E U. Should we stay or should we leave.

[chesters1]

The fares are high because commuters pay them ,i expect if the fares in spain rose blood would be spilt.

Choice has its consequences if you choose to take a train you choose to pay the fares they demand

Edited July 4, 2019 by chesters1

[leedafeeder]

If people cared remotely for the environment, people would travel by train and pay the fares. Your average Brit unfortunately doesn't give a hoot however.

[Huge_Vitae]

If ever there were an intertwined subject it is coal and railways!

 

But as usual those who fail to study history are destined to suffer the same fate. I pointed out before that, whilst EU rules do not prevent the Nationalisation of railways, the EU HAS to give permission for it to be done, they might give it but it WILL be within the rules which will (I was going to say; allow all of the railway operators to compete with the National Railway, but in actual fact) prevent the National Railway from operating a monopoly, considering that the current operators own ALL THE STOCK AND THE NEW NATIONAL RAILWAY HAS NONE, who has the advantage?

 

Now that is current, go back in time to the last occasion it was taken in to public ownership, railways were bad, there were multiple companies all running different timetables even with their watches and clocks set on different times ffs! Not only that but of course those damn capitalists were making money.

 

Along came Labour with the solution, public ownership. When they got their hands on it they realise it’s not making a fortune, there is a need for investment into diesel electric and away from steam which was incredibly more costly to run. Wait a minute, a Labour Govt. cannot possibly authorise reducing the domination of coal and along came Beecham, there you go, we became decades behind Countries such as Spain, France, Sweden et al who had no coal and remains the reason why our railways are so far behind other European Nations.

 

But some are so stupid or single minded that they argue for things without understanding you cannot support ‘remain’ AND public ownership of ANYTHING.

[big_cod]

If ever there were an intertwined subject it is coal and railways!

 

But as usual those who fail to study history are destined to suffer the same fate. I pointed out before that, whilst EU rules do not prevent the Nationalisation of railways, the EU HAS to give permission for it to be done, they might give it but it WILL be within the rules which will (I was going to say; allow all of the railway operators to compete with the National Railway, but in actual fact) prevent the National Railway from operating

 

a monopoly, considering that the current operators own ALL THE STOCK AND THE NEW NATIONAL RAILWAY HAS NONE, who has the advantage?

 

Now that is current, go back in time to the last occasion it was taken in to public ownership, railways were bad, there were multiple companies all running different timetables even with their watches and clocks set on different times ffs! Not only that but of course those damn capitalists were making money.

 

Along came Labour with the solution, public ownership. When they got their hands on it they realise its not making a fortune, there is a need for investment into diesel electric and away from steam which was incredibly more costly to run. Wait a minute, a Labour Govt. cannot possibly authorise reducing the domination of coal and along came Beecham, there you go, we became decades behind Countries such as Spain, France, Sweden et al who had no coal and remains the reason why our railways are so far behind other European Nations.

 

But some are so stupid or single minded that they argue for things without understanding you cannot support remain AND public ownership of ANYTHING.

 

When National Express handed back the keys to the East Coast line franchise in 2009, it was renationalised under an arms-length government body called Directly Operated Railways. Nevertheless, during the following five years under state control, it increased ticket sales, returned about £1bn to the taxpayer and delivered record levels of customer satisfaction.

[Ken L]

Do you think GNER/National Express had no commitment to contribute to the treasury as franchise holders?

[Huge_Vitae]

Regulation (EU) 2016/796 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Railways and repealing Regulation (EC) No 881/2004

 

Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the interoperability of the rail system within the European Union.

[Phone]

Hugh,

 

Are you trying to spoil a fiesty argument with facts? SHAME, Shame, shame

 

Phone

[big_cod]

Regulation (EU) 2016/796 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Railways and repealing Regulation (EC) No 881/2004

 

Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the interoperability of the rail system within the European Union.

EU rules do not prevent you from having public railway company .

 

In a yougov poll over 60% of voters wanted to renationalise the rail network where as only 25 % against isnt that the will of the people now where I have heard that before .

.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-railways-eu-rules-nationalise-single-market-restrictions-labour-a8968691.html

Edited July 6, 2019 by big_cod

[Huge_Vitae]

 

I've been right here reading your posts Paul, and have heard very little of your thoughts on Brexit. What I have read, is mainly a collection of quotes/opinions from various sources. Very few of them are factual news articles, and those that could be loosely classed as such, come with such overwhelming bias it's hard to take them seriously. The rest mostly contain the random thoughts of people who you feel agree with you, be it politician, industrialist, pop singer, or ex-footballer. Your posts are mostly made up of sensationalist sound bites, and sweeping generalisations, predicting doom and gloom. You've been predicting the imminent fall of the PM since she took the office a couple of years ago, even you are bound to get it right eventually. You present opinions as fact, rarely fully read the links you post, (which often read opposite to the headline), and constantly repeat the same things. I think I've said before that if you keep saying the same thing often enough, it doesn't necessarily make it a fact anywhere but in your own mind.

 

John.

[big_cod]

 

 

I've been right here reading your posts Paul, and have heard very little of your thoughts on Brexit. What I have read, is mainly a collection of quotes/opinions from various sources. Very few of them are factual news articles, and those that could be loosely classed as such, come with such overwhelming bias it's hard to take them seriously. The rest mostly contain the random thoughts of people who you feel agree with you, be it politician, industrialist, pop singer, or ex-footballer. Your posts are mostly made up of sensationalist sound bites, and sweeping generalisations, predicting doom and gloom. You've been predicting the imminent fall of the PM since she took the office a couple of years ago, even you are bound to get it right eventually. You present opinions as fact, rarely fully read the links you post, (which often read opposite to the headline), and constantly repeat the same things. I think I've said before that if you keep saying the same thing often enough, it doesn't necessarily make it a fact anywhere but in your own mind.

 

John.

Is that really the best you can do its a bit like brexit full of unknowns and full uncertainties if you want some facts I will give you one look no further the pound has been on its arse for 3 years since the Brexit vote costing this country billions and billions building materials engine parts you name all going through the roof Brexit 100% to blame you can dream as much as like with Brexit thats the bottom line fact not fantasy. Edited July 7, 2019 by big_cod