Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
asperity

Rail Nationalisation

Recommended Posts

There are rough sleepers in China and difficult as it is to believe in Moscow. Any attempt to get the number to zero would appear to be a heck of a difficult task. It seems that to equate this simple but distressing fact of life to societal failure is probably false. The important thing is surely that society does care about these people  and given the estimate of 15000 rough sleepers in Moscow it seems that socialism does not seem to perform better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where you get your figures from, but the reality is, that Russia is no longer a "Communist State", maybe a totalitarian one, but not Communist, since the fall of the USSR.  Like China, it has allowed the rise of an oligarchy, who've asset stripped State assets and made fortunes out of the process, many then moving to the West, to buy property in London or buy football clubs, with their ill gotten gains.   I don't condone the acceptance of poverty by any State,  but where you have the pretence of civilisation by some of the richest, who tolerate 20% of their populations living below the poverty line, you need to question their capitalist ideology.     :ph34r:    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, observer said:

Not sure where you get your figures from, but the reality is, that Russia is no longer a "Communist State", maybe a totalitarian one, but not Communist, since the fall of the USSR.  Like China, it has allowed the rise of an oligarchy, who've asset stripped State assets and made fortunes out of the process, many then moving to the West, to buy property in London or buy football clubs, with their ill gotten gains.   I don't condone the acceptance of poverty by any State,  but where you have the pretence of civilisation by some of the richest, who tolerate 20% of their populations living below the poverty line, you need to question their capitalist ideology.     :ph34r:    

Not sure what the state of politics in the rest of the world has to do with rail nationalisation in the UK though............................................:huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, asperity said:

Not sure what the state of politics in the rest of the world has to do with rail nationalisation in the UK though............................................:huh:

Neither am I, but these topics always tend to go off track.     :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎02‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 1:57 AM, observer said:

That's the whole point, they're not there "to make a profit", but deliver a public service;   we don't ask if the Police, Army, NHS etc are making a profit do we ?    An efficient transport infrastructure is essential to National economic wellbeing, and in aiding the economy, it should provide means for Gov to sustain it.    :ph34r: 

The only transport infrastructure that has to be in public hands is the one that has to go everywhere, that is roads. ( Don't bother with the Toll notion - they are where an alternative free route exists but may be less convenient - or at least that is the rhetoric). Only a minority use the railways and they are generally better off folks even amongst those in London. There has always been a prejudice in government that railways are a subsidy for the middle classes. The working classes use the bus even in London. With cuts to buses by local government there is even more reason to favour roads and especially buses as a public service.

The arguments I have seen on this thread are not clearly based on a demonstration of an overarching public service need to provide something that would not be available at all or could be open to abuse if in private hands, i.e. Police, Army. The NHS is interesting in that most advanced democracies acknowledge the need for universal healthcare availability but do not choose to realise it as an NHS. It is therefore perhaps Social Security systems that are the actual overarching public service need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But our roads are clogged up, and even our railways.  The only systems that will solve it are mass transit systems such as a modernised rail system, where some central control can be exercised. Of course new communications technology can reduce the need for people movement, but an efficient transport system is a requisite for a modern economy.  :ph34r: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't answer the question as to why the taxpayer, many of whom never use the railways, be forced to pay for the transport of other people? The user should pay. Road users pay for the roads, even leaving aside any tolls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only, road tax was hypothecated for roads, unfortunately it goes into the Gov coffers and is used according to their priorities.   As for rail, freight can be carried by rail too, and is arguably preferable to the current domination of road space by HGVs.   As for usage, many folk never use various "public" services, but still pay taxes for them; however they function in supporting the general economy and thus growth.      :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2018 at 7:41 PM, observer said:

Not sure where you get your figures from, but the reality is, that Russia is no longer a "Communist State", maybe a totalitarian one, but not Communist, since the fall of the USSR.  Like China, it has allowed the rise of an oligarchy, who've asset stripped State assets and made fortunes out of the process, many then moving to the West, to buy property in London or buy football clubs, with their ill gotten gains.   I don't condone the acceptance of poverty by any State,  but where you have the pretence of civilisation by some of the richest, who tolerate 20% of their populations living below the poverty line, you need to question their capitalist ideology.     :ph34r:    

To be fair, this is true. Then again, homelessness and asset stripping would have come as a blessed relied to the tens of millions deliberately starved and murdered under communism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs,

Our roads are clogged up in places but that is in part due to a remarkable political decision to pass an Act called the Road Traffic Reduction Act, which gave councils a duty to try and make it difficult to drive cars in cities. Then have the government use the need to reduce emissions to justify not building enough capacity to keep pace with population and what you see around you is the result.

I really do favour public transport but try to get to anywhere in Manchester outside the city centre and the airport for a 0900 start for work and then leave at 1715 from somewhere in Westbrook/ Callands / Dallam or Stockton Heath. Then consider working in Northwich -public transport isn't economic or rational. Like I said there is a case for nationalising and subsidising buses to a far greater extent than for trains. They enable more travel provided they start before 0700 and end after 1830; which is why WBT is so hopeless as they do not support the 50% of the working population that work outside the town - just a shopping service to a town centre that the council is killing off by stopping shoppers in cars getting to it. Mass transit is not the answer because from any part of Warrington to places outside the volumes are small. In my opinion the key is frequent connecting buses which are 10 minute maximum frequency during the commuting peak.

Oh and the other key is a single ticket for buses and trains with limitless connections in a maximum timed journey. The model I like is the German Verkehrs Verbunds which work very well indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Road space is a finite resource and if cars keep piling onto it, it's inevitable that it will clog up. I concur with your comments about buses, as it's a no brainer to figure out that one bus can take fifty cars off the road, that's 50 less sources of city pollution. However, as I've said many times on here, the bonds of drivers to their cars will be hard to break, and drivers are voters too.   Whilst i'm no supporter of HS2,  we clearly need inter-city services, especially in the North, that are clean and quick, which was my point about mass-transit. The best examples within Cities are the under-ground, but even that is now being swamped by passenger numbers in London.  There is new technology on the horizon, but I doubt any of us will see it in action.   An efficient transport infrastructure is essential to future economic growth, which is why Gov has an interest in it's provision.     :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, observer said:

If only, road tax was hypothecated for roads, unfortunately it goes into the Gov coffers and is used according to their priorities.   As for rail, freight can be carried by rail too, and is arguably preferable to the current domination of road space by HGVs.   As for usage, many folk never use various "public" services, but still pay taxes for them; however they function in supporting the general economy and thus growth.      :ph34r:

You do spout rubbish most of the time Obs. All tax goes into the government coffers and they waste an awful lot of it, we know that. As for freight by rail, yes an awful lot can be carried by trains but there are very few, if any, shopping centres/supermarkets with a rail terminal in them. I would rather my contribution to the public purse be used for travel I can use locally (local bus services) than intercity travel which is not universally rquired. I haven't used a train for years. Apparently from your posts you yourself are a car driver so aren't really in a position to continually moan about the number of cars on the roads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check your posts Asp; you said

10 hours ago, asperity said:

That doesn't answer the question as to why the taxpayer, many of whom never use the railways, be forced to pay for the transport of other people? The user should pay. Road users pay for the roads, even leaving aside any tolls.

"Road users pay for the roads", when they probably pay for many other things too.   As for car usage, I'll take my chances along with the rest; if they price us of the roads fine, but I can't see it happening any time soon.    :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it may seem like a daft idea but why not get people to work nearer to where they live.

I know two people who work in hospitals. one lives in warrington and works in manchester so has to commute there to cover whatever shift they are working. the other lives in manchester and has the same commute to warrington to work their shift. don't know if they do a similar job but if they do why can't they swap so that they do not have to travel for an hour to get to work and could possibly use public transport to get to work so taking two cars off the road..

just one example and probably hundreds of journeys like this happening everyday.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Evil Sid said:

I know it may seem like a daft idea but why not get people to work nearer to where they live.

I know two people who work in hospitals. one lives in warrington and works in manchester so has to commute there to cover whatever shift they are working. the other lives in manchester and has the same commute to warrington to work their shift. don't know if they do a similar job but if they do why can't they swap so that they do not have to travel for an hour to get to work and could possibly use public transport to get to work so taking two cars off the road..

just one example and probably hundreds of journeys like this happening everyday.

I used to think like that many years ago Sid when i was on the road especially going over the Pennines. You would see  thousands of cars at rush hour travelling from Leeds area to Manchester area & vice versa & wonder how many of those people were doing the same type of jobs. With the advent of the internet there must be a lot of jobs that can even be done from home these days. Railways are great but a big problem is they don't go where most commuters want them to ,from doorstep to doorstep. To make rail effective there needs to be a system of frequent buses to take people to rail stations &  the cost & experience of travelling to work  has to be better than using the car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made that point in another topic Sid, and got ribbed for it;  think the daily commute for Warrington is around 25,000 in and 25,000 out.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×