Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The New Year starts with little cheer for any of the parties

24

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    Am I the only person bored to death by the annual complaints about train costs?

    3.4% is a bit above inflation but compared to what seems to be ever-escalating fuel costs, insurance costs etc for driving a mere 3.4% doesn't seem very significant at all.

    Yep. The alternatives are to either not have the services, or to put the costs on general taxation (i.e. the rest of us).

    Essentially what they (the commuters) want is for the rest of us to pay for their lifestyle choice. ;)

    (runs for cover)
    If they want to commute then suck it up or get a local job.
  • Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    edited January 2018
    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 80,846
    edited January 2018
    *Trigger warning*

    If you've recently had your breakfast look away now.

    Hard to believe Mhairi Black turned down fashion advice from Alex Salmond and Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh.


  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    FF43 said:

    Am I the only person bored to death by the annual complaints about train costs?

    3.4% is a bit above inflation but compared to what seems to be ever-escalating fuel costs, insurance costs etc for driving a mere 3.4% doesn't seem very significant at all.

    Most advanced countries subsidise transport costs. Given we all do so, the question is whether the UK subsidies work better or worse than other countries in the round.

    Most season tickets are bought by commuters to London. I wonder how much the high ticket prices are the other side of the coin from the very accommodation costs in London. Are ticket prices higher in the UK than Germany in part because people are travelling further to get affordable housing?
    "Subsidise transport costs"? How much is fuel being subsidised by?
    I didn't say governments subsidise all transport costs. My point was about how effective those subsidy choices are.

    The issue for private road users is resource allocation. Given congestion on limited road space are drivers charged appropriately through fuel and vehicle tax for their use of that resource.

    I am a big supporter of public buses. They are flexible and relatively cheap to operate but it needs an integrated system that could benefit hugely from a comparatively modest subsidy. Buses compete with private cars for road space. Buses like private cars, but unlike trains, don't have to pay directly the infrastructure costs.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 13,950

    Am I the only person bored to death by the annual complaints about train costs?

    3.4% is a bit above inflation but compared to what seems to be ever-escalating fuel costs, insurance costs etc for driving a mere 3.4% doesn't seem very significant at all.

    Yep. The alternatives are to either not have the services, or to put the costs on general taxation (i.e. the rest of us).

    Essentially what they (the commuters) want is for the rest of us to pay for their lifestyle choice. ;)

    (runs for cover)
    It's commuters who are subsidising everyone else.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.

    By their deeds ye shall know them. Arms sales to Iran, zilch. Arms sales to Saudi Arabia, large squillions.
  • Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    When has the government made the case for the Saudi Regime?

    Dealing with the regime in the real world is simple realpolitik but that isn't the same as making the case for them.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.

    By their deeds ye shall know them. Arms sales to Iran, zilch. Arms sales to Saudi Arabia, large squillions.
    Hypocrites and scheming chancers, they are involved in most of the middle east unrest and killing lots of innocent people.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    Millions are being spent in 'the north', including many electrification schemes. Besides, has the trans-Pennine electrification been officially scrapped yet? You might also want to look at all the upgrades happening 'up north', including a short but rather useful chord line opened in Manchester just last month:

    https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/lnw/ordsall-chord/

    You whinging Yorkshiremen should feel sorry for us Midlanders: trapped between your ungrateful whinging and the southerners' gilt-edged infrastructure - the Midland line electrification has been cancelled north of ?Kettering?.

    And all because the west country folk got their line electrified first. Blooming copper-topped lucky goits! ... ;)
  • malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
  • I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    King Cole, a fair comment. More should be said and done about Saudi funding for fundamentalist schooling overseas.

    However, that doesn't wash away the Leader of the Opposition's overt support for a despotic regime. Doing business with a regime because confining oneself to only trading with Western liberal democracies is seriously economically harmful is one thing. Going out of your way to praise how wonderful a despotic regime is, is quite another.
  • The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    Millions are being spent in 'the north', including many electrification schemes. Besides, has the trans-Pennine electrification been officially scrapped yet? You might also want to look at all the upgrades happening 'up north', including a short but rather useful chord line opened in Manchester just last month:

    https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/lnw/ordsall-chord/

    You whinging Yorkshiremen should feel sorry for us Midlanders: trapped between your ungrateful whinging and the southerners' gilt-edged infrastructure - the Midland line electrification has been cancelled north of ?Kettering?.

    And all because the west country folk got their line electrified first. Blooming copper-topped lucky goits! ... ;)
    Yorkshire is the backbone of the UK.

    It has been cancelled.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/chris-grayling-explains-government-s-u-turn-on-electrification-of-trans-pennine-rail-line-1-8768581/amp
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265
    @Morris_Dancer: Jeremy Corbyn and "The case for Iran"

    The Iranian regime is pretty nasty but geopolitically a good relationship with Iran would be useful, to balance both Saudi Arabia and Russia. More useful than the one with Israel certainly.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    On the topic of predictions, a few thoughts on the thread starting here:

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    Millions are being spent in 'the north', including many electrification schemes. Besides, has the trans-Pennine electrification been officially scrapped yet? You might also want to look at all the upgrades happening 'up north', including a short but rather useful chord line opened in Manchester just last month:

    https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/lnw/ordsall-chord/

    You whinging Yorkshiremen should feel sorry for us Midlanders: trapped between your ungrateful whinging and the southerners' gilt-edged infrastructure - the Midland line electrification has been cancelled north of ?Kettering?.

    And all because the west country folk got their line electrified first. Blooming copper-topped lucky goits! ... ;)
    Yorkshire is the backbone of the UK.

    It has been cancelled.

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/chris-grayling-explains-government-s-u-turn-on-electrification-of-trans-pennine-rail-line-1-8768581/amp
    AIUI the decision has not yet been made: a report was due last month.

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/no-decision-on-trans-pennine-electrification.html
    http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/here-whats-going-electrification-transpennine-13512446

    It should be said that I'm not a fan of bi-mode trains, especially the Hitachi rubbish IEPs.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836

    King Cole, a fair comment. More should be said and done about Saudi funding for fundamentalist schooling overseas.

    However, that doesn't wash away the Leader of the Opposition's overt support for a despotic regime. Doing business with a regime because confining oneself to only trading with Western liberal democracies is seriously economically harmful is one thing. Going out of your way to praise how wonderful a despotic regime is, is quite another.

    Indeed; praising the Iranian regime is strange, although, the monarchy wasn’t a shining beacon either.
    Regarding Mossadeq as irredeemably hostile didn’t work out well, either.

    Arguably oil was the curse of the twentieth century.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    But, Mr. Herdson, what do you think will happen in the Italian and Swedish elections? :p

    Mr. 43, better yet, imagine a democratic Iran. People are right to say regime change could make things worse, but it could also make things better, and the argument (which you've not made but I've seen elsewhere) that the Iranians should tolerate oppression because it brings stability is less than convincing.
  • stodge said:

    Am I the only person bored to death by the annual complaints about train costs?

    3.4% is a bit above inflation but compared to what seems to be ever-escalating fuel costs, insurance costs etc for driving a mere 3.4% doesn't seem very significant at all.

    Am I the only person bored to death by the annual complaints from people bored by those complaining about train fare rises ?

    Yes and I don't care.

    I drive a car as well and I'm well aware how much of every litre of fuel is covered by taxation and then I consider who mends the roads - Highways England, now, who owns Highways England, aren't they the same as Network Rail ? Local authority highway departments - a really successful history of partnership with Amey, Carillion and the like (giggle).

    Drivers have plenty to complain about too but you seem more interested in having a pop at train travellers - how has the price of petrol moved against inflation since 1990 ? As for insurance, wholeheartedly agree, what are we going to do about it ?
    Compared to 1995 the petrol price is about 25% higher when inflation is taken into account.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    Millions are being spent in 'the north', including many electrification schemes. Besides, has the trans-Pennine electrification been officially scrapped yet? You might also want to look at all the upgrades happening 'up north', including a short but rather useful chord line opened in Manchester just last month:

    https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/lnw/ordsall-chord/

    You whinging Yorkshiremen should feel sorry for us Midlanders: trapped between your ungrateful whinging and the southerners' gilt-edged infrastructure - the Midland line electrification has been cancelled north of ?Kettering?.

    And all because the west country folk got their line electrified first. Blooming copper-topped lucky goits! ... ;)
    The Ordsall Chord ain't exactly Crossrail. At the moment only one train each way per hour (off peak only) uses it because we don't have any extra trains yet. While some of these will be new, others will be cast-offs from the west country and Scotland - ie those areas with ongoing electrification projects.

    Meanwhile, Trans-Pennine Express had a franchise obligation to introduce new loco-hauled services before the end of 2017. So what did they do? Cobbled together a set of manky old stock to run one unadvertised return journey between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport on December 30th. One carriage was in total darkness. And for that they can claim Job Done.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 4,553



    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.

    Selling weapons is a far more tangible and meaningful gesture of support than Jez chatting shit for half an hour to a drafty room full of arseholes who have nothing better to do on a Tuesday night.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 6,336
    Fishing said:

    I've said it before, but the Government needs to do far more to encourage home working, basically by making it a right unless the nature of the job specifically prevents it. That would:

    - raise productivity, since convincing evidence shows that people are more productive at home (except those with young kids)
    - reduce crowding in public transport
    - even out housing demand
    - promote general happiness, since people who work from home have higher morale.

    It is 2018 now, offices are mostly out of date.

    Indeed but there's still huge cultural resistance in far too many organisations to the concept. The idea seems to be if you're in the office you're working and if you're at home you're skiving. Now, the fact that being on the Internet at work does happen (low productivity anyone ? Just kidding) doesn't matter because you're visible and you might be working.

    It isn't for everyone by any means and there are issues of isolation and being part of the team/firm which need to be resolved but I did a study for a local authority and showed that if they could get 10% of their admin staff to work from home they could close one of their main buildings at a saving of several millions of pounds. Multiply that and imagine the current commercial space which could be freed up for residential redevelopment.

    It's something a Government committed to house building and home ownership should be actively promoting and indeed leading by example.

  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    The Government only found about £4.5 billion for Crossrail out of national taxpayer funds. London fare payers, business ratepayers and developers are funding the majority - two thirds - of the costs by borrowing taken out by the Mayor and TfL. And the government's investment will be repaid many times over by the extra economic benefits generated by the scheme.

    The Treasury likes projects in London - they get their money back several times over.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    But, Mr. Herdson, what do you think will happen in the Italian and Swedish elections? :p

    Mr. 43, better yet, imagine a democratic Iran. People are right to say regime change could make things worse, but it could also make things better, and the argument (which you've not made but I've seen elsewhere) that the Iranians should tolerate oppression because it brings stability is less than convincing.

    I support democracy everywhere, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Palestine. It's messy, but I don't think i have the right to say I can have it, but these other people are incapable of democracy or, even worse, don't deserve it. I supported the Arab Spring for that reason and regret the hopefully temporary reaction against it in places like Egypt.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    Millions are being spent in 'the north', including many electrification schemes. Besides, has the trans-Pennine electrification been officially scrapped yet? You might also want to look at all the upgrades happening 'up north', including a short but rather useful chord line opened in Manchester just last month:

    https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/lnw/ordsall-chord/

    You whinging Yorkshiremen should feel sorry for us Midlanders: trapped between your ungrateful whinging and the southerners' gilt-edged infrastructure - the Midland line electrification has been cancelled north of ?Kettering?.

    And all because the west country folk got their line electrified first. Blooming copper-topped lucky goits! ... ;)
    The Ordsall Chord ain't exactly Crossrail. At the moment only one train each way per hour (off peak only) uses it because we don't have any extra trains yet. While some of these will be new, others will be cast-offs from the west country and Scotland - ie those areas with ongoing electrification projects.

    Meanwhile, Trans-Pennine Express had a franchise obligation to introduce new loco-hauled services before the end of 2017. So what did they do? Cobbled together a set of manky old stock to run one unadvertised return journey between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport on December 30th. One carriage was in total darkness. And for that they can claim Job Done.
    The Ordsall Chord is a really useful addition, which is why it was done. It'll become more utilised with time.

    We have a real problem with rolling stock upgrades atm. The nationalised Network Rail's utter failure wrt electrification has meant that orders for new stock and the consequent cascades are pretty much in chaos. Add in the ?2020? deadline for removal of non-disabled compliant stock, and it's going to get worse before it gets better.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348
    brendan16 said:

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    The Government only found about £4.5 billion for Crossrail out of national taxpayer funds. London fare payers, business ratepayers and developers are funding the majority - two thirds - of the costs by borrowing taken out by the Mayor and TfL. And the government's investment will be repaid many times over by the extra economic benefits generated by the scheme.

    The Treasury likes projects in London - they get their money back several times over.
    As I've said to TSE in the past, they'd get the TPE electrified if Yorkshire businesses were to blow the cobwebs off their wallets and pay for it in a similar manner to Crossrail ... ;)
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    edited January 2018

    But, Mr. Herdson, what do you think will happen in the Italian and Swedish elections? :p

    Mr. 43, better yet, imagine a democratic Iran. People are right to say regime change could make things worse, but it could also make things better, and the argument (which you've not made but I've seen elsewhere) that the Iranians should tolerate oppression because it brings stability is less than convincing.

    1. Italy will end up with some social-democrat-led coalition, not a million miles from what it has now. Sweden I don't know much about (ask NickP!)

    2. Given the choice between sandwiches and freedom, people will invariably choose sandwiches. The trick with reform is to keep the factories and shops open. i don't think the Iranians should 'tolerate' oppression but nor do I think it's realistic in any country with no history of the full freedoms needed to make democracy work, to jump straight to what the likes of Western Europe has. If democracy were introduced today to Iran, the result would probably be much like when Egypt tried: the Islamic parties would dominate because they'd be so much better organised. Before introducing democracy, Iran needs to build up the mentality of a free civil society.

    An interim non-Islamic dictatorship would probably be a necessary step. The risk of trying to run before you can walk is that you trip up, fall flat on your face and become sceptical of the whole idea of running. Though of course the risks there are that the regime finds 'reasons' to prolong a the temporary interim stage into something permanent, while replicating the repression and corruption of most dictatorships.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    Mr. 43, it might've worked in Egypt had Morsi not been such a bloody fool. He won a legitimate but narrow victory then acted like he was a pharaoh, losing widespread support to the extent the 'electorate' were happy when there was a military coup!

    I do wonder, as someone else here said a long time ago, whether the presidential system is a stupid one in such situations. A parliamentary system with a prime minister could work better, as a Morsi-type figure could be dumped whilst his party could retain power. It'd be more flexible and avoid a totally binary win-lose result.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    Mr. Herdson, reckon Five Star will get most seats?

    Sandwiches are very tasty. Yet another great British contribution to civilisation.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    On the topic of predictions, a few thoughts on the thread starting here:

    Agree with most of these. Merkel is hardest to call. She has been around forever and at some point she has to go. Is now the time? But something not well understood over here: the current situation is tailor made for Angela Merkel. She is really, really good at creating consensuses, which is what is needed now. Germans expect her to do it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,429

    Off topic: Today was meant to be my first day back at work after the Christmas break. Instead I am sat in bed drinking Lemsip and using tissues at a very rapid rate.

    At least I've got you lot for company!

    Are you calling us all a snivelling bunch, then ?
    :smile:
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    Mr. 43, it might've worked in Egypt had Morsi not been such a bloody fool. He won a legitimate but narrow victory then acted like he was a pharaoh, losing widespread support to the extent the 'electorate' were happy when there was a military coup!

    I do wonder, as someone else here said a long time ago, whether the presidential system is a stupid one in such situations. A parliamentary system with a prime minister could work better, as a Morsi-type figure could be dumped whilst his party could retain power. It'd be more flexible and avoid a totally binary win-lose result.

    There is, as far as I know, no evidence that Egyptians were mostly happy with the coup. It obviously wasn't democratic.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 18,067
    edited January 2018
    I don't blame people for hating on train fare rises. If the trains weren't late, packed and rubbish then people might get on board for an RPI+ rise. As I remember it, there were yearly 5% fare rises and the same shite trains, just as packed as ever, if more more so.

    Whatever one thinks of how expensive Switzerland is, my monthly Zurich travel pass is about 100 francs, and my fiancé's monthly all Swiss pass is 230 francs (which allows her to travel on any train, bus or tram in the whole bloody country). Plus the trains are never late here. When they are it's a local scandal and the SBB hold all kinds of investigations.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714
    Regarding Iran, it used to be liberal and undemocratic, now it is illiberal and essentially undemocratic. From where they are now, a secular dictatorship is probably the least worst option as a first step.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    FF43 said:

    On the topic of predictions, a few thoughts on the thread starting here:

    Agree with most of these. Merkel is hardest to call. She has been around forever and at some point she has to go. Is now the time? But something not well understood over here: the current situation is tailor made for Angela Merkel. She is really, really good at creating consensuses, which is what is needed now. Germans expect her to do it.
    I agree with that but I don't see how she can put together a coalition (indeed, if she could, I think she would have done by now, for the reasons you say). The SPD will remain extremely wary of going back into a Merkel-led government and getting the Greens, FPD and all wings of the CDU-CSU into the same tent will always prove extremely difficult - which is why I think it'll take another election to prompt one of those outcomes (and those are the only realistic outcomes), and if she can't do it, I think that'll be the time for her to call it quits so that someone else can lead her party into the new elections and have a go at forming a government afterwards.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    edited January 2018

    Mr. Herdson, reckon Five Star will get most seats?

    Sandwiches are very tasty. Yet another great British contribution to civilisation.

    Five Star may get most seats but it'll be close and I doubt it'll be enough. How the new voting system will play out is a big variable to think about - parties with concentrated support will benefit. My guess would be that PD will just gain most seats.
  • On the topic of predictions, a few thoughts on the thread starting here:

    Excellent predictions, pithily expressed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 19,429

    King Cole, a fair comment. More should be said and done about Saudi funding for fundamentalist schooling overseas.

    However, that doesn't wash away the Leader of the Opposition's overt support for a despotic regime. Doing business with a regime because confining oneself to only trading with Western liberal democracies is seriously economically harmful is one thing. Going out of your way to praise how wonderful a despotic regime is, is quite another.

    Indeed; praising the Iranian regime is strange, although, the monarchy wasn’t a shining beacon either.
    Regarding Mossadeq as irredeemably hostile didn’t work out well, either...
    Had the UK been a little less greedy for grabbing the lion's share of Iranian oil, and the US a little less incompetent, Iran could, and should have been our natural ally in the region for the last half century.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,223

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 52,911
    Mr. Herdson, cheers for that answer.

    Mr. 43, obviously not democratic but crowds cheered, as I recall, and there was little in the way of counter-demonstrations.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 33,197

    King Cole, a fair comment. More should be said and done about Saudi funding for fundamentalist schooling overseas.

    However, that doesn't wash away the Leader of the Opposition's overt support for a despotic regime. Doing business with a regime because confining oneself to only trading with Western liberal democracies is seriously economically harmful is one thing. Going out of your way to praise how wonderful a despotic regime is, is quite another.

    Indeed; praising the Iranian regime is strange, although, the monarchy wasn’t a shining beacon either.
    Regarding Mossadeq as irredeemably hostile didn’t work out well, either.

    Arguably oil was the curse of the twentieth century.
    And the start of the twenty-first. Operation Iraqi Freedom was 2003.
  • It's almost beyond doubt now that Theresa will lead the Tories at the next general election. There's no one willing or able to challenge her and she's not going anywhere. In fact, I can't see her giving up the leadership ever.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,035

    On the topic of predictions, a few thoughts on the thread starting here:

    Excellent predictions, pithily expressed.
    Basically not much change.

    Which is usually right.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 29,743
    On topic I can’t help believing that the cause of the current stalemate is that none of the major parties are offering anything that we want. The government gives the impression of being obsessed with Brexit, way, way beyond the attention span of 95% of the population; Labour are incoherent and shambolic under Corbyn and the Lib Dem’s remain largely invisible. In Scotland the gloss continues to come off the SNP but SLAB are still unbelievably chaotic with little to say.

    A genuine NOTA party could well do a Macron in such a scenario but it is not yet on the horizon.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714

    It's almost beyond doubt now that Theresa will lead the Tories at the next general election. There's no one willing or able to challenge her and she's not going anywhere. In fact, I can't see her giving up the leadership ever.

    I hope you are right and we can look forward to the Maybot yelling 'Nothing has changed! Nothing has changed!' in dozens of warehouses up and down the country during the election campaign.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 31,439
    edited January 2018
    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune
  • TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004

    It's almost beyond doubt now that Theresa will lead the Tories at the next general election. There's no one willing or able to challenge her and she's not going anywhere. In fact, I can't see her giving up the leadership ever.

    What do you mean by "no one willing or able to challenge her"?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,223

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 29,743

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
  • Dura_Ace said:



    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.

    Selling weapons is a far more tangible and meaningful gesture of support than Jez chatting shit for half an hour to a drafty room full of arseholes who have nothing better to do on a Tuesday night.
    No if we were gifting weapons then that would be a tangible and meaningful gesture of support.

    Selling weapons is a transaction with a cost attached. What cost was Jez given that you think is equivalent?

    If Saudi Arabia weren't willing to meet our prices demanded they'd get nothing from us. Jez gave his support for free because he actually supports them.
  • MaxPB said:

    I don't blame people for hating on train fare rises. If the trains weren't late, packed and rubbish then people might get on board for an RPI+ rise. As I remember it, there were yearly 5% fare rises and the same shite trains, just as packed as ever, if more more so.

    Whatever one thinks of how expensive Switzerland is, my monthly Zurich travel pass is about 100 francs, and my fiancé's monthly all Swiss pass is 230 francs (which allows her to travel on any train, bus or tram in the whole bloody country). Plus the trains are never late here. When they are it's a local scandal and the SBB hold all kinds of investigations.

    Train fare debates are not about the cost but who pays. Should it be the passengers or the taxpayers in general?

    Network Rail is 100% government owned and there is still a residue of nationalisation with the train operators because the government (the taxpayer) pays train operators to keep fares lower than they would otherwise be and subsidises rail travel.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 18,155
    edited January 2018

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.


    I'm not aware of Ruth's position on Iran or Saudi (or for that matter the DUP), but outside 'No to Indy Ref II', what other consistent positions does she have?


    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.




    Here's Her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador to SA not commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure).

    'On the occasion of Saudi National Day, I am reminded of the great history of Saudi Arabia. Today, the Saudi people can rightly proud of their nation, of their history and their developments. Saudi Arabia is a strong nation, an important player in the world and a close friend and partner of the UK. I am looking forward to celebrating the anniversary of 100 years of relations between our two Kingdoms in December this year.'

    https://tinyurl.com/y7sgsnq7
  • brendan16 said:

    The government can find £15 billion for Crossrail but not a few million for electrification in the North.

    Bring back the Northern Powerhouse.

    The Government only found about £4.5 billion for Crossrail out of national taxpayer funds. London fare payers, business ratepayers and developers are funding the majority - two thirds - of the costs by borrowing taken out by the Mayor and TfL. And the government's investment will be repaid many times over by the extra economic benefits generated by the scheme.

    The Treasury likes projects in London - they get their money back several times over.
    Unlike for HS2.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 27,035
    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    Arguably they should be charging baseline pricing for commuters, high prices for 0.5 - 7 days before travel and then marginal cost for the last few hours before departure...
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 30,473
    edited January 2018

    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.

    Indeed she's not making the case for them. Do you struggle to understand the meaning of the word "sell". You don't sell things to only people that you like, you sell to people willing to pay the price. It's a transaction not support.
  • Mr. Rentool, one shall sacrifice a goat to Asclepius on your behalf.

    Which person in the Government of All the Talents will be sacrificed?

    Nominations?
  • It's almost beyond doubt now that Theresa will lead the Tories at the next general election. There's no one willing or able to challenge her and she's not going anywhere. In fact, I can't see her giving up the leadership ever.

    What do you mean by "no one willing or able to challenge her"?
    All potential challengers are now paralysed with fear. There's the obvious fear of inheriting Brexit. Also, Theresa has been amazingly successful at creating a personality cult around herself. Think how the Tories collectively vilified Grant Shapps when he stuck his head above the parapet. Any challenger now would be deemed an enemy of Brexit, a stooge of George Osborne and ostracised accordingly.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 17,836
    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    Ironic, this Government (or it’s satrap) suggesting it’s advisable to plan ahead!
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    MaxPB said:

    I don't blame people for hating on train fare rises. If the trains weren't late, packed and rubbish then people might get on board for an RPI+ rise. As I remember it, there were yearly 5% fare rises and the same shite trains, just as packed as ever, if more more so.

    Whatever one thinks of how expensive Switzerland is, my monthly Zurich travel pass is about 100 francs, and my fiancé's monthly all Swiss pass is 230 francs (which allows her to travel on any train, bus or tram in the whole bloody country). Plus the trains are never late here. When they are it's a local scandal and the SBB hold all kinds of investigations.

    My experience of Swiss trains (admittedly, a while ago) is that the reason they run on time is because they go so bloody slowly.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
  • Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Pong said:

    "Research shows that regular travelers will spend as much as 13% of their salary travelling to work by train in Britain from today. This compares with between 2.5% and 5% of workers’ salaries in countries such as France, Germany, Italy and Spain."

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/fare-rises-mean-commuters-lose-13-of-salary-getting-to-work-dv3j82xrk

    What allowance does that make for the fact that British workers tend to live further away from their place of work?
    Yes, it partly reflects the shortage of affordable rented accommodation in British cities compared with those countries - but I'm not sure that's a consolation to those affected. The combination of not being able to live near work and soaring train prices is nasty. Ideally business would just move out of Lndon and save on wage costs as they'd still be a better deal, but in practice it doesn't seem to happen enough.
    Agreed.

    One thing that has always puzzled me is that people say London is too crowded and expensive - and yet when you suggest moving elsewhere to them to bring down costs they look at you as if you have grown a second head.

    While I can understand that Stoke or Ulveston would not be for everybody, Manchester and Leeds are great cities and far cheaper than London.
    The fact remains that there is a very large (probably over a million homes) housing shortage in the country, and any significant such move would just transfer the problem elsewhere.

    It is probably one of the few problems facing government which could be solved comparatively easily with determined action, given that the costs of government (or council) borrowing would almost certainly see a positive return on investment.
    It seems absurd that we can commit £50bn to an economically marginal HS2, which won't have any significant benefit for a decade, not to mention £20bn plus to the economically absurd Hinckley project, while neglecting housing.

    That the media should then obsess over a tiny number of unoccupied properties is simply ridiculous.
    Agreed, although where do the people currently live who need the million houses we are short of?

  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,999
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
    The A1 is good now from Catterick down to Peterborough All three laned motorway..However surprisingly crap near London still roundabouts and no upgrading to motorway status .
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.

    Indeed she's not making the case for them. Do you struggle to understand the meaning of the word "sell". You don't sell things to only people that you like, you sell to people willing to pay the price. It's a transaction not support.
    There speaks a true blue Tory, profit at any cost even murdering innocent people.
  • DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    How is your one-off ten quid ticket possibly 'subsidising' my £3,400 a year?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.


    I'm not aware of Ruth's position on Iran or Saudi (or for that matter the DUP), but outside 'No to Indy Ref II', what other consistent positions does she have?


    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.




    Here's Her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador to SA not commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure).

    'On the occasion of Saudi National Day, I am reminded of the great history of Saudi Arabia. Today, the Saudi people can rightly proud of their nation, of their history and their developments. Saudi Arabia is a strong nation, an important player in the world and a close friend and partner of the UK. I am looking forward to celebrating the anniversary of 100 years of relations between our two Kingdoms in December this year.'

    https://tinyurl.com/y7sgsnq7
    Ruthie's positions are like the town clock, a different face for each audience.
  • Mr. Rentool, one shall sacrifice a goat to Asclepius on your behalf.

    Which person in the Government of All the Talents will be sacrificed?

    Nominations?
    Lord Adonis stepped forward?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348
    Yorkcity said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
    The A1 is good now from Catterick down to Peterborough All three laned motorway..However surprisingly crap near London still roundabouts and no upgrading to motorway status .
    They can't do much about the Black Cat until they sort out what's happening with the A428. The whole thing needs a bypass: it's mad to think that some houses near Sandy have front doors that open out directly onto the A1 dual carriageway ...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,223
    Yorkcity said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
    The A1 is good now from Catterick down to Peterborough All three laned motorway..However surprisingly crap near London still roundabouts and no upgrading to motorway status .
    But it's still fast flowing and very few jams. Plus if you are coming from afar, then the roundabouts help to keep you alert, IMO.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 2,945
    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777
    DavidL said:

    On topic I can’t help believing that the cause of the current stalemate is that none of the major parties are offering anything that we want. The government gives the impression of being obsessed with Brexit, way, way beyond the attention span of 95% of the population; Labour are incoherent and shambolic under Corbyn and the Lib Dem’s remain largely invisible. In Scotland the gloss continues to come off the SNP but SLAB are still unbelievably chaotic with little to say.

    A genuine NOTA party could well do a Macron in such a scenario but it is not yet on the horizon.

    You forgot to mention that Ruthie has disappeared completely David, has she managed a constituency surgery yet, or mentioned what the feeble 13 have achieved so far at Westminster.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,999

    Yorkcity said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
    The A1 is good now from Catterick down to Peterborough All three laned motorway..However surprisingly crap near London still roundabouts and no upgrading to motorway status .
    They can't do much about the Black Cat until they sort out what's happening with the A428. The whole thing needs a bypass: it's mad to think that some houses near Sandy have front doors that open out directly onto the A1 dual carriageway ...
    Yes that always amazes me , can not be nice to live so close to the A1 carriageway.
  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 4,553

    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.

    Indeed she's not making the case for them. Do you struggle to understand the meaning of the word "sell". You don't sell things to only people that you like, you sell to people willing to pay the price. It's a transaction not support.
    So was Jezza not supporting Iran when got paid to go on PressTV?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 22,223
    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    Arguably they should be charging baseline pricing for commuters, high prices for 0.5 - 7 days before travel and then marginal cost for the last few hours before departure...
    They are there to generate general utility for the country (there are plenty of positive externalities), to maximise profit for reinvestment and returns, and to provide a good service to customers. No idea what order those should be in, that said but I'm sure ( @JosiasJessop? ) there is an established relationship.

    As to the pricing, I think many (every?) provider of such services (easyjet, BA, etc) has such a structure. As the necessity increases, so does the price. Your suggestion is interesting - I think they do part of it (high prices 0.5 - 7 days of high prices), as to marginal costs for walk-ins, well that surely is where their pricing power is greatest plus it would create a huge free rider problem. Literally!
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
    At 15 minutes' notice, there's an argument that they should be dirt cheap as the train would otherwise be going with the seat empty.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.


    I'm not aware of Ruth's position on Iran or Saudi (or for that matter the DUP), but outside 'No to Indy Ref II', what other consistent positions does she have?


    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.




    Here's Her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador to SA not commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure).

    'On the occasion of Saudi National Day, I am reminded of the great history of Saudi Arabia. Today, the Saudi people can rightly proud of their nation, of their history and their developments. Saudi Arabia is a strong nation, an important player in the world and a close friend and partner of the UK. I am looking forward to celebrating the anniversary of 100 years of relations between our two Kingdoms in December this year.'

    https://tinyurl.com/y7sgsnq7
    Ruthie's positions are like the town clock, a different face for each audience.
    But the faces all tell the same time though?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 26,777

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    You seen the state of Yemen from Saudi dropping British bought bombs indiscriminately, murdering and starving innocent civilians and children. You may think that making a profit justifies that , personally I think it is abhorrent and typical of Tories who are in general heartless sh**s, especially if it makes them a profit.
  • malcolmg said:

    Mr. Divvie, I posted this in reply to Mr. Ace's insightful and wise comment. I repost it for you to answer, if you wish:

    "Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?"

    If Ruth Davidson were in favour of a regime that executes homosexuals and makes the hijab mandatory for women would you refrain from remarking upon it?

    Edited extra bit: I posted this at the same time as you actually replied to the above.

    Show me the Conservative MP who has made the case for Saudi Arabia at an event commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure) and I'll happily condemn them.


    I'm not aware of Ruth's position on Iran or Saudi (or for that matter the DUP), but outside 'No to Indy Ref II', what other consistent positions does she have?


    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.




    Here's Her Britannic Majesty's Ambassador to SA not commemorating the nation's founding (or founding of current political governance structure).

    'On the occasion of Saudi National Day, I am reminded of the great history of Saudi Arabia. Today, the Saudi people can rightly proud of their nation, of their history and their developments. Saudi Arabia is a strong nation, an important player in the world and a close friend and partner of the UK. I am looking forward to celebrating the anniversary of 100 years of relations between our two Kingdoms in December this year.'

    https://tinyurl.com/y7sgsnq7
    Ruthie's positions are like the town clock, a different face for each audience.
    But the faces all tell the same time though?
    5 minutes to No to Indy Ref II?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    edited January 2018

    It's almost beyond doubt now that Theresa will lead the Tories at the next general election. There's no one willing or able to challenge her and she's not going anywhere. In fact, I can't see her giving up the leadership ever.

    What do you mean by "no one willing or able to challenge her"?
    All potential challengers are now paralysed with fear. There's the obvious fear of inheriting Brexit. Also, Theresa has been amazingly successful at creating a personality cult around herself. Think how the Tories collectively vilified Grant Shapps when he stuck his head above the parapet. Any challenger now would be deemed an enemy of Brexit, a stooge of George Osborne and ostracised accordingly.
    What makes you think that a challenger is required? That's not how the rules work - and it hasn't been since the last century.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
    At 15 minutes' notice, there's an argument that they should be dirt cheap as the train would otherwise be going with the seat empty.
    That's not the way it works. They have no idea if the seat will be empty or full: it is not an airline, and booking is not mandatory. A ticket also does not guarantee you a seat.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714
    If you buy an annual season ticket you are essentially block-purchasing an anytime return for every day of the year. You therefore get a discount per journey compared to the person who pitches up at the station to make the same journey once in a while. This could be construed as the occasional travellers subsidising the season ticket holders.

    Alternatively, you could say that if it wasn't for the daily commuters there wouldn't be the trains for the occasional travellers to catch.
  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    You seen the state of Yemen from Saudi dropping British bought bombs indiscriminately, murdering and starving innocent civilians and children. You may think that making a profit justifies that , personally I think it is abhorrent and typical of Tories who are in general heartless sh**s, especially if it makes them a profit.
    If we had refused to sell Saudi any bombs would they have failed to buy bombs elsewhere? Yes or no?

    If we had refused to sell Saudi any bombs would Yemen be better off? Yes or no?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
    At 15 minutes' notice, there's an argument that they should be dirt cheap as the train would otherwise be going with the seat empty.
    Like offering to pay half price for a hotel room that is vacant at 11pm.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 1,687

    Yorkcity said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    I can count the number of return train journeys I've taken on a couple of limbs (note- I'm not from Norfolk). The last time I considered taking the train down to that shittole London, the quoted price was well North of 300 quid for me and my lad. I declined the chance to spend an hour on a train amongst the plebs and bunged 40 quid worth's of petrol in the car and spent 90 minutes on the M1 instead.

    To mangle a quote that Thatcher never said, "anyone on a train paying 550 quid a month to go to that shittole London needs to have a word with themselves"

    £300? Not doubting you, obvs, but you must have spent a lot of time trying to find the most expensive ticket available.
    It was short notice and travelling at peak times. Just done a quick google and the same journey tomorrow would still cost 254 quid. I'd still use the car!
    Yes fair enough if it's on the spur of the moment it'll cost you. I suppose that's how they structure it, whatever the increase. As to taking a car on the M1? I hate it. Depending on which side of the county you're on, the A1 is a better bet 10/10 times IMO.
    The A1 is good now from Catterick down to Peterborough All three laned motorway..However surprisingly crap near London still roundabouts and no upgrading to motorway status .
    They can't do much about the Black Cat until they sort out what's happening with the A428. The whole thing needs a bypass: it's mad to think that some houses near Sandy have front doors that open out directly onto the A1 dual carriageway ...
    If the A1 South of Peterborough were a building, it would surely be a Grade 1 listed historic monument by now. It really does just feel like driving back into the 1950s in places, especially through some of the Hertfordshire new towns. And some of the OK Diners and olde worlde service areas extend further north up to Doncaster as well. It's all pretty damn weird tbh.
  • MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
    At 15 minutes' notice, there's an argument that they should be dirt cheap as the train would otherwise be going with the seat empty.
    That would be the case only if the trainlines only sold no more tickets than there are seats. So you could turn up at 15 minutes notice and potentially get a dirt cheap ticket but equally potentially be told the train has sold out already so you can't get any ticket at all.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    Here's Tessy not making the case for Saudi Arabia.

    Indeed she's not making the case for them. Do you struggle to understand the meaning of the word "sell". You don't sell things to only people that you like, you sell to people willing to pay the price. It's a transaction not support.
    So was Jezza not supporting Iran when got paid to go on PressTV?
    Not in the same way no, he was selling himself to them.
  • Where's this strange idea that buying a train ticket also buys you a seat come from?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 18,067
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    You seen the state of Yemen from Saudi dropping British bought bombs indiscriminately, murdering and starving innocent civilians and children. You may think that making a profit justifies that , personally I think it is abhorrent and typical of Tories who are in general heartless sh**s, especially if it makes them a profit.
    They are going to buy the bombs from someone, better us than Russia.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 14,368

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    You seen the state of Yemen from Saudi dropping British bought bombs indiscriminately, murdering and starving innocent civilians and children. You may think that making a profit justifies that , personally I think it is abhorrent and typical of Tories who are in general heartless sh**s, especially if it makes them a profit.
    If we had refused to sell Saudi any bombs would they have failed to buy bombs elsewhere? Yes or no?

    If we had refused to sell Saudi any bombs would Yemen be better off? Yes or no?
    The drug dealers and pimps defence...

    Perhaps we should be better than that.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 10,714

    Where's this strange idea that buying a train ticket also buys you a seat come from?

    Certainly not from Jezza!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,265

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    That would be the drug dealers self-justification. Someone will supply the heroin. We might as well get the profit from it. Not a comfortable argument.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Lots of politics on train fares and the media coverage of the demonstrations show small groups of RMT members with little or no passenger involvement.

    An interview on early 5 live with a group of business passengers said they always buy cheap advance fares at a considerable saving.

    Just to check the position the single fare for today's 2.00pm Colwyn Bay to Euston is £91.00 and the same train tomorrow is £28.00

    Just needs sensible planning to save a fortune

    That is what really pisses me off about rail fares. Those who need flexibility and to use the system at short notice get totally ripped off to subsidise those with more predictable needs. My sympathy with regular commuters with their season tickets is extremely limited.
    I would call that those who choose to use flexibility pay an appropriate amount for it.

    It is possible to get very inexpensive tickets just the night before - it shouldn't be beyond the means of a modern man to plan a couple of days in advance most of the time.

    If you choose to run your life such that you need to book tickets at 15 minutes notice, then of course they should be more expensive. It is about optimising use of a resource.
    At 15 minutes' notice, there's an argument that they should be dirt cheap as the train would otherwise be going with the seat empty.
    That's not the way it works. They have no idea if the seat will be empty or full: it is not an airline, and booking is not mandatory. A ticket also does not guarantee you a seat.
    No, I know. Although they do know whether a specific seat has been reserved or not - for a journey of any distance, anyway.

    I was making a bit of a devil's advocate case - if there is an unsold seat, it won't always be the potential traveller who is the more desperate of the two sides to complete the transaction.
  • FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    That would be the drug dealers self-justification. Someone will supply the heroin. We might as well get the profit from it. Not a comfortable argument.
    The legalisation of drugs is a similar and valid argument since it brings control and taxes.

    The legal supply of arms to Saudi is comparable.
  • FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    That would be the drug dealers self-justification. Someone will supply the heroin. We might as well get the profit from it. Not a comfortable argument.
    No it's not remotely the same as drug dealers since drug dealers are acting illegally, which would be the equivalent of us breaking international sanctions.

    The equivalent of us selling arms on the global marketplace to nations that aren't under sanctions is supermarkets selling tobacco. Yes tobacco is addictive, dangerous and deadly, but it is also legal.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 18,067
    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    That would be the drug dealers self-justification. Someone will supply the heroin. We might as well get the profit from it. Not a comfortable argument.
    No, it's the real world, and selling heroin is illegal, selling arms to Saudi Arabia isn't. Morality in these cases is for the birds, and I've come to that conclusion where previously I was in agreement with those who wished to stop selling to the Saudis. Better us than Russia.
  • The pound is stronger against the dollar today at 1.354

    Although another way to look at it is that the dollar is weaker (as is the Euro).
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,004
    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Mr. Ace, the Second Punic War is not, alas, a subject of interest for most of the population. That doesn't stop me posting about it here.

    And like Minucius Rufus, the Cunctator's magister equitum, you've completely missed the point. You think it's a good thing we have a Leader of the Opposition that, four years ago, was making the case for Iran's regime?

    Better, worse or about the same as a government currently making ng the case for the Saudi regime?
    Also selling them the bombs to kill innocent children, real charmers. Best they can say is somebody else would sell them bombs if we didn't.
    Best they can say is that it provides productive jobs, a secure income etc to our own citizens. You'd rather another nation got that wealth?

    That's still not making the case for Saudi Arabia's regime though.
    I would rather not be labelled with being party to murdering innocent people for money. It is totally wrong.
    We're not murdering anyone.

    If there are global sanctions (eg Apartheid South Africa, today's North Korea) then absolutely selling weapons and breaking the sanctions would make you a party.

    If a nation is in the global marketplace and has lots of nations they can purchase arms from then unilaterally refusing a sale achieves nothing in preventing the sale and simply harms ourselves.

    What good does that achieve?
    That would be the drug dealers self-justification. Someone will supply the heroin. We might as well get the profit from it. Not a comfortable argument.
    Actually, it's an excellent argument. If the state regulated the supply of heroin, the quality would become assured, users could be monitored, a huge dent would be put in organised crime and meaningful education could be given to users and at-risk groups. And the state gets taxes on top.

    Dealing in arms at least has the potential to give a small amount of influence over those countries that buy them. With no world government to regulate, that's as good as it gets. The alternative is to put people out of work, lose influence to other - possibly hostile - powers in the region concerned, and make no difference on the ground to those at the sharp end. But hey - some activist gets to feel good.
This discussion has been closed.