politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ready for President Chuck Grassley?
Options
Comments
-
I travel from North Essex on generally a good service.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.Floater said:
You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
When I first commuted the trains were awful
The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.
Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
Different service provider - yet you want a one (shit) size fits all approach so we can all enjoy bad service
Well, that's how you Socialists think whether its education or anything else really.0 -
I'm telling you what my experience is, I'm glad you have a better experience than me. But unfortunatly I can't travel on whoever the TOC is for Essex. It's SWR or nothing.Floater said:
I travel from North Essex on generally a good service.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.Floater said:
You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
When I first commuted the trains were awful
The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.
Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.
Different service provider - yet you want a one (shit) size fits all approach so we can all enjoy bad service
Well, that's how you Socialists think whether its education or anything else really.0 -
You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.CorrectHorseBattery said:
What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?TimT said:
Trains that crash and kill lots of people?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.0 -
I'm not sure that the Labour Communications Officer who asked Corbyn about another Brexit referendum would have liked the headlines which followed about being neutral.
https://order-order.com/2019/11/23/labour-comms-staffer-question-time-liar/1 -
Do you know how many catastrophes have occurred throughout human history by frustrated men who declare we should try *this* radical option because 'it couldn't be any worse'?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.Floater said:
You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
When I first commuted the trains were awful
The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.
Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.0 -
I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.TimT said:
You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.CorrectHorseBattery said:
What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?TimT said:
Trains that crash and kill lots of people?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.0 -
Then don't answer the questionCasino_Royale said:
Do you know how many catastrophes have occurred throughout human history by frustrated men who declare we should try *this* radical option because 'it couldn't be any worse'?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I commute into London via SWR. My train is old, dirty, with faulty doors, incredibly overcrowded and with a cost of £500 a month. It couldn't be any worse.Floater said:
You must be young - my journeys are generally on fairly new trains and they are generally clean.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
When I first commuted the trains were awful
The biggest problem for delays has been that old perennial - suicide by train.
Not sure how nationalising trains and expanding the power of unions (which history shows us will lead to more delay and disruption due to strikes) would stop that.0 -
You want your cake and you want to eat itCorrectHorseBattery said:
I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.Floater said:
"as a consumer I have no choice"CorrectHorseBattery said:
If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.KentRising said:
Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.
This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.
Wonderful stuff
You decry lack of choice by advocating removal of competition
Super stuff
0 -
I can only assume it must be the comedy value, as with Diane.HYUFD said:
IDS is quite a popular and hard-working local MP, saw more IDS window posters this afternoon than I have for most candidates I have canvassed foralb1on said:
Canvassing for IDS as a Conservative must be the equivalent of canvassing for Diane Abbott for Labour; a battle to suppress the embarrassment of association with the candidate. It is a mystery why parties do not gently consign the useless to pastures new when they start being a drain on the reputation of the party.HYUFD said:Out canvassing in Chingford this afternoon and had Momentum canvassing on the other side of the street at the same time. They even appeared when one of our canvassers was chatting with a resident and were politely told it was a Tory household. Good number of IDS window posters appearing though a few for Labour candidate Faiza Shaheen too
0 -
-
Presumably alsorural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Railways initially designed for larger rolling stock
Better employee relations0 -
And regardless of context, your question was silly. Of course it can get worse.CorrectHorseBattery said:
I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.TimT said:
You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.CorrectHorseBattery said:
What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?TimT said:
Trains that crash and kill lots of people?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.0 -
-
That seems a pretty good bet even though I’d love them not to get over 40% !Casino_Royale said:***BETTING POST***
For a better return on the Tories take a look at the Conservative Vote percentage market on Betfair exchange.
Given the polling over the last few weeks, and how Brexit Party voters have moved, it's very unlikely the Tory vote will now drop below 40%. This didn't happen even in GE2017 with the clusterf*ck, and the stakes for the Tories are even higher now and the narrative far better.
Right now, you can back the Tories to clock 40.00-44.99% at 2.2. If you're really nervous, you can also back 45.00-49.99% as a saver too at 6.2 giving a 1.78 return on the combo (after Betfair commission).
That seems very generous to me.
DYOR.
I would be shocked if they don’t get over that though . Labour really need to poll at least 35% to make life difficult for the Tories because the BP standing down in over 350 seats might be skewing what they need for a decent majority .0 -
-
No chart updates for three hours, sorry folks.
0 -
19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.0
-
Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?0
-
Just under £500wooliedyed said:Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?
0 -
CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
You could have fewer, older, less reliable trains at far more irregular intervals that are even more dirty and awful, with more regular strikes, leading to people giving up commuting to work and changing their jobs entirely, and the economy changing in ways that affect you badly - think your home losing its value and putting you in negative equity.
The rail network has two problems: (1) its popularity, meaning it's hit capacity and (2) its age, which is difficult to renew due to it being a capacity.
There's a third factor too which is the very high cost of running it, due in no small apart to endemic unionisation, and over-the-top multilayered safety regulation, which is in need of rationalisation which could be done without impacting safety at all.
You know what wouldn't fix any of those problems?
Yup, that's right. Nationalisation.1 -
OPINIUM!!!!!!2
-
And yet I use the East Coast Main line around 50 times a year and whilst it was in private ownership I did not have recourse to use the delay repay system once in 4 years. In the 10 months after it was taken back into public ownership I got my fare back because it was more than an hour delayed 7 times.CorrectHorseBattery said:
My train is always late, dirty, incredibly crowded (good luck getting a seat) and is £500 a month. How on Earth could it be any worse?Richard_Tyndall said:
Probably because enough of us remember how absolutely crap they were when they were in public ownership. And we see how crap Network Rail is.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
My recent experience of public vs private is completely the reverse of yours.
0 -
Well, it could have not been on time at all...CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
It’s at times like this that I’m glad I can walk to work.0 -
Is that a genuine question? It's been flipping obvious they intend to do that for some time now. They've given up on fiscal rectitude, the only things they have left are screaming at the Europeans and finding some groups and issues to torment. Although - to be fair - I am surprised it was Labour who made abortion an election issue, as I genuinely thought it would be Cons.nunu2 said:Now this is interesting. "Reject identity politics". Are the tories going for a culture war?
https://mobile.twitter.com/andrealeadsom/status/11982920183022755840 -
Wow, that's a lot, you should have mentioned itCorrectHorseBattery said:
Just under £500wooliedyed said:Say, Horse Battery, how much are you paying a month for your train travel?
0 -
The train not running at all?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.0 -
Be interesting to see if that Opinium result is shared by others. An absolute disaster for Labour.0
-
-
A 19 point lead sounds literally incredible.0
-
Ah yes, I had that twice last week as well. You're right, I apologise.TudorRose said:
The train not running at all?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.0 -
Yes, so the boundaries of your limited imagination will lead you to make ignorant decisions.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
I don't mean to insult you there, by the way. I mean ignorant in its primary meaning - lacking knowledge or awareness.
I'm just as pissed off with SWR and my train service as you. And I also know enough about the industry, and the history, to know that nationalisation would make it worse.0 -
My recollection is that the first time the East Coast Mainline franchise was given up the directly operated railway was an improvement, so I don't think we can draw a consistent conclusion either way.Richard_Tyndall said:
And yet I use the East Coast Main line around 50 times a year and whilst it was in private ownership I did not have recourse to use the delay repay system once in 4 years. In the 10 months after it was taken back into public ownership I got my fare back because it was more than an hour delayed 7 times.CorrectHorseBattery said:
My train is always late, dirty, incredibly crowded (good luck getting a seat) and is £500 a month. How on Earth could it be any worse?Richard_Tyndall said:
Probably because enough of us remember how absolutely crap they were when they were in public ownership. And we see how crap Network Rail is.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
My recent experience of public vs private is completely the reverse of yours.0 -
There's a valid argument to be made for progressive renationalisation along the TfL model, bringing the existing franchises back under public sector control as they expire. My main concern is that what would happen in practice is not the creation of arms-length operators running a not-for-profit service funded mainly by fares, but a reconstituted, monolithic BR kept on a short lead by the Transport Secretary and funded primarily by the Treasury. It would start out well enough, from the point of view of passengers: Government spending would be diverted into the system to subsidise and to cap fares, which would be hugely popular. The fact that this expenditure would be disproportionately concentrated - yet again - on people earning above average incomes in London and the South East, because that is who most of the rail commuters are, would presumably be pointed out by someone, but the complaint would be drowned out by the cheering.Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
Of course, in the long run the bribery would prove counterproductive. It would, as you suggest, be a blueprint for decay. The railways would be a lower priority for investment than the NHS and pensions so they would be starved of it. The shortfall couldn't be made up from hiking fares because the Government would be afraid of reversing the bribes and making all those commuters (many of whom live in valuable marginals) angry again. The trains would age and become dirty, old and knackered. Reliability and punctuality would steadily decline, accidents and overcrowding would steadily increase. The underfunding situation would also be exacerbated by the rail unions holding passengers to ransom every year to squeeze large pay settlements out of panicked ministers.
Being a monopoly provider of an important public service, a forward journey towards a publicly-owned railway system is not necessarily to be feared - if it is done properly. It's the journey backward to the bad old days that we want to make sure we avoid.0 -
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.Floater said:
"as a consumer I have no choice"CorrectHorseBattery said:
If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.KentRising said:
Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.
This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.
Wonderful stuff1 -
About that closing gap narrative.....
0 -
36 on Chelsea and 28 for Leicester are way to long on these two teams to win the league with Man City on 4. Betfair exch.0
-
I don't believe it. This is still going to go down to the wire.0
-
It’s yet more massive bungs for the middle class, as with their policy on tuition fees.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I want the trains to be publicly owned yes. Because then at least the £500 I was paying wouldn't be funding the Hong Kong metro.Floater said:
"as a consumer I have no choice"CorrectHorseBattery said:
If my train ticket was £100 and it was late, I wouldn't care so much. But I pay nearly £500 a month and it's been on time twice.KentRising said:
Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
I get a "refund" of 3% if it's over 15 minutes late, so if it's around 10 minutes late as per normal, they keep my money and use it to fund the Hong Kong metro.
This isn't capitalism, it's an organised cartel. I as a consumer have no choice. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Yet you happy for Labour to nationalise whole sectors of economy.
Wonderful stuff0 -
Gaslighting?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I clearly referred to the case of the train that I get on being privatised vs publicly owned. I of course didn't mean there would be - unfortunate - suicides or other issues of that nature.TimT said:
You asked a very silly question (as if being 15 minutes late and dirty is the worst that can happen) and I answered it.CorrectHorseBattery said:
What like under the privatised Railtrack, which went bust because of it?TimT said:
Trains that crash and kill lots of people?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.
Yes, things can get a lot worse than you described and you've had a wonderfully sheltered life if you can't image that they could.
Your point is ridiculous gaslighting.
Something I'm sure we'll see the return of if we go back to nationalisation.
Perhaps oil lamps as well.1 -
Game over . That Opinium is a shocker for Labour . And also terrible for the Lib Dems .
Looks like the Remainer Tories are bailing out for fear of Corbyn and some Labour Leavers are off to the Tories aswell .
I said we’d know this weekend if Labours manifesto was going to crash and burn , unless other polls show a marked difference then really this looks like a huge majority for the Tories.0 -
Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.0 -
Head. In. Sand.CorrectHorseBattery said:19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.
0 -
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!!!!!!!nunu2 said:0 -
Yup don't disagree.nico67 said:Game over . That Opinium is a shocker for Labour . And also terrible for the Lib Dems .
Looks like the Remainer Tories are bailing out for fear of Corbyn and some Labour Leavers are off to the Tories aswell .
I said we’d know this weekend if Labours manifesto was going to crash and burn , unless other polls show a marked difference then really this looks like a huge majority for the Tories.0 -
0
-
It's looking like 1987, over again.Morris_Dancer said:A 19 point lead sounds literally incredible.
0 -
Perhaps that Bootle constituency poll will actually be useful after all....2
-
Presumably if Network Rail were more competent more of them would be able to snap up advance train faresKentRising said:
Also, trains back before 1994 didn't cost half your income to get from A to B. Network Rail fly their staff around the UK because it saves on the ££££ of using trains. Train fares in this country are a national disgrace.CorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.0 -
Opinium!!!!!!
0 -
If other polls show the same thing, yup time to concede it's going spectactularly wrong. I bloody hope it's not a massive lead like that.nunu2 said:
Head. In. Sand.CorrectHorseBattery said:19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.
0 -
Re Railways: most of the Beeching closures were implemented by LAB 1964 to 1970.
CON is pro railway although I wish we would scrap HS2 as it's a waste of money.1 -
Opinium on flavible has the following tasty morsels dropping
Sunderland central, newcastle north, redcar, leigh, both warringtons, Hemsworth, eccles, ellesmere port, all of the Wirral1 -
but . .CorrectHorseBattery said:
"The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
move on please, nothing to see here.0 -
Last Oppy was 44 28, so it's +3 and unchanged. Usually MoE 2%0
-
Then, you should vote Conservative.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.
We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.0 -
I'm assuming these are new?The latest constituency-level polling by Deltapoll, published by the Observer, suggests that Lib Dems are making inroads in specific constituencies, but struggling to take a lead. In the Cities of London and Westminster constituency, for example, Chuka Umunna is up 22 points but trails the Tories by six points. In Chelsea and Fulham, the Lib Dems are up 14 points but trail the Tories by 23 points. In Hendon, the party is up eight points but is still a distant third.0
-
It's an outlier.0
-
Fieldwork is presumably during and after the debates, is it post the Labour manifesto launch as well?geoffw said:
but . .CorrectHorseBattery said:
"The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
move on please, nothing to see here.
An absolute disaster.0 -
Christ, that Opinium.
#Corbynmanifestobounce0 -
-
19 point lead. Is that a real poll and not fake news ?GIN1138 said:Opinium!!!!!!
And when was it done0 -
Constituency polls are London again, Chuka within 6 but LDs a mile behind in Chelsea and in Hendon (3rd place)0
-
I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.Casino_Royale said:
Then, you should vote Conservative.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.
We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.0 -
If Labour couldn't make a dent after their manifesto and the debate then when?geoffw said:
but . .CorrectHorseBattery said:
"The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
move on please, nothing to see here.0 -
Hahahahaha
Pause
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA-1 -
I'm assuming Chuka could squeeze some Labour votes if he's a clear 2nd. Surprised the Lib Dems are so far behind in Chelsea and Fulham. Hendon was always Tories versus Labour.0
-
We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.0
-
Come on Boris, get to 50 so the 'not a real majority' lot can sod off2
-
Exactly. Curtains.nunu2 said:
If Labour couldn't make a dent after their manifesto and the debate then when?geoffw said:
but . .CorrectHorseBattery said:
"The results suggest that the first week of televised debates between the party leaders has not made an immediate impact on the race."
move on please, nothing to see here.0 -
Note: Opinium lead would be 16% if all parties stood in every seat - ie same lead as last week.
So underlying result is no change, Con just gain 3% overall due to BXP not standing.
Still a great result for Con, but not a "home run" moment.1 -
Con maj 1.53 with Betfair.
Labour running out of runway for takeoff.0 -
Dr. Foxy, already backed (little bit longer, on Ladbrokes a few days ago).
Hope Chelsea can beat Manchester City.
Edited extra bit: I think some are getting carried away with a single poll three weeks before the vote.0 -
Are you sure ?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.Casino_Royale said:
Then, you should vote Conservative.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.
We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.0 -
I do hope that poll is correct, I want to see Corbyn comprehensively trounced. There is no place for his kind of politics (at least I blooming well hope so) in the UK.0
-
3 already today ?CorrectHorseBattery said:We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.
0 -
Has Twitter exploded yet?nunu2 said:0 -
The news has reached the twitterverse and they are losing their shit1
-
100%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Are you sure ?CorrectHorseBattery said:
I won't vote for a party led by Boris Johnson. Never, ever.Casino_Royale said:
Then, you should vote Conservative.CorrectHorseBattery said:
Yes, just like I pay my taxes to fund the NHS even though I don't use it.TudorRose said:
But you are (presumably as a Labour supporter) happy for people to pay higher taxes for services that they don't use at all?
We already do fund the railways, they're all subsidised with our money. I'd be happier if we didn't give them any money at all - but then the services wouldn't run anymore.
Under this administration, HMT Treasury have been reducing subsidies to the railways and driving efficiencies since 2010.
We go even further if we moved to (yep, you guessed it) DOO-CCTV and a digital railway - it'd facilitate lower operating costs, and a more reliable service, and the Treasury could focus its resources instead on reopening branch lines and investing in capital strategic upgrades.0 -
Love an outlier...
0 -
Which?Flashy5 said:
3 already today ?CorrectHorseBattery said:We don't know it's an outlier yet. We need to see other polls.
0 -
Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the Lib Dems even manage to take Richmond Park now. Jo Swinson is extremely unpopular among all of my social circles and those who may vote Lib Dem are now so worried about Jez and his crazy Marxist policies they are falling back in line with the Tories.Artist said:I'm assuming Chuka could squeeze some Labour votes if he's a clear 2nd. Surprised the Lib Dems are so far behind in Chelsea and Fulham.
0 -
being 16 minutes late and all of the above? being cancelled so the next one is even more overcrowded? being charged 5p more for the same level of service? a smell of urine or vomit? lots of dogs? headphones that bleed? self-important people talking loudly on phones about how they are 16 minutes late?CorrectHorseBattery said:
Can you explain what could be worse for my train than being 15 minutes late, overcrowded (with a lot of people standing), dirty (I had what looked like a shit stain on my seat the other day) and with faulty doors that don't open?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Believe me it can and was under BRCorrectHorseBattery said:
A lot of us look at the trains now and can't imagine how it could be much worse. My train has been on time twice in the last month. Twice.DeClare said:
They must be too young to remember the filthy dirty delayed 'services' that the British Railways Board used to operate between 1948-1994 what a nightmare!eristdoof said:
Most of the British population do not believe the private sector can run the railways better than a state owned organisation.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The majority of railways are publicly owned and run. I don't see why the British seem to think we can do it better.rural_voter said:
How have the Swiss railways apparently managed to do better than us over a really long period?Novo said:Those advocating nationalisation of the railways clearly cannot remember how bad British Rail was. Grossly unreliable and inefficient and prone to UK wide strikes paralysing the entire network.
100% elec trains
No Beeching closures
Lower subsidy
Affordable fares (unlike a £150-200 return London-Manchester)
Extreme punctuality.
State-owned since 1902. BR was only nationalised in about 1947.
Even in NI the railways are entirely publicly owned.0 -
It means Tories will hold all their seats in the south against the libdemsMikeL said:Note: Opinium lead would be 16% if all parties stood in every seat - ie same lead as last week.
So underlying result is no change, Con just gain 3% overall due to BXP not standing.
Still a great result for Con, but not a "home run" moment.0 -
I like the way the Graun says the 19-pt gap shows the debates didn't have an effect. Er, I think it shows they had a very substantial effect!!!0
-
This is how Tory supporters felt in 1997 and 2001.nunu2 said:
Head. In. Sand.CorrectHorseBattery said:19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.
1 -
Need to see the data tables0
-
It won't be, because some soft Tories will peel off to other parties, the same as happened in 1983. They probably won't get more than 42% on the day.CorrectHorseBattery said:19 points, I just refuse to believe that will the final result. 47% of the vote, no way, sorry.
1 -
Here you go BigGBig_G_NorthWales said:
19 point lead. Is that a real poll and not fake news ?GIN1138 said:Opinium!!!!!!
And when was it done
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/23/tories-renewed-poll-boost-brexit-party-candidates-pull-out-opinium-observer0 -
No point in spinning this . Opinium is diabolical for Labour . My only solace is this election hasn’t turned into a no deal Tory platform . They put the deal through which gives those of us more time to escape the Thatcherism on steroids bloodbath .
One year to escape during the transition .0 -
The only reason why there's a change from the last poll is adjusting for TBP standing down.TOPPING said:I like the way the Graun says the 19-pt gap shows the debates didn't have an effect. Er, I think it shows they had a very substantial effect!!!
0 -
Tories peak too soon. All is lost.0
This discussion has been closed.