of a particular marginal identity in India who regarded the Indian state as it now is as the occupying imperial power. This is one personal example of a global fact. Imperial history is the norm not the exception, at virtually all times and places. Reflect upon the Greeks, Macedonians, Persians, Romans, the history of Ukraine, China etc, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Russians etc.
The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone. A think we need an agenda of more genuine diversity and inclusion, but hesitate to think we shall get one.
"...is it not standing up in favour of imperialism that is more marginalised and self-censored." Yes, imo. However, as a generalisation I doubt that the person who is self-censoring in this way is needing to do so as broadly or as often as many young black women. What I took from the book is how a constant need to assimilate wears one down. (I do think there are parallels with those who saw their communities changing around them in the last 40 years and saw no choice but to assimilate into the new orthodoxy of globalisation, and were similarly worn down).
"The odd time is ours when the imperial past is questioned and critically appraised and assumed to be both bad and gone." Completely agree, and with your previous paragraph. To me the interesting question at the heart of it (and imo one of the genuine dividing lines between progressives and conservatives), is whether we are capable of genuine social progress globally, such that imperialism can be beaten back permanently, or whether we are just in a brief period of more benign (American-led) imperialism that we should hang on to for as long as we can before we get the Chinese version, that is likely less benign.
I think the idea we're currently living under an American imperium is a nonsense.
Sure, they are the dominant Western power, and act in their national interest accordingly, which sometimes is reflected in lopsided trade deals and alliances that reflect that, but it's not remotely comparable to what China is doing or wants to do.
So, you've posted me an article showing me the history of the US intervening in regime change over the last 200 years and that's supposed to be evidence of an American empire we live under today, is it?
We (and they) both were interested in regime change in Iraq, Syria and Libya in just the last 10 years - and, although unofficial, we're both very interested in regime change away from Putin in Russia today.
That's not "empire". It's foreign policy.
Posted in response to "what China is doing", which I took to mean its sour-faced meddling and leveraged of finance and infrastructure to exert control over other countries. My response was intended as a rebuke to anyone who thinks America is innocent of similar.
If you mean something different, then spit it out.
My view on imperialism is that the concept doesn't just wink into being past some magical red line; it's a continuum. America has done a lot on that spectrum, from outright colonisation and extermination, through to benign and charitable interventions to help allies. And literally everything in between. America has an imperial history, such a fact cannot reasonably be disputed. And I think it's totally fair to say we still live in an American world. It is a hegemonic power you don't want to be on the wrong side of. Would I call it "imperium"? No. But such descriptions don't fall away as obvious nonsense either.
I don't accept that caricature but even if I did I'd take American control of finances and infrastructure over Chinese any day of the week, thank you.
America doesn't threaten to grind you up and crush your bones, and then proceed to do exactly that.
I mean..
The US Department of Defense charged eleven soldiers over those abuses, and they were court-martialled, convicted, sentenced to military prison, and dishonourably discharged.
China is committing genocide against the Uighurs as a matter of state policy.
They are not remotely comparable.
Well, they are to @Farooq, which might suggest something….
Indeed. It's fascinating that he started off on Thursday with a firm "Republic. Now." and then moved through rampant europhilia over the weekend and onto classic anti-Western tropes and whatabboutery this evening."
It's almost as if treason comes as a package, isn't it?
Pointing out crimes committed by a foreign country is not treason. We are not the USA, however much the weaker-minded amongst us would wish us to be.
One of the economic advantages the UK has is that it is densely populated.
It was an advantage when transportation was difficult and expensive, centuries ago.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
Why then has the Netherlands (pop density 508 per km2) got such good infrastructure compare to England (pop density 276 per km2)?
Because the Dutch are better at telling NIMBYs to f--k themselves than we are. I didn't say that high population density was the only reason that we have so many NIMBYs, only that it a main reason.
Joe Armitage @joe_armitage · 8m The Tory rebels have either: 1) deliberately attempted to use the Conservative HQ document format for their dossier (see example below) OR 2) somebody in Conservative HQ has gone rogue and is conducting the research and writing it for them.
Re the Cost of Living, round me the price of petrol has shot up. It is now 20 pence higher than the price it dropped to after Sunak's bung.
Really painful.
Even if the PM is replaced, what does the new PM say or do about this? What would Labour say or do?
A sixth of that increase is directly going to HMRC as VAT as windfall government income, so those who say the government can do nothing are wrong. That money should be recycled back to the poorest third or so, not just the poorest ten per cent. It should not be done by age, or extra given to those who own loads of houses.
The German Federal government are seemingly massively reducing fuel duty and making local public transport effectively free for the summer...
That's the sort of creative thinking Labour should be doing. Really cheap or free public transport (buses especially - trains may not cope with the demand) - provide incentives to get people out of their cars, saving them money and moving towards green targets. Such policies were hugely popular in, for example, Sheffield and London in my youth.
You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money
Charming, as ever. Buses are fabulous in Brighton. Serve all the city with frequent services - every 3-10 minutes on most routes. Much quicker than driving - only nutters (with obvious exceptions for those who really have no choice) try to drive into the centre. Buses are heavily used for access to all workplaces and shopping in the city. Could be even cheaper. But I guess you know best. (Different out in the sticks, obviously).
Wow a few places have decent buses...they are the exception not the rule. I live in the southeast 5 miles from heathrow....I tried taking the bus once and after two buses in a row failed to appear had to get a taxi yet keep getting told the south east has a good bus service. You also neglect bus services are mostly hub and spoke....want to go to the town centre no problem need to go across town its usually go to the bus stop catch a bus to the centre then hope the bus from the centre turns up on time to get the bus to where you are going.
Merely want to go from where you are to the town centre often fine.....most people aren't going to the town centre though they are going elsewhere
You said "You can make buses free people still wont use them because they take too long and dont go door to door and rarely even where people want to go. Waste of fucking time and money"
We've given you two major counterexamples - Edinburgh and Brighton. Why is it they seem to be able to do it properly?
Well for a start you stating you find the bus useful does not equal all people finding the bus useful. Round my way you see the buses go past...usually with around 5 to 10 passengers. Pretty sure despite you finding the bus useful that if I came up your way the same would apply. Only time I ever see full buses is if I go into london. Not seen a bus even half full anywhere else in britain as yet
You should get out more. My bus is often full by the time it gets to the City Centre. It is empty when it sets off, and in an intermediate state along the way. How full it is depends on where you observe it on the route.
The problem for me using it is that there is only one per hour, and the last one from the city is at 1830, if I miss that, then there is another service part of the way, then I have a 2 mile walk. Incidentally my Trust runs a bus between the three hospital sites, about 2-3 miles apart, open to any passenger, but free with Staff ID. It is nearly always full.
Again you live in leicester its quite a big place. I havent said buses dont work there. I just don't think they work in small places of 150k or less. Ie most towns in the country. People keep telling me to travel more as there bus is full but they always come from huge places. Think its them needs to travel more. Even you have said last one is at 18:30....well good bye to going out for a meal with your work colleagues then if you want to get a bus....inconvenient as I said
Bedford is 65k people and had a pretty decent bus service when I was there. That said... It worked as biddenham and bromham, but the outer villages will have been a lot more patchy.
The right to leave / wrong to leave figures (37/49) in the latest YouGov are the widest spread we’ve seen yet, I think.
Wrong to leave still just 1% more than the 48% who voted Remain in 2016
Wrong, wrong, wrong and you know it.
You'd do better to argue that 37% is just 0.5% lower than the 37.5% who voted Leave in 2016.
In fact, 49% is 15% more than the 34% who voted Remain in 2016.
Either include don't knows/abstentions or don't. Don't mix it up.
I did include don't knows, with them still less than 50% of the UK electorate think Brexit was wrong
Here's the thing though.
51% wrong, even if it were sustained, wouldn't be enough to reverse the UK's current Euro policy. But (silly example incoming), if the polling got to 80% wrong, it would be in the interests of someone to run on a policy of making up with Europe, pretty much whatever the cost. They would run on it, probably win on it and enact it.
So- where's the transition? Or more accutately, where are the transitions? What degree of opposition to the current policy makes it worth Labour moving further than "Make Brexit Work (because this one doesn't)"? When does defending this Brexit stop being in the Conservatives' interests?
My guess- the drift will be 1 or 2 percent a year, and mostly not due to people changing their minds. (Almsot nobody is changing their minds on this.) So barring events (which could go either way), it will take until around the end of the decade for the right:wrong score to hit 60:30. And that's when the politics starts to awake from its slumber.
The right to leave / wrong to leave figures (37/49) in the latest YouGov are the widest spread we’ve seen yet, I think.
Wrong to leave still just 1% more than the 48% who voted Remain in 2016
Wrong, wrong, wrong and you know it.
You'd do better to argue that 37% is just 0.5% lower than the 37.5% who voted Leave in 2016.
In fact, 49% is 15% more than the 34% who voted Remain in 2016.
Either include don't knows/abstentions or don't. Don't mix it up.
I did include don't knows, with them still less than 50% of the UK electorate think Brexit was wrong
Here's the thing though.
51% wrong, even if it were sustained, wouldn't be enough to reverse the UK's current Euro policy. But (silly example incoming), if the polling got to 80% wrong, it would be in the interests of someone to run on a policy of making up with Europe, pretty much whatever the cost. They would run on it, probably win on it and enact it.
So- where's the transition? Or more accutately, where are the transitions? What degree of opposition to the current policy makes it worth Labour moving further than "Make Brexit Work (because this one doesn't)"? When does defending this Brexit stop being in the Conservatives' interests?
My guess- the drift will be 1 or 2 percent a year, and mostly not due to people changing their minds. (Almsot nobody is changing their minds on this.) So barring events (which could go either way), it will take until around the end of the decade for the right:wrong score to hit 60:30. And that's when the politics starts to awake from its slumber.
It won't ever get that high as rejoin now means with the Euro, Schengen and everything. Plenty of 2016 Remain voters, including me, would have voted Leave if that was the requirement of continued membership. At most longer term we will rejoin EFTA not the full EU
One of the economic advantages the UK has is that it is densely populated.
It was an advantage when transportation was difficult and expensive, centuries ago.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
Why then has the Netherlands (pop density 508 per km2) got such good infrastructure compare to England (pop density 276 per km2)?
That doesn't look right. I think you've used a UK figure for England population density: I think England is twice that (and I think your figure for Netherlands is too high) - Wikipedia gives figures for England and the Netherlands as 432 and 423 respectively. Not that your point is wrong, but, you know, details...
The right to leave / wrong to leave figures (37/49) in the latest YouGov are the widest spread we’ve seen yet, I think.
Wrong to leave still just 1% more than the 48% who voted Remain in 2016
Wrong, wrong, wrong and you know it.
You'd do better to argue that 37% is just 0.5% lower than the 37.5% who voted Leave in 2016.
In fact, 49% is 15% more than the 34% who voted Remain in 2016.
Either include don't knows/abstentions or don't. Don't mix it up.
I did include don't knows, with them still less than 50% of the UK electorate think Brexit was wrong
Here's the thing though.
51% wrong, even if it were sustained, wouldn't be enough to reverse the UK's current Euro policy. But (silly example incoming), if the polling got to 80% wrong, it would be in the interests of someone to run on a policy of making up with Europe, pretty much whatever the cost. They would run on it, probably win on it and enact it.
So- where's the transition? Or more accutately, where are the transitions? What degree of opposition to the current policy makes it worth Labour moving further than "Make Brexit Work (because this one doesn't)"? When does defending this Brexit stop being in the Conservatives' interests?
My guess- the drift will be 1 or 2 percent a year, and mostly not due to people changing their minds. (Almsot nobody is changing their minds on this.) So barring events (which could go either way), it will take until around the end of the decade for the right:wrong score to hit 60:30. And that's when the politics starts to awake from its slumber.
It won't ever get that high as rejoin now means with the Euro, Schengen and everything. Plenty of 2016 Remain voters, including me, would have voted Leave if that was the requirement of continued membership. At most longer term we will rejoin EFTA not the full EU
OK then, how far beyond 50 Wrong :40 Right do the polls have to get for that to be on the agenda of an ambitious political party?
The right to leave / wrong to leave figures (37/49) in the latest YouGov are the widest spread we’ve seen yet, I think.
Wrong to leave still just 1% more than the 48% who voted Remain in 2016
Wrong, wrong, wrong and you know it.
You'd do better to argue that 37% is just 0.5% lower than the 37.5% who voted Leave in 2016.
In fact, 49% is 15% more than the 34% who voted Remain in 2016.
Either include don't knows/abstentions or don't. Don't mix it up.
I did include don't knows, with them still less than 50% of the UK electorate think Brexit was wrong
Here's the thing though.
51% wrong, even if it were sustained, wouldn't be enough to reverse the UK's current Euro policy. But (silly example incoming), if the polling got to 80% wrong, it would be in the interests of someone to run on a policy of making up with Europe, pretty much whatever the cost. They would run on it, probably win on it and enact it.
So- where's the transition? Or more accutately, where are the transitions? What degree of opposition to the current policy makes it worth Labour moving further than "Make Brexit Work (because this one doesn't)"? When does defending this Brexit stop being in the Conservatives' interests?
My guess- the drift will be 1 or 2 percent a year, and mostly not due to people changing their minds. (Almsot nobody is changing their minds on this.) So barring events (which could go either way), it will take until around the end of the decade for the right:wrong score to hit 60:30. And that's when the politics starts to awake from its slumber.
It won't ever get that high as rejoin now means with the Euro, Schengen and everything. Plenty of 2016 Remain voters, including me, would have voted Leave if that was the requirement of continued membership. At most longer term we will rejoin EFTA not the full EU
OK then, how far beyond 50 Wrong :40 Right do the polls have to get for that to be on the agenda of an ambitious political party?
As a bonus, Guy Verhofstadt would even come over and campaign for them.
Comments
There are a whole coterie of far left sites and bloggers out there who cannot reconcile themselves to Starmer's achievement in rescuing Labour from it's near death experience under "Jeremy" and seem to make it their business to undermine him at every turn. They appear to yearn for nothing more than self-vindication in the form of a heavy Labour defeat under Starmer at the next GE, if they haven't removed him by then.
It's actually quite hard to find a left leaning website that doesn't go out of its way to promote the opponents of Starmer from the left. Even Labour List seems obsessed with reporting every talking point of Momentum in amongst other mainstream reports, which is perhaps to be expected given that its main sponsors are the Unite, Community and FBU unions.
(Amusingly the url for the site is still thecorbynproject.com)
Popular routes would soon form, and it would be easy to increase supply as drivers would be self employed small businesses, so more popular routes would attract more drivers.
Would quicker, nimbler services that respond organically to supply and demand be more efficient? I dunno, but it seems like an idea worth trying.
Kind of amazing that there’s this big controversy about Ukraine gaining the capacity to strike inside Russia, meanwhile Russia is launching missiles at Ukrainian cities 500km from the frontlines.
https://twitter.com/DGisSERIOUS/status/1533485066831241216?cxt=HHwWgIC9zeSihMgqAAAA
It has become clear over time he has moved well away from that and the removal of the whip from Jezza has antagonised them.
A heavy labour defeat followed by a move to purity with a socialist agenda seems to be the preferred course of action if Starmer does not go.
It’s crazy. You can’t change a great deal in opposition.
Prior to that there was one bus a week on a Thursday to the nearest town, Shaftesbury. The return bus left 30 mins later.
The (effectively unusable) service was stopped due to, er... lack of use.
The current privatised system doesn't work though. There needs to be interchange between companies, and through ticketing (like in London, and now Greater Manchester, I think) with planned routes for interchange rather than a purely radial pattern. Frequent services at peak times etc.
4/4 The world should not wonder how putin might exit the war. putin has his own propaganda army that can explain anything. The world must unite around #Ukraine and speed up supplies of heavy weapons to protect global order and democratic values.
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1531288980599226371?cxt=HHwWhoCykd_NncAqAAAA
(Though tbf I could say 1% or 99% likely and and still claim I was right, whatever the outcome.)
It's almost as if treason comes as a package, isn't it?
They certainly have ramped up expectations higher than they've been since just before the Russian invasion ramping up in February, so if it doesn't happen right soon they will look very silly.
Several people who couldn't drive for medical reasons had to move house.
It's an issue for only a small minority, sure.
But it's a pretty major, vote switching one for some.
No metro anywhere near either...
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/culture-and-community/transport/car-or-van-ownership/latest
I'd like to see London achieve that.
There is a special place in purgatory for people like Macron.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/05/several-dead-in-nigeria-as-gunmen-attack-catholic-church
Let’s just call it what it is, which is essentially Muslim factions in Nigeria deliberately targeting and killing Christians. This whole “well, it’s a tribal thing blah blah” fails to mention the tribe involved (Faluna) is 99% Sunni Muslim. If we are going to deal with shit like this, we are going to have confront some uncomfortable truths, one of which is that is a relatively significant proportion of Muslims essentially want to see Christians dead as they see them as non-righteous. As with Hitler, you don’t appease these people, you confront them.
Outside of london a 15 minute car journey quickly turns into an hour long bus journey, and prices aren't that cheap.
I paid £4.90 the other day for a 12 minute bus ride (15 minutes waiting at stop, plus 15 minutes walk at the other end) - it would have been 10 minutes door to door by car. And since I already own the car, the marginal cost of the extra miles is a lot less than the £4.90 bus fare was.
It should really be so difficult to have a comprehensive national bus service. Deregulation was one of Thatcher’s biggest mistakes.
recognise evil for what it is and stop making excuses for apologists.
I am no fan of Putin or EM's view of Putin.
Ex Estonian President not mincing words with Macron
“No. France will not mediate anything. Not when you start out from the outset standing up for the aggressors “feelings”
Can you please keep your visionary ego within your own national borders where at least you have a mandate”
The EU has a fault line
https://twitter.com/ilvestoomas/status/1532957185117913088?s=21&t=V-jefnMspaO_iSd0fz7DnQ
The #Ukrainian 55th Artillery Brigade shared photos of the #French self-propelled 155mm howitzers Ceasar at work in #Ukraine firing at Russian invaders. #StandWithUkraine #France https://t.co/zdGI09tImX
Some people seem to want to turn the Ukraine war into a conflict between NATO partners, particularly with Germany, France and Italy. I am sure that they do not intend to do Putin's work.
Or are you talking about normal people?
And the result was to privatise the buses everywhere except the area around the bridge by Westminster.
You'd do better to argue that 37% is just 0.5% lower than the 37.5% who voted Leave in 2016.
In fact, 49% is 15% more than the 34% who voted Remain in 2016.
Either include don't knows/abstentions or don't. Don't mix it up.
What it is not is 'ap' north.
On buses, Manchester does indeed have the busiest bus corridor in Europe, which is excellent if you cannot wait more than 60 second for a bus and are prepared to pay any price to ride the first bus that comes, but isn't great if you want an affordable overall bus service. Manchester's buses are, contrary to popular belief here, actually quite affordable, but only in the narrow situation that you get the same bus five days a week. Weekly tickets are actually quite cheap. So bus deregulation hasn't been an unmitigated disaster. Buses also became considerably cleaner and more pleasant to ride on deregulation. But it you want to make one-off journeys they are very expensive, and that's also a result of deregulation.
Franchising is not a panacea, because deregulation was not all bad. But on balance, I believe franchising will give GM a much better public transport offer.
It is a big disadvantage now as it is a main reason why we have too many NIMBYs, poor infrastructure, a stunted construction sector and ruinously high house prices.
Joe Armitage
@joe_armitage
·
8m
The Tory rebels have either: 1) deliberately attempted to use the Conservative HQ document format for their dossier (see example below) OR 2) somebody in Conservative HQ has gone rogue and is conducting the research and writing it for them.
https://twitter.com/joe_armitage/status/1533571955827302400
New thread
51% wrong, even if it were sustained, wouldn't be enough to reverse the UK's current Euro policy. But (silly example incoming), if the polling got to 80% wrong, it would be in the interests of someone to run on a policy of making up with Europe, pretty much whatever the cost. They would run on it, probably win on it and enact it.
So- where's the transition? Or more accutately, where are the transitions? What degree of opposition to the current policy makes it worth Labour moving further than "Make Brexit Work (because this one doesn't)"? When does defending this Brexit stop being in the Conservatives' interests?
My guess- the drift will be 1 or 2 percent a year, and mostly not due to people changing their minds. (Almsot nobody is changing their minds on this.) So barring events (which could go either way), it will take until around the end of the decade for the right:wrong score to hit 60:30. And that's when the politics starts to awake from its slumber.
Not that your point is wrong, but, you know, details...