Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: SydneyRover on November 27, 2019, 09:21:08 pm
-
Don't you just love privatised natural monopolies?
"Avanti West Coast will also have a new logo: an orange triangle. According to the train operators, the triangle was designed by an independent creative team of more than 100 people working in two locations: an old pickle factory in London and a theatre in Amsterdam''
"The trains, the staff and the entire management team may be staying the same, but passengers on intercity west coast mainline services will next month no longer be boarding a Virgin train but riding on a rebranded, “ready and fit for the future”, Avanti''
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/27/west-coast-train-services-to-be-rebranded-with-avanti-logo
-
Nationalise the buggers....
BobG
-
Can't wait for Jeremy to Nationalise the rail network. Brilliant
-
Well above the CPI these guys are having a laugh.
"UK rail fares to rise 2.7% in January
Labour says latest above-inflation rise means fares have risen at double the rate of wages over a decade''
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/nov/30/uk-rail-fares-to-rise-27-in-january
-
It is an interesting one. The average profit margin is 2%, thus not big at all.
How therefore can prices be reduced and service improved? That doesnt feel an easy thing to do.
-
Can't wait for Jeremy to Nationalise the rail network. Brilliant
The Pacer Trains will be phased out long before that happens
Would be nice but cant see it happening
-
It is an interesting one. The average profit margin is 2%, thus not big at all.
How therefore can prices be reduced and service improved? That doesnt feel an easy thing to do.
Rail transport should be a service like water and energy and not run on a for profit basis otherwise it will always be in trouble always asking for bailouts or cutting nonprofitable routes bfyp.
-
Yes sydney, so you believe there should effectively be a 2% cut to rail fares to run it at break even? Doesn't feel to me like a big saver for people, this is a small profit margin even at the higher rates of ticket increases. See the problem is labour say they're going to use this to fund the nationalisation, thus how will they then be able to cut fares and subsidise routes etc?
Then, are we to expect employees etc not to grumble further on pay etc or do we just accept that as a cost to the taxpayer too and could labour resist these unions?
-
Maybe I wasn't clear bfyp, I don't think a profit should come into it at all, give the public a proper train service and get people out of cars, London couldn't run if everyone drove. Give all big cities a 'london' service and interconnect them. It's a public good.
-
Maybe I wasn't clear bfyp, I don't think a profit should come into it at all, give the public a proper train service and get people out of cars, London couldn't run if everyone drove. Give all big cities a 'london' service and interconnect them. It's a public good.
the point is lBour intend to use the money generated from the 2% profit margin to fund Nationalisation,so there won't be any fare. Cuts, for decades.
-
Maybe I wasn't clear bfyp, I don't think a profit should come into it at all, give the public a proper train service and get people out of cars, London couldn't run if everyone drove. Give all big cities a 'london' service and interconnect them. It's a public good.
the point is lBour intend to use the money generated from the 2% profit margin to fund Nationalisation,so there won't be any fare. Cuts, for decades.
Exactly this. It will.simply need much more funding. Building infrastructure like London would cost huge sums and is the benefit there?
I could never commute to work by rail for example, I cant see it ever working for many living here. Somewhat ironic when my office is 3 mins walk from a train station.
-
And yet it works right across Western Europe...
-
And yet it works right across Western Europe...
They didn't rip up their city tram systems or do a Beeching on their rail systems! What I find bewildering is Labour totally showing no interest in developing the cross country routes advocated by Gideon in his Northern power house project. Surely that would be a massive vote winner and result in millions of Jobs.is it purely because it was a Tory idea? They have gone off the boil with it! I just don't see the sense!
-
Sproty.
P.91 here.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwis8MLGo5XmAhXGiVwKHcGfARgQFjAAegQIBxAC&usg=AOvVaw1T9SsTRaP20X9ory5skl6I
Labour committing to "Crossrail of the North".
-
Labour going for it now with rail;
https://labourlist.org/2019/12/labour-plans-biggest-ever-rail-fares-cut-to-save-commuters-1000-a-year/
Proper promise to roll back rail to an affordable, publically owned service.
That will put the Tory pledge to increase fares by 2.7% in January into the long grass.
Here is why it is needed;
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKvD-AsWsAkLK0P.png
Getting exciting now!
-
Ah another expensive pledge outside the costed manifesto. It's a cost of at least 3 billion pounds a year, more money from the money tree....
Update, we have an answer, vehicle excise duty and reducing road investments. Doesn't seem sensible to me, great if you can use rail but not really fair on those without that option.
-
Oh that's just priceless...For the many not the few,unless the few live within a couple of miles of a railway station.What an absolutely crazy plan, another Labour stealth tax raise resulting in roads in even worse conditions than they are now..
That costed plan is a tough one for even Billy to justify..lol
-
Just to understand what you mean WC if you could expand on your comment, I don't think they are saying those that have to drive won't be allowed to, that you'll have to give up your car.
The 'many' will benefit in lower pollution and leave the roads clear for those that can't use trains for commuting, deliveries, trades etc.
-
Then I will explain what I mean Sydney..They are going to raise money by putting up excise duty which means car tax will go up,which is a stealth tax on everybody including hauliers and businesses which are already going to be mullered by Labour.It means less investment on our roads..
And those that will benefit will be a tiny proportion,most people don't live within 6 miles of a railway station.And it wont lead to clearer roads..
-
If investment in rail is increased WC more freight can be handled that way which relieves pressure on road transport, damage done to roads by heavy vehicles is a big expenditure and rail is much safer, better to have the bulk of freight handled by rail with the final bit by road.
I haven't seen any figures posted to say how much road tax will have to be increased so it's hard to comment unless you can post the figures/links WC.
Road travel will have to be modified in the near future anyway if the UK wants to tackle fine particle pollution by diesel vehicles plus all the gases that that enter the atmosphere, the choices are fairly obvious unless air quality is improved the cost to lives and health care will be a burden on those in the future.
There is no safe level of pm2.5
Added
This is a citizen science project that measures air pollution with low cost monitor built and distributed around the world by local organizations.
https://luftdaten.info/en/home-en/
-
Well I don't have the figures Sydney but the amount of goods transported in this country by rail will be miniscule and with all the investment in the world it will still be miniscule because there isn't the infrastructure to accomadate it or the appetite,rail freight is a timely process...It just doesn't work for enough people in this just in time world.The only people who this will help will be a few people who could travel by rail but cant afford it on a daily basis at the expence of everybody else
I'm sorry but you have to draw the line somewhere,you cant just have plan after plan costed by "businesses will pay for it" not if we want to remain competitive with the rest of the world.
It's a absolute crazy plan which has zero hope of being successful absolute madness...
-
It's difficult to understand how you can call it a crazy plan without providing any data to support your argument WC.
-
The only data I need on this Sydney is 40 years running businesses and the thousands of suppliers I've come across in that time.and do you know how much of the millions and millions of pounds of goods ive bought has come from railfreight?? absolutely none..it's a just in time world,cashflow is everything.Railfreight needs a lorry to take goods to the depot,it then sits there until theres a place on a train,then it get railed from a to b..Then you need to wait until is disembarked and cleared for collection and hope in all that time nothing is damaged.Then you need another lorry to pick it up and deliver to the business who bought it...Best part of three days,countless phone calls and arrangements and a dam site more expensive than saying to a haulier can you pick this up at 7am in Doncaster and deliver it to anywhere in the uk that day....
Sometimes you need data to argue a point and sometimes you just need a bit of common sense to tell you that something is unworkable..
-
Living by the main Scunny and Grimsby and Immingham I see lots less Rail traffic than I have ever done
Logical deliveries only - some but less Coal than ever , Bio Pellets for Drax , Sand for "Rockware - or whatever it is these days" and some bulk Steel from Scunny plus one or two Trains of rust coloured sliding roofed wagons *.
Gone are the days of Parcel vans I suppose - as they just dont hold up as WC has just outlined. Times change and who could imagine now the Fish Van trains from Grimsby to "wherever they went". Stick e on a lorry and they are already en route
* Anyone know what they carry ?
-
Again No one is saying that all freight can or should go by rail but 5% is a low figure which if doulbled would take 76m tonnes off the major roads reducing pollution reducing health costs and improving lives. I get the feeling this is the stuff that the Tories want to kick down the road with brexit, I think it's 3 times they have lost in court over high levels of pollution from road traffic.
-
The only reason some steel is railed from Scunny is for there export business.It can be loaded at the plant which has railway infrastructure and transported straight to the docks which also has railway infrastructure and straight on the ship..Anything else is moved by road hauliers.And that's from a company who has rail facilities on there actual site..
it's a total non starter,not possible,not cost effective whatever the investment in rail,man hour expensive,more risky for delays..So I'm going to stick with a crazy idea which will result in millions of us paying more stealth road tax and benefitting a tiny proportion of the population.
I'm not for one minute against paying extra tax for things but they have to produce value for money investment and this will be a black hole for our money that we wont notice any difference from other than it will harm the economy and add even more cost to business who Labour think seem to be a money pit they can delve into everytime they come with a plan to spend money...
-
I don't understand how this will be solved unless there is a drastic change to the vehicles on the roads.
Air pollution: UK government loses third court case as plans ruled 'unlawful'
This article is more than 1 year old
High court says approach to tackling pollution in 45 local authority areas is ‘not sufficient’ and orders urgent changes
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/21/high-court-rules-uk-air-pollution-plans-unlawful
-
The only reason some steel is railed from Scunny is for there export business.It can be loaded at the plant which has railway infrastructure and transported straight to the docks which also has railway infrastructure and straight on the ship..Anything else is moved by road hauliers.And that's from a company who has rail facilities on there actual site..
it's a total non starter,not possible,not cost effective whatever the investment in rail,man hour expensive,more risky for delays..So I'm going to stick with a crazy idea which will result in millions of us paying more stealth road tax and benefitting a tiny proportion of the population.
I'm not for one minute against paying extra tax for things but they have to produce value for money investment and this will be a black hole for our money that we wont notice any difference from other than it will harm the economy and add even more cost to business who Labour think seem to be a money pit they can delve into everytime they come with a plan to spend money...
Mostly yes, some UK rail goes via train but very minimal internal UK as you say, most of it goes to the channel tunnel really. Most trains they use are incoming not outgoing - the reason, the costs are massive.
If you put more trains in to goods Sydney that will cut the passenger volumes and speed without a massive investment.
-
There needs to be massive changes in this country and across the world....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50614518 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50614518)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-50621304 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-50621304)
These two stories from today alone prove this....the problem is that there is too much money to be made from Freight via a lorry rather than through trains and plastic production is never going to stop unfortunately whilst the likes of Trump and the Chinese pay absolutely no regards to the environment.
Labours plans will at least start to help with some of these issues....this should be regardless of whatever financial cost IMO
-
Some of the discussion of this important policy is missing the point.
Lots of frothing about costs, without considering the net benefits. Some of those are financial, for companies as well as travellers.
Why should rail travel in the UK cost so much more per mile than in other EU countries?
The link on costs I posted shows that the UK is running rail public transport at a much higher charge than countries with better (modern) rail infrastructure, and with comparable economies.
The only reasonable explanation is the business model for the rail industry, sweating the asset of legacy Victorian infrastructure.
By returning to the charging base of the system in 2010, before the 40% increase to 2019 prices, the UK is simply resetting the expectations of the industry and consumers.
The principle of transferring resources from that which needs to reduce (private transport), to that which is better for most (public transport), is obviously correct. It is the same as removing fossil fuel subsidies in favour of increased spending on renewable energy.
What Labour should also do is give priority to buses (electric) in the transport strategy. For me, this is AS WELL as the rail proposal, because they would work in tandem.
Article in the New Statesman makes the case here;
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2019/12/changing-just-one-word-would-make-labours-train-fares-policy-much-much
-
The only data I need on this Sydney is 40 years running businesses and the thousands of suppliers I've come across in that time.and do you know how much of the millions and millions of pounds of goods ive bought has come from railfreight?? absolutely none..it's a just in time world,cashflow is everything.Railfreight needs a lorry to take goods to the depot,it then sits there until theres a place on a train,then it get railed from a to b..Then you need to wait until is disembarked and cleared for collection and hope in all that time nothing is damaged.Then you need another lorry to pick it up and deliver to the business who bought it...Best part of three days,countless phone calls and arrangements and a dam site more expensive than saying to a haulier can you pick this up at 7am in Doncaster and deliver it to anywhere in the uk that day....
Sometimes you need data to argue a point and sometimes you just need a bit of common sense to tell you that something is unworkable..
Well said wingco.
I am retired now but like yourself, I had forty odd years of being in business and over time deliveries in and out become more and more “just in time”.
Rail deliveries would not be much use to most service industries.
How would companies like Amazon manage let alone smaller companies like ours.
Then of course there is the threat of the unions to go on strike like we are due to endure in the next four weeks.
-
Nobody is saying that road haulage is going to vanish. As with everything, it's about getting the balance.
-
Allow me to explain that 'just in time' manufacturing is not about waiting until you're nearly out of stock and then picking the phone up expecting the supplier to have it to you the same day, it's about advance planning and a robust supply-chain that can be relied upon to have the goods with you at the agreed time. There is absolutely nothing about rail freight that doesn't fit with JiT.
-
Allow me to explain that 'just in time' manufacturing is not about waiting until you're nearly out of stock and then picking the phone up expecting the supplier to have it to you the same day, it's about advance planning and a robust supply-chain that can be relied upon to have the goods with you at the agreed time. There is absolutely nothing about rail freight that doesn't fit with JiT.
In theory yes pies, that would be correct.
In reality though it doesn’t always follow.
Personally, I wasn’t speaking about manufacturing.
I was a plumbers merchant and we purchased from manufacturers.
Yes, we carried stock but invariably we would get orders from customers, out of the blue, which were far bigger than our usual stock levels.
Of course this meant calling on suppliers to get products to us just in time, as the saying goes.
More often than not this was a next day delivery, either to our premises or direct to the customer, depending of course who it was.
We dealt extensively with utility companies all over the UK and they always wanted next day delivery for large quantities of products.
Delivery by road was the only way to get the materials delivered in time.
-
If you look back through the thread hound you will see written that no one is talking about local/next day deliveries.
-
I think you will find that just in time deliveries include next day and others have been talking about just in time deliveries, in case you hadn’t noticed.
-
Correct but only those who are arguing against labours proposals in case you didn't notice hound
-
Correct but only those who are arguing against labours proposals in case you didn't notice hound
So you do agree then that wingco and myself are right to say that rail freight wouldnt be good enough for lots of businesses.
I am glad about that, we rarely agree.
I would expect the majority on here to support Labour proposals by the way.
Maybe there are people who haven't had to deal with running their own businesses so perhaps some of them wouldn’t fully understand the need for not penalising road users.
-
Hound.
For God's sake, no-one is saying that lorries are going to be banned and every business has to have its own RailFreight drop off point!
-
Can't help you if you haven't read all the comments hound
-
Hound.
For God's sake, no-one is saying that lorries are going to be banned and every business has to have its own RailFreight drop off point!
Well of course I know that BST.
I was supporting the view of wingco and his comment on just in time deliveries and explaining to pies that his theory on delivery and stock requirements wasn’t quite right.
It was your Aussie mate who complicated the thread with his follow up post saying that no one had spoken about local or next day deliveries.
Where did I say that every business had to have its own rail freight drop off point by the way.
-
Correct but only those who are arguing against labours proposals in case you didn't notice hound
So you do agree then that wingco and myself are right to say that rail freight wouldnt be good enough for lots of businesses.
I am glad about that, we rarely agree.
I would expect the majority on here to support Labour proposals by the way.
Maybe there are people who haven't had to deal with running their own businesses so perhaps some of them wouldn’t fully understand the need for not penalising road users.
No one disagreed you and WC are arguing between yourselves.
-
Correct but only those who are arguing against labours proposals in case you didn't notice hound
So you do agree then that wingco and myself are right to say that rail freight wouldnt be good enough for lots of businesses.
I am glad about that, we rarely agree.
I would expect the majority on here to support Labour proposals by the way.
Maybe there are people who haven't had to deal with running their own businesses so perhaps some of them wouldn’t fully understand the need for not penalising road users.
No one disagreed you and WC are arguing between yourselves.
Haha, you do make me laugh Sydney.
And you say that I had not read the other posts.
I even started my post to him with “well said wingco”.
Arguing my arse.
-
I didn't say you were arguing out of your arse hound :)
-
I didn't say you were arguing out of your arse hound :)
Hahaha, or should that be seasonal and be hohoho.
-
Sweet Jesus Sydney what are you on about?? Me and hound are agreeing with each other.. It's you, Billy and pies I'm disagreeing with..
-
Exactly :)
-
What of what I've said are you disagreeing with WingCo?
-
You are correct Billy,and please accept my humble apologies,nothing you have put on this thread I have disagreed with.I guess I've been that used to being on the opposite side to the political debates with you over the last month or two I became complacent..
However it wouldn't be modern politics if I didn't say this policy isn't one you have vehemently defended with your normal vigour so I'm assuming this isn't one you are totally convinced on either,buti'm sure you will correct me on that too.lol
-
Sweet Jesus Sydney what are you on about?? Me and hound are agreeing with each other.. It's you, Billy and pies I'm disagreeing with..
Exactly :)
SR, you really are mixed up dude.
First you tell me that wingco and myself are arguing with each other.
Then I tell you that we aren’t and explain why.
Your response to that is to avoid acknowledging your mistake by making a silly comment.
Wingco posts and confirms that he and I were agreeing with each other then you say “exactly”.
Crazy man. 🤯
-
Passengers protest to demand Northern rail be stripped of franchise
Customers of one of UK’s worst-performing train firms gather for Manchester demonstration
Government transport spending per person in London is two and a half times more than it is in the north of England, according to analysis from the centre-left thinktank IPPR North. Treasury data shows that in 2018-19
£903 was spent in the capital for every resident, while in the north the sum was £376.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/dec/05/passengers-protest-demand-northern-rail-stripped-franchise
And this is how johnson is going to fix it????
Boris Johnson vows to ban all-out strikes on public transport
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/05/boris-johnson-says-sorry-for-any-offence-caused-by-burqa-article
-
But surely if the government want people to use public transport then all measures should be taken to encourage it.
The grief that the current industrial action will cause just forces people away and back into cars.
-
If they'd done that there wouldn't be a need fir a strike hound.
-
If they'd done that there wouldn't be a need fir a strike hound.
Yep, the union leaders call a strike, the union members daren’t go against that so they lose at least a months pay at an expensive time of year for most people.
Their customers are inconvenienced and go back to using their cars.
The union leaders probably still get paid.
-
Hound.
What on earth are you talking about?
The union members VOTED to strike!
-
Yeah I know that, like the miners did.
-
Hound
Why do you do this?
-
Well I don’t agree with strikes for a start.
Lots of lads I knew back in the days of mass strikes daren’t vote against going on strike.
They felt that they had no option.
The union leaders had them over a barrel.
-
That was a million years ago.
But, since you raise the issue of strikes in principle, do you reckon the similarity between the trends in these two graphs is a coincidence?
(https://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/union-membership-1900-2007-500x329.png)
(https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20150606_BKC500.png)
Look at the post War data in particular. The correlation is startling. When unions are weaker, the very richest cream off far, far more of the national output. We work. They take the proceeds.
Strong unions are ESSENTIAL for a capitalist democracy to work fairly. Those graphs demonstrate that.
-
By the way. The story from the USA is even more startling.
(http://www.uslabormarket.sakura.ne.jp/topics/16/16053/epi.gif)
If you don't agree with strikes,what you are saying by default,whether you mean it or not, is that you're happy for the very richest in society to pocket the majority of the proceeds of economic growth.
Are you REALLY happy with that?
-
There are some amazing opportunities for people to become really wealthy now BST.
Some people get there through hard work and some by luck but as you know, money makes money so invariably, wealthy people can more easily add to what they have.
There will always be super rich people.
-
Well I don’t agree with strikes for a start.
Lots of lads I knew back in the days of mass strikes daren’t vote against going on strike.
They felt that they had no option.
The union leaders had them over a barrel.
This is true. I know miners who were told where to put their cross on the voting slip and were watched as they did it.
Before you ask I have no proof of this but I know it's the absolute truth.
-
Hound.
I'm not questioning that. I'm questioning whether you are happy with the AMOUNT going to the very richest. If you are, just say so.
-
I am neither happy or unhappy about it.
-
Would you mind if I give you a bit of context then. See if it helps you get off the fence?
That graph I posted on the previous page. It shows that from 1979-today, the share on national income taken by the richest 1% (that's about 300,000 people) has gone up from 5%-15%.
That 10% increase is equivalent to about £250bn per year.
That's enough to pay for the following Government services.
The NHS
The police and courts budget
The housing budget and
The transport budget.
Now, when the unions were being crushed by Thatcher, she insisted it was essential that we allow the wealthiest off the leash, because they would provide the dynamism and entrepreneurship that we needed to get the economy flourishing.
Guess what?
UK average economic growth per year from 1980-now (when we've had weak unions) is significantly lower than it was from 1950-1980 (when we had strong unions).
So there you go. The unions have been crushed. The economy has done worse since then. But the very richest have pocketed most of the proceeds of the growth we have had.
Still happy with that?
-
Have the 3 thousand UK lottery winners affected those figures?
-
Work it out BB. It's primary school.level sums.
If you assume that everyone of them won £10m, that's £30bn. Over 25 years. That's about £1.2bn per year. Or 0.5% of that increase.
-
Private train operators have creamed off £3.5billion from running our railways over the past 10 years to 2017.
All those 2% add up?
These gigantic profits come despite passengers having to deal with overcrowding, delays, cancellations, strikes and among the highest ticket prices in Europe.
It got worse yesterday as fare increases averaging out at 2.3% were introduced.
An investigation probing for the first time the true cost of rail privatisation, has found that tens of millions of pounds are spent on fatcat wages.
Scrutinised the accounts of 10 private firms involved in running train services and found they made £407million in profits last year alone.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/board-gravy-train-rail-firms-9553889