Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On his first day as a member of the US Senate WH2012 GOP nomin

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited January 2 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On his first day as a member of the US Senate WH2012 GOP nominee, Mitt Romney, fires a broadside at Donald Trump

Mitt Romney becomes a US senator today and begins with a broadside against Trump in the Washington Post. https://t.co/TGfyp8xxid pic.twitter.com/sk4eYPxjqZ

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 978
    Might be well placed to run as a unity candidate if Trump falls, don't fancy his chances in a contested primary.

    50s is probably decent value
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    edited January 2
    The interesting thing about this is that he's pretending to support the trade war ("He was right to... crack down on China’s unfair trade practices"). He doesn't need to pander to get reelected in Utah and he must know the trade war is in fact dumb, so it's a good sign he's positioning to run.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 24,147

    The interesting thing about this is that he's pretending to support the trade war ("He was right to... crack down on China’s unfair trade practices"). He doesn't need to pander to get reelected in Utah and he must know the trade war is in fact dumb, so it's a good sign he's positioning to run.

    It was his platform in 2012.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/politics/mitt-romneys-stance-on-china-trade.html
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287
    I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault. But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions....

    That will be every tweet, then.

    I said a month or so back that Romney was worth a small punt as the Republican nominee. Good to see Mike coming round to the idea. :smile:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287
    Remembering Watergate, the choice of the Washington Post is perhaps an additional dig at Trump.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972
    Fifth
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,871
    New York Times reporting that Romney's Washington Post article seen as flagging possible primary challenge to Trump

    https://nyti.ms/2RwRCe2
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,625
    As a Mormon Republican in Utah, Romney is completely impregnable. Even so, becoming the state senator and then trying to run for president just 2 years later looks slippery.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,525
    Seems a good trading bet, at least. I'm on.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536
    It looks like a good bet. But I’d have thought Mitt Romney would be an easy opponent for Donald Trump. His lack of principle has been exploited by others.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972

    It looks like a good bet. But I’d have thought Mitt Romney would be an easy opponent for Donald Trump. His lack of principle has been exploited by others.

    Lol. He is now 1.64 on Betfair for nominee. That was quick.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972
    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,945
    Classic Romney/Trump photo:

    https://goo.gl/images/fbfCf2
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Good morning, everyone.

    Hmm. A defeated candidate returning from the political grave... I wonder if Ed Miliband might try the same.

    Mr. B2, I've used trains barely a handful of times (only once as an adult) and it seems bloody baffling to me.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,212
    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Indeed. There's been a few lively debates on here about the railways, the thing for me is it's about the *perception* of being ripped off, whether or not the trains provide a better service than they did under the BR days.

    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.
  • I’m on this sort of bet when Romney announced his run for the Senate.

    I tried to get Shadsy to put up a market on Romney voting to convict in a Trump impeachment, no joy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,305
    Romney taking the moral high ground but of course Trump will just retort he won in 2016 while Romney lost in 2012.

    I expect Trump is also still closer to voters in the Republican primaries than Trump
  • IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 48,984
    edited January 2
    I still think the 1.67 for Trump to be nominee is a big price
    My only other GOP bet is Pence.
    Happy with that.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972
    edited January 2

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    They are - but on that journey I bet you'd have found that advance tickets for York to Darlington and Darlington to Edinburgh, for the same trains, would have saved you a few pounds.

    Edit/ for example for that journey, first class, travel 2 and 4 Feb, its £6.80 cheaper to buy tickets to and from Darlington,
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,114

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
  • IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    They are - but on that journey I bet you'd have found that advance tickets for York to Darlington and Darlington to Edinburgh, for the same trains, would have saved you a few pounds.
    Yup. The joy with LNER and CrossCountry is you can choose your seats so you don’t have to move when you do split ticket journeys.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 71,834
    edited January 2

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    From useful ticket office staff.
  • Mitt Romney could easily become a focal point for Republicans who remain appalled at what Trump has done to the party. He is a traditional conservative with friends across the aisle. I would be surprised if he decides to run against Trump in 2020 but he could act as a "kingmaker".

    If Elizabeth Warren is selected as Democratic candidate she must surely start as favourite to become the first female POTUS. A formidable intellect she seems to know how to reach out to those in society she would never have met had she not been a politician.

    I would love to see Romney v Warren. It could possibly lead to a campaign which has more policy and less hatred unlike recent contests. I have to declare that Mitt Romney is a distant cousin. His family hails from Dalton-in-Furness.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    I had friends visiting and was researching options as to where to pick them up from, and chanced upon it by accident.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 18,614

    Mitt Romney could easily become a focal point for Republicans who remain appalled at what Trump has done to the party. He is a traditional conservative with friends across the aisle. I would be surprised if he decides to run against Trump in 2020 but he could act as a "kingmaker".

    If Elizabeth Warren is selected as Democratic candidate she must surely start as favourite to become the first female POTUS. A formidable intellect she seems to know how to reach out to those in society she would never have met had she not been a politician.

    I would love to see Romney v Warren. It could possibly lead to a campaign which has more policy and less hatred unlike recent contests. I have to declare that Mitt Romney is a distant cousin. His family hails from Dalton-in-Furness.

    Good to see you back posting ER
  • I remember the grief I got for making a joke Oscar Pistorious joke from a UKIP killjoy.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,114

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    From useful ticket office staff.
    Blimey.. the ones at my station are never that helpful, but I travel to London terminuses so I guess theres niot much mileage in messing about with tickets
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972
    Looking at the photo I am surprised at how far away Scotland is. No wonder the train fare is so expensive.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 1,887
    Is it just me who thinks we should wait to see if Romney decides to vote against Trump's agenda as a senator before we speculate too much on whether he will run for President? It just feels like words are cheap.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    From useful ticket office staff.
    Blimey.. the ones at my station are never that helpful, but I travel to London terminuses so I guess theres niot much mileage in messing about with tickets
    The ticket in question is from a London terminus!
  • IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    From useful ticket office staff.
    Blimey.. the ones at my station are never that helpful, but I travel to London terminuses so I guess theres niot much mileage in messing about with tickets
    Termini.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    If you want real arguments of railway ticket pricing, get onto the topic of what a better system would be. ;)

    (though it's generally only an argument between people who *really* care about teh inutae of ticketing and fares.)
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,525
    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 37,914
    Quincel said:

    Is it just me who thinks we should wait to see if Romney decides to vote against Trump's agenda as a senator before we speculate too much on whether he will run for President? It just feels like words are cheap.

    He'll probably do so every now and then, given the numbers they can survive that, and most of the time he'll hem and haw before just voting the party line.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 22,536

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    and there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare...



    HOW on earth did you find that out?
    From useful ticket office staff.
    Blimey.. the ones at my station are never that helpful, but I travel to London terminuses so I guess theres niot much mileage in messing about with tickets
    I have always found the staff at Liverpool St station's ticket office unfailingly helpful when talking through options if you go outside rush hour.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809
    A lot of rubbish being spouted about rail fares this morning (especially on Sky Fake News).

    Bottom line is, those that travel by rail would like those who don't to subsidize them more.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Tiny shift on the market of another referendum (Ladbrokes), before the end of this year.

    One occurring has drifted to 2.37, from 2.25, one not occurring has shortened from 1.66 to 1.57.

    At the moment, comfortable with having backed one not happening at 1.75, having previously backed, and tipped, one happening at 6.5.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,305

    Mitt Romney could easily become a focal point for Republicans who remain appalled at what Trump has done to the party. He is a traditional conservative with friends across the aisle. I would be surprised if he decides to run against Trump in 2020 but he could act as a "kingmaker".

    If Elizabeth Warren is selected as Democratic candidate she must surely start as favourite to become the first female POTUS. A formidable intellect she seems to know how to reach out to those in society she would never have met had she not been a politician.

    I would love to see Romney v Warren. It could possibly lead to a campaign which has more policy and less hatred unlike recent contests. I have to declare that Mitt Romney is a distant cousin. His family hails from Dalton-in-Furness.

    I think Trump v Sanders is more likely than Romney v Warren, your distant relative has already been the 2012 nominee
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    Quincel said:

    Is it just me who thinks we should wait to see if Romney decides to vote against Trump's agenda as a senator before we speculate too much on whether he will run for President? It just feels like words are cheap.

    Speculating about things before all the evidence is in is kind central to the whole betting thing.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 1,887
    edited January 2
    Pulpstar said:

    I still think the 1.67 for Trump to be nominee is a big price
    My only other GOP bet is Pence.
    Happy with that.

    This is an absurd thing to say on 2 Jan, but I'm calling the current price on Betfair for Trump to be the nominee as one of the best prices we'll get all year on political bets.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 1,887

    Quincel said:

    Is it just me who thinks we should wait to see if Romney decides to vote against Trump's agenda as a senator before we speculate too much on whether he will run for President? It just feels like words are cheap.

    Speculating about things before all the evidence is in is kind central to the whole betting thing.
    Hehe, very true. I guess my point is that we've been here before with a few other senators who criticise Trump and then we all speculate they might sink Trump's nominee/bill/whatever and then they 'reluctantly' vote the party line. I won't be expecting any more of Romney until he actually delivers a bit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    Next month my other half and I are going to Edinburgh from York first class for £70 in total.

    Advance purchase tickets are very good.
    They are - but on that journey I bet you'd have found that advance tickets for York to Darlington and Darlington to Edinburgh, for the same trains, would have saved you a few pounds.
    Yup. The joy with LNER and CrossCountry is you can choose your seats so you don’t have to move when you do split ticket journeys.
    If I were on that train and someone came along at Darlington and offered me nearly seven quid for moving to another seat (of my choice), I'd take the money.
  • felixfelix Posts: 8,217
    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    You Gov polling points out that fare orice freezes are giving targeted help to the better off. No wonder Labour are so keen on them!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    tlg86 said:

    A lot of rubbish being spouted about rail fares this morning (especially on Sky Fake News).

    Bottom line is, those that travel by rail would like those who don't to subsidize them more.

    +1

    That is the real heart of the discussion about any publicly-owned service which users partially pay for: how to weight the split between what is paid for by the taxpayer, and what is paid for by the users.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 18,614

    In a country with 9+% unemployment, Macron decides to come down heavy on the unemployed

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/01/01/20002-20190101ARTFIG00102-de-nouvelles-sanctions-pour-les-chomeurs.php

    should boost employment prospects in popcorn selling
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    Quincel said:

    Quincel said:

    Is it just me who thinks we should wait to see if Romney decides to vote against Trump's agenda as a senator before we speculate too much on whether he will run for President? It just feels like words are cheap.

    Speculating about things before all the evidence is in is kind central to the whole betting thing.
    Hehe, very true. I guess my point is that we've been here before with a few other senators who criticise Trump and then we all speculate they might sink Trump's nominee/bill/whatever and then they 'reluctantly' vote the party line. I won't be expecting any more of Romney until he actually delivers a bit.
    I think this is actually an indicator the other way. Trump's agenda is popular with Republican primary voters so if you're running against him on his personal qualities, you probably don't want to vote against him very much. Voting against him would be the kind of thing you'd do if you opposed him but didn't care what the primary voters thought.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378

    As a Mormon Republican in Utah, Romney is completely impregnable. Even so, becoming the state senator and then trying to run for president just 2 years later looks slippery.

    Nah - it would be is state senator was all he’d done but he’s also (I think) been a Bishop, turned around the SLC Games, built up a leading investment firm and had a extensive political role
  • kyf_100 said:

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Malice is right. A recent example from Scotrail - the 09:15 Perth to Glasgow allows use of off-peak fares. In the December timetable change Scotrail re-timed it to depart at 09:14, which is 1 minute too early for off peak tickets. Which turns a £17 fare to Glasgow into a £30 fare. Or you can wait for the next one - at 10:17. They could have put a fares easement into the system allowing the continued use off off peak tickets, but chose not to.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378
    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    When I fly to LA it’s cheaper to buy a ticket from Paris connecting in London and also a single to Paris

    Presumably it is revenue maximising though why it is I have no idea
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 232


    In a country with 9+% unemployment, Macron decides to come down heavy on the unemployed

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/01/01/20002-20190101ARTFIG00102-de-nouvelles-sanctions-pour-les-chomeurs.php

    should boost employment prospects in popcorn selling

    We had 8.1% unemployment in 2011. Despite cutting back on public sector employment, having sluggish economic growth we’ve gone from 8.1% to 4.1%, welfare reform and labour reform have had a lot to do that.

    (Both France and uk use the same process for measuring unemployment)

  • eekeek Posts: 2,588
    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    You Gov polling points out that fare orice freezes are giving targeted help to the better off. No wonder Labour are so keen on them!
    There were multiple stories of people buying cheap tickets on Virgin East Coast trains and being fined for getting off at Darlington rather than Durham / Newcastle (as London to Durham was a cheaper ticket at the time of purchase)..
  • notme2 said:


    In a country with 9+% unemployment, Macron decides to come down heavy on the unemployed

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/01/01/20002-20190101ARTFIG00102-de-nouvelles-sanctions-pour-les-chomeurs.php

    should boost employment prospects in popcorn selling

    We had 8.1% unemployment in 2011. Despite cutting back on public sector employment, having sluggish economic growth we’ve gone from 8.1% to 4.1%, welfare reform and labour reform have had a lot to do that.

    (Both France and uk use the same process for measuring unemployment)

    France need an Osborne.

    Just shows how lucky we were to have him.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378

    kyf_100 said:

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Malice is right. A recent example from Scotrail - the 09:15 Perth to Glasgow allows use of off-peak fares. In the December timetable change Scotrail re-timed it to depart at 09:14, which is 1 minute too early for off peak tickets. Which turns a £17 fare to Glasgow into a £30 fare. Or you can wait for the next one - at 10:17. They could have put a fares easement into the system allowing the continued use off off peak tickets, but chose not to.

    Without knowing the impact of that 1 minute change on other services you can’t draw that conclusion

    And there a difference between revenue maximising and malice
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 232

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
  • notme2notme2 Posts: 232

    notme2 said:


    In a country with 9+% unemployment, Macron decides to come down heavy on the unemployed

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/01/01/20002-20190101ARTFIG00102-de-nouvelles-sanctions-pour-les-chomeurs.php

    should boost employment prospects in popcorn selling

    We had 8.1% unemployment in 2011. Despite cutting back on public sector employment, having sluggish economic growth we’ve gone from 8.1% to 4.1%, welfare reform and labour reform have had a lot to do that.

    (Both France and uk use the same process for measuring unemployment)

    France need an Osborne.

    Just shows how lucky we were to have him.
    Not sure if that is sarcasm... but I’m betting nobody would have expected unemployment to drop like a stone as it has pursuing policies of public sector squeeze.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,258

    notme2 said:


    In a country with 9+% unemployment, Macron decides to come down heavy on the unemployed

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/01/01/20002-20190101ARTFIG00102-de-nouvelles-sanctions-pour-les-chomeurs.php

    should boost employment prospects in popcorn selling

    We had 8.1% unemployment in 2011. Despite cutting back on public sector employment, having sluggish economic growth we’ve gone from 8.1% to 4.1%, welfare reform and labour reform have had a lot to do that.

    (Both France and uk use the same process for measuring unemployment)

    France need an Osborne.

    Just shows how lucky we were to have him.
    I hear he sets the Standard now.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,258
    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    ydoethur said:

    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
    Network Rail have mucked up. However I place much of the blame on the DfT.

    This is one point the pro-renationalisation people need to answer: what management structure would a unified organisation have? If you just shift the DfT people over, you aren't going to fix any problems.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 49,305
    Charles said:

    As a Mormon Republican in Utah, Romney is completely impregnable. Even so, becoming the state senator and then trying to run for president just 2 years later looks slippery.

    Nah - it would be is state senator was all he’d done but he’s also (I think) been a Bishop, turned around the SLC Games, built up a leading investment firm and had a extensive political role
    He was also Governor of Massachusetts and has already been the GOP nominee for President in 2012, I doubt he will be picked again
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,258
    edited January 2

    ydoethur said:

    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
    Network Rail have mucked up. However I place much of the blame on the DfT.

    This is one point the pro-renationalisation people need to answer: what management structure would a unified organisation have? If you just shift the DfT people over, you aren't going to fix any problems.
    Fair point, albeit bluntly I see little separation between Network Rail and the DfT.

    I must disagree with your last sub clause though. It won't just not fix the problems, it will make them considerably worse.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 4,970
    Dr P.

    "The problem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off."

    Fairly accurate. But what is a natural monopoly? Water supply, yes, but I'm not sure trains are in this category. They are a from of transport but competing with other forms. The government provide roads free of charge, the car manufacturers don't pay for their upkeep.

    The advantage of nationalisation is a consistent pricing structure, the disadvantage is the price may well be higher.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 8,797
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
    Network Rail have mucked up. However I place much of the blame on the DfT.

    This is one point the pro-renationalisation people need to answer: what management structure would a unified organisation have? If you just shift the DfT people over, you aren't going to fix any problems.
    Fair point, albeit bluntly I see little separation between Network Rail and the DfT.

    I must disagree with your last sub clause though. It won't just not fix the problems, it will make them considerably worse.
    I think there's a function being exercised by the DfT that should be with the ORR which you notice no-one ever mentions.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,287

    It looks like a good bet. But I’d have thought Mitt Romney would be an easy opponent for Donald Trump. His lack of principle has been exploited by others.

    If they were to run against each other today, perhaps.
    I don't think that's Romney's calculation. He's positioning himself to pick up the pieces if Mueller makes it impossible for Trump to run again (note, I am not mentioning impeachment) - and the odds on that are pretty good.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,258
    Nigelb said:
    This is the best bit:

    No injuries sighted (except to spider).
  • Charles said:

    kyf_100 said:

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Malice is right. A recent example from Scotrail - the 09:15 Perth to Glasgow allows use of off-peak fares. In the December timetable change Scotrail re-timed it to depart at 09:14, which is 1 minute too early for off peak tickets. Which turns a £17 fare to Glasgow into a £30 fare. Or you can wait for the next one - at 10:17. They could have put a fares easement into the system allowing the continued use off off peak tickets, but chose not to.

    Without knowing the impact of that 1 minute change on other services you can’t draw that conclusion

    And there a difference between revenue maximising and malice
    I wasn't suggesting that the 1 minute change wasn't required. The timetable shows a non clock face arrangement on that route - trains run at random minutes around quarter past the hour. But having had a train that departs on the exact point where off peak applies and having seen that change by 1 minute, Scotrail had a choice. Do they apply an easement to the fares, or do they pocket the extra revenue?
  • I’ve set myself a New Year’s resolution.

    I’m going to stop describing myself as working class.

    It’s much more fun when people work it out for themselves.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 2,109
    edited January 2
    tlg86 said:

    A lot of rubbish being spouted about rail fares this morning (especially on Sky Fake News).

    Bottom line is, those that travel by rail would like those who don't to subsidize them more.

    I've travelled by rail maybe 8 times in the last 10 years. I think we should make public transport a cheaper and more attractive option, that would include more investment in bus services as well (which admittedly I use a bit more but still not much)

    It can't work for everywhere and especially more rural places it will be very difficult without a car but I think we should make not owning a car a more realistic option for more people.

    It would get more cars off the road which would make travelling easier for the remaining drivers at peak times. It will making living further from where you work a more realistic option by reducing the time and cost of doing so. Not to mention the environmental benefits of less cars on the road.

    If you were to encourage more people to use public transport by doing this then you would need to invest even more to increase capacity to handle it but I think this would be worth it for the other benefits.

    Edit: Obviously wildly unrealistic for a lot of people but by reducing cars on the road we could help encourage more of those that could to cycle to work.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972
    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    When I fly to LA it’s cheaper to buy a ticket from Paris connecting in London and also a single to Paris

    Presumably it is revenue maximising though why it is I have no idea
    I am guessing the demographics/supply and demand equations for the two trips are different, the same as in the railways. However airlines are sharper on cancelling when people don't show for one of the legs, so I am assuming you actually have to go to Paris in your scenario?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 12,972

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The most irritating thing about private sector pricing - thinking of broadband but also almost all insurance nowadays - is how sticking with renewing with the same company gets you ripped off, unless you go through the annual routine of phoning them up and making a fuss. It's probably the one financial feature of the modern world that actually goes against the older generation.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
    Network Rail have mucked up. However I place much of the blame on the DfT.

    This is one point the pro-renationalisation people need to answer: what management structure would a unified organisation have? If you just shift the DfT people over, you aren't going to fix any problems.
    Fair point, albeit bluntly I see little separation between Network Rail and the DfT.

    I must disagree with your last sub clause though. It won't just not fix the problems, it will make them considerably worse.
    I think there's a function being exercised by the DfT that should be with the ORR which you notice no-one ever mentions.
    I mention it occasionally. ;)

    IMO a big problem is that the Office of Rail Regulation it is now called the Office for Rail and Road, a massive dilution of its focus. The change won't improve things for road or rail.

    And the 'old' ORR was nowhere near as good as the Strategic Rail Authority.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,258

    I’ve set myself a New Year’s resolution.

    I’m going to stop describing myself as working class.

    It’s much more fun when people work it out for themselves.

    Are you going to start picking up on other people's awesome puns as well? I note that nobody has picked up on my one about Osborne...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    notme2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The fare increases that have happened today come about from *regulated* fares...
    And of course the only full, true monopoly on the railways is Network Rail - which is (a) repsonsible for most of the problems and (b) publicly owned.
    Network Rail have mucked up. However I place much of the blame on the DfT.

    This is one point the pro-renationalisation people need to answer: what management structure would a unified organisation have? If you just shift the DfT people over, you aren't going to fix any problems.
    Fair point, albeit bluntly I see little separation between Network Rail and the DfT.

    I must disagree with your last sub clause though. It won't just not fix the problems, it will make them considerably worse.
    I think there's a function being exercised by the DfT that should be with the ORR which you notice no-one ever mentions.
    I mention it occasionally. ;)

    IMO a big problem is that the Office of Rail Regulation it is now called the Office for Rail and Road, a massive dilution of its focus. The change won't improve things for road or rail.

    And the 'old' ORR was nowhere near as good as the Strategic Rail Authority.
    PM for you.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    I travelled om the tube yesterday morning at seven. The trains were dirty, with vomit on the floor in two carriages. It was not the most pleasant experience.

    Although that might have had something to do with the proximity to the New Year celebrations. ;)
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,143
    edited January 2
    Railway stations should be at least partly controlled by local authorities. Their impact on local economies and placemaking takes second fiddle today to the operating company’s desire to maximise revenue (often unimaginatively).

    Only a few of the larger railway stations - pre-eminently London St. Pancras - are places you’d want to spend any time. Most of them are draughty and depressing.

    And yet architecturally we have a wonderful network of stations, and no shortage of railway enthusiasts in this country. Perhaps they should all be managed by a sort of National Trust for the railways.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. Jessop, either that, or passengers had seen Mr. Eagles' salmon pink trousers and found themselves unable to prevent reverse peristalsis.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 1,128

    tlg86 said:

    A lot of rubbish being spouted about rail fares this morning (especially on Sky Fake News).

    Bottom line is, those that travel by rail would like those who don't to subsidize them more.

    +1

    That is the real heart of the discussion about any publicly-owned service which users partially pay for: how to weight the split between what is paid for by the taxpayer, and what is paid for by the users.
    One of the reasons why trains are so overcrowded is because people can live in "cheaper" areas and then commute to get much higher paid jobs (often in London), while expecting those who don't use the trains to subsidise their ability to do it. I am not sure subsidised trains are very fair (excuse the pun) at all.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378

    Charles said:

    kyf_100 said:

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Malice is right. A recent example from Scotrail - the 09:15 Perth to Glasgow allows use of off-peak fares. In the December timetable change Scotrail re-timed it to depart at 09:14, which is 1 minute too early for off peak tickets. Which turns a £17 fare to Glasgow into a £30 fare. Or you can wait for the next one - at 10:17. They could have put a fares easement into the system allowing the continued use off off peak tickets, but chose not to.

    Without knowing the impact of that 1 minute change on other services you can’t draw that conclusion

    And there a difference between revenue maximising and malice
    I wasn't suggesting that the 1 minute change wasn't required. The timetable shows a non clock face arrangement on that route - trains run at random minutes around quarter past the hour. But having had a train that departs on the exact point where off peak applies and having seen that change by 1 minute, Scotrail had a choice. Do they apply an easement to the fares, or do they pocket the extra revenue?
    They make an assessment as to whether the increase in the number of passengers by having a lower fare offsets the loss of revenue and make the optimal decision.

    A financially rational call, not malice

    Of course the SNP government* could have decided it was important to have a lower fare on that route at that time and used taxpayer money to subsidise the journey

    (I’ve no idea if trains are a devolved power but given the Scotrail name have assumed that it is)
  • CookieCookie Posts: 998

    Railway stations should be at least partly controlled by local authorities. Their impact on local economies and placemaking takes second fiddle today to the operating company’s desire to maximise revenue (often unimaginatively).

    Only a few of the larger railway stations - pre-eminently London St. Pancras - are places you’d want to spend any time. Most of them are draughty and depressing.

    While I agree with your solution, the issue isn't so much the operating company's desire to maximise revenue - that can generally work in harmony with place-making. The problem is that because most operating companies can't see beyond the next franchise renewal, they have no incentive to invest for the long term. Why put captal into improving a station only for another TOC to reap the benefits?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378
    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    IanB2 said:

    Topical: misery on the railways

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/02/five-reasons-why-guardian-readers-hate-taking-the-train

    I am surprised that the capriciousness of ticket pricing doesn't get more criticism (but maybe most people do the same journey all the time)? I have just avoided a train fare of over £100 London to Holyhead by buying it as a package with the Dublin ferry; I want to go to Dublin but if I wanted to go to Holyhead it would still be cheaper to buy a through ticket to Ireland, and throw the boat ticket away. And there's another journey in the South East where buying a ticket to a couple of stations further along the line regularly halves the fare.

    When I fly to LA it’s cheaper to buy a ticket from Paris connecting in London and also a single to Paris

    Presumably it is revenue maximising though why it is I have no idea
    I am guessing the demographics/supply and demand equations for the two trips are different, the same as in the railways. However airlines are sharper on cancelling when people don't show for one of the legs, so I am assuming you actually have to go to Paris in your scenario?
    You have to go to Paris on the way out (such a hardship). On the way back you can no show*

    Even if you do a round trip (never leave the airport) 4 hours saves about £1,000 so worthwhile in my view

    * was only an issue when my plane back from the US was cancelled and they insisted on trying to rebook me on a flight to Paris via Chicago
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 21,378
    IanB2 said:

    kyf_100 said:



    The fares seem designed to confuse, baffle and cheat.
    Season ticket prices seem to increase more than your pay packet each year.
    Good luck getting a seat. If the train isn't cancelled. Or on strike.

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Yes, that's something of more general application. The probvlem of the public sector is that they're perceived as often inefficient. The problem of the private sector is that they're perceived to often want to rip you off. Where there is genuine competition (breakfast cereal, say, or broadband providers), it's easy to switch to one that seems to offer better value - even the mos hardened Trot is not demanding British Rice Krispies. But natural monopolies that are private combine the temptation to rip you off with the means to do it without comeback.
    The most irritating thing about private sector pricing - thinking of broadband but also almost all insurance nowadays - is how sticking with renewing with the same company gets you ripped off, unless you go through the annual routine of phoning them up and making a fuss. It's probably the one financial feature of the modern world that actually goes against the older generation.
    I agree. You’d have thought it’s a waste of everyone’s time and there would be a code they could apply so you dont have to use 15 minutes of call centre time
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 71,834
    edited January 2
    ydoethur said:

    I’ve set myself a New Year’s resolution.

    I’m going to stop describing myself as working class.

    It’s much more fun when people work it out for themselves.

    Are you going to start picking up on other people's awesome puns as well? I note that nobody has picked up on my one about Osborne...
    That Osborne is editing a newspaper and not in government pains me a lot, that’s why I didn’t comment on your pun.

    George Osborne CH would not have given Corbyn and a McDonnell a free pass on the economy at GE2017.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,968

    Charles said:

    kyf_100 said:

    BR may have been rubbish, but people got the perception that because it wasn't run by the private sector, there was no deliberate attempt to pick their pockets. It was incompetence rather than malice. That perception is very different now.

    Malice is right. A recent example from Scotrail - the 09:15 Perth to Glasgow allows use of off-peak fares. In the December timetable change Scotrail re-timed it to depart at 09:14, which is 1 minute too early for off peak tickets. Which turns a £17 fare to Glasgow into a £30 fare. Or you can wait for the next one - at 10:17. They could have put a fares easement into the system allowing the continued use off off peak tickets, but chose not to.

    Without knowing the impact of that 1 minute change on other services you can’t draw that conclusion

    And there a difference between revenue maximising and malice
    I wasn't suggesting that the 1 minute change wasn't required. The timetable shows a non clock face arrangement on that route - trains run at random minutes around quarter past the hour. But having had a train that departs on the exact point where off peak applies and having seen that change by 1 minute, Scotrail had a choice. Do they apply an easement to the fares, or do they pocket the extra revenue?
    Do they have new trains on that route?

    It might be that the new train is timetabled to arrive into Glasgow much more than 1 minute earlier. If so, that would weaken the case for maintaining it as an off-peak service.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    edited January 2
    I was thinking this morning, have we had a secretary of state with such wide-ranging and multivariate ineptitudes as Chris Grayling before?

    Grayling has managed to have not one, not two, but THREE crises in the space of one fortnight's holiday.

    There were Labour leafletters at my station this morning handing out literature putting the boot in over the 3% fair rise.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. Eagles, aye, a story that gets less attention than it deserves is the Conservatives throwing away their economic strength, especially in the catastrophically 2017 campaign.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146


    That Osborne is editing a newspaper and not in government pains me a lot, that’s why I didn’t comment on your pun.

    George Osborne CH would not have given Corbyn and a McDonnell a free pass economy at GE2017.

    Osborne's austerity agenda is what gave us Corbyn in the first place.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. Cocque, Grayling's inept, but a 3% price rise is not a crisis.

  • That Osborne is editing a newspaper and not in government pains me a lot, that’s why I didn’t comment on your pun.

    George Osborne CH would not have given Corbyn and a McDonnell a free pass economy at GE2017.

    Osborne's austerity agenda is what gave us Corbyn in the first place.
    It wasn’t his agenda, it was economic reality.

    Plus the only time the Tories have a won a majority this millennium is after five years of austerity.

    Although as a pedant I’d point out government spending increased under Osborne.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. Eagles, and the interest on debt is what, £50bn? More?

    The Conservatives might want to remember that and mention it every now and then.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146

    Mr. Cocque, Grayling's inept, but a 3% price rise is not a crisis.

    It might not be, if it wasn't for him reeling from the drone fiasco, and on the hook for what appears to be massive corruption over Seaborne Freight.

    A more skilled Transport Secretary might be able to ride out the storm, if they weren't already deep in the shit.

    Grayling is not that man.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,146
    edited January 2


    Although as a pedant I’d point out government spending increased under Osborne.

    The Tories' dirty little secret.

    It isn't really fair to blame Osborne for the centre failing to hold. Centrism is dying across the planet.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,809
    There's an argument that rail fares aren't high enough. Check out SWR's PPM this morning:

    http://trains.im/ppm/SW

    That's what happens when everyone's on holiday. :)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 47,008
    Mr. Cocque, you've named two serious transport matters. That doesn't make the third a crisis.

    If I murder a child and set fire to an oil refinery and then have a cheese sandwich, the first two crimes don't make the third an illegal act.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 1,953


    That Osborne is editing a newspaper and not in government pains me a lot, that’s why I didn’t comment on your pun.

    George Osborne CH would not have given Corbyn and a McDonnell a free pass economy at GE2017.

    Osborne's austerity agenda is what gave us Corbyn in the first place.
    It also gave us Brexit.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,220


    That Osborne is editing a newspaper and not in government pains me a lot, that’s why I didn’t comment on your pun.

    George Osborne CH would not have given Corbyn and a McDonnell a free pass economy at GE2017.

    Osborne's austerity agenda is what gave us Corbyn in the first place.
    And Brexit.

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/11/19/austerity-swung-voters-to-brexit-and-now-they-are-changing-their-minds/
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 9,785
    edited January 2
    Romney's an interesting candidate from the anti-Trump side but it's also worth thinking about who would be the *Trumpist* non-Trump candidate. This is particularly important if Trump meets with misfortune after some or all of the primaries have taken place, because he's already got a bunch of delegates sewn up. But even if it's the party bigwigs deciding, the party in general is becoming increasingly Trumpified, and in any case they'll be terrified of upsetting Trump's supporters, who have highly-developed conspiracy theory skills.

    If Trump is still alive in this situation then his endorsement becomes important; Obviously Pence is possible, but Trump will want somebody who's shown loyalty to him personally, in which case the obvious choice is Newt Gingrich.
This discussion has been closed.