Train congestion charging
Discussion
Okay, firstly you might wonder why I'm posting this on a car forum, but go with me for a minute.
I heard on the news, that because they are expecting more people to use the trains in the next 5 years, and most on already overcrowded routes, they are planning on adding a 'congestion charge', which will put up prices by 25%...
So, just to get this straight - Labour is trying to 'price people out of their cars and into public transport', but said public transport is overcrowded already, so will put prices up to make the alternative less attractive.
Which will mean, we will all end up paying much more, for exactly what we all do now....
I heard on the news, that because they are expecting more people to use the trains in the next 5 years, and most on already overcrowded routes, they are planning on adding a 'congestion charge', which will put up prices by 25%...
So, just to get this straight - Labour is trying to 'price people out of their cars and into public transport', but said public transport is overcrowded already, so will put prices up to make the alternative less attractive.
Which will mean, we will all end up paying much more, for exactly what we all do now....
Fidgits said:
So, just to get this straight - Labour is trying to 'price people out of their cars and into public transport', but said public transport is overcrowded already, so will put prices up to make the alternative less attractive.
Which will mean, we will all end up paying much more, for exactly what we all do now....
Exactly what i was thinking, money grabbing c***s
jimothy said:
So basically if you work, they try to stop you, but if you don't, they give you benefits...
no...
its if you work, you pay a lot of money so some people dont have to.
Of course, people have realised this, so less people are working, and of course, those that still are, must now pay more for those not doing...
I must confess that my wife had to endure a rant of epic proportions when I saw this on the news.
FFS, what do they expect us to do? Clients / employers expect you to be on site somewhere in the region of 8am-10am, most schools expect pupils to be there by 9am - in short congestion is caused by people needing to travel in the congested times. They don't do it just to be annoying for transport planners!
What kind of ivory tower do these t
ts live in?
It's all about tax. It has always been about tax with a Labour goverment; they've just found a way of doing it without raising Income Tax this time.
FFS, what do they expect us to do? Clients / employers expect you to be on site somewhere in the region of 8am-10am, most schools expect pupils to be there by 9am - in short congestion is caused by people needing to travel in the congested times. They don't do it just to be annoying for transport planners!
What kind of ivory tower do these t
ts live in? It's all about tax. It has always been about tax with a Labour goverment; they've just found a way of doing it without raising Income Tax this time.
JonRB said:
It's all about tax. It has always been about tax with a Labour goverment; they've just found a way of doing it without raising Income Tax every time.
Incidentally, this is at least the fourth identical thread I've seen on this topic in 24hrs. No doubt due to strength of feeling rather than lack of searching
Why don't they just increase the capacity of the tracks to what they once were? They can't grumble that the infrastructure isn't there because very often it is - the the Chiltern line - used to be four track main line, now it's half that - but all the bridges etc are still there four four.
But I agree in principle - Labour are c*nts.
But I agree in principle - Labour are c*nts.
Fidgits said:
Okay, firstly you might wonder why I'm posting this on a car forum, but go with me for a minute.
I heard on the news, that because they are expecting more people to use the trains in the next 5 years, and most on already overcrowded routes, they are planning on adding a 'congestion charge', which will put up prices by 25%...
So, just to get this straight - Labour is trying to 'price people out of their cars and into public transport', but said public transport is overcrowded already, so will put prices up to make the alternative less attractive.
Which will mean, we will all end up paying much more, for exactly what we all do now....
Er........No! What has happened is that the A.T.O.C. (the Association of Train Operating Companies) A "Private" association representing "private " rail companies Has said that if the government drive everyone off the roads, then the rail companies could not manage the increase in passengers, and would have to price passengers off peak time trains. Indeed, in London, this is already happening.
I know you all like to blame everything from global warming to the mars lander failure on the "Labour" government, but the fact is that this is a statement coming from an association of private train companies who are saying that they can't supply the service that they are charged with. Maybe we should let someone else who can then?
Apache said:
I think it's their way of 'encouraging' business to move further afield of the smoke. Unfortunately the cachet of the correct postcode means certain businesses will fight to stay there
The trouble is that the government policy is to encorage business sectors to converge geographically. Their argument is that it makes business more effective because staff of the businesses and their skillsets are co located and interchangable within the area.
The down side, is that everybody, has to commute to the same location, and transport infrastructure can't cope.
I guess you've not seen the extra lanes on the M25 between M23 and M4 have absolutely no impact on traffic, as engineering has moved out of the far south east.
Those people (workers) crazy enough to follow the original government incentives to business, are now paying the social security bill, of the unemployed that weren't stupid enough to follow.
IMHO.
dilbert said:
Apache said:
I think it's their way of 'encouraging' business to move further afield of the smoke. Unfortunately the cachet of the correct postcode means certain businesses will fight to stay there
The trouble is that the government policy is to encorage business sectors to converge geographically. Their argument is that it makes business more effective because staff of the businesses and their skillsets are co located and interchangable within the area.
The down side, is that everybody, has to commute to the same location, and transport infrastructure can't cope.
I guess you've not seen the extra lanes on the M25 between M23 and M4 have absolutely no impact on traffic, as engineering has moved out of the far south east.
Those people (workers) crazy enough to follow the original government incentives to business, are now paying the social security bill, of the unemployed that weren't stupid enough to follow.
IMHO.
Well said Dilbert, I've said it for years, put ALL the jobs in one place and you'll get gridlock. London iss paying the price, as are other major cities.
Look at any motorway near a city in, the morning, and in the evening. Notice how there is one side grid locked, and one side almost empty. What we are lacking is planning.
Oh! I'd only disagree with you in that it is "government policy". I don't believe so, more down business pressures in my view.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Wednesday 22 June 23:40
8Pack said:
Apache said:
I think it's their way of 'encouraging' business to move further afield of the smoke. Unfortunately the cachet of the correct postcode means certain businesses will fight to stay there
The trouble is that the government policy is to encorage business sectors to converge geographically. Their argument is that it makes business more effective because staff of the businesses and their skillsets are co located and interchangable within the area.
The down side, is that everybody, has to commute to the same location, and transport infrastructure can't cope.
I guess you've not seen the extra lanes on the M25 between M23 and M4 have absolutely no impact on traffic, as engineering has moved out of the far south east.
Those people (workers) crazy enough to follow the original government incentives to business, are now paying the social security bill, of the unemployed that weren't stupid enough to follow.
IMHO.
Well said Dilbert, I've said it for years, put ALL the jobs in one place and you'll get gridlock. London iss paying the price, as are other major cities.
Look at any motorway near a city in, the morning, and in the evening. Notice how there is one side grid locked, and one side almost empty. What we are lacking is planning.
Oh! I'd only disagree with you in that it is "government policy". I don't believe so, more down business pressures in my view.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Wednesday 22 June 23:40
Well you may be right, but the nations Semiconductor Intellectual Property centre is cambridge along with ARM and all.
I remember some time ago the government promoting the idea of a technology melting pot. There was quite a bit in the trade press.
I think they must have realised their mistake, because the centre moved to the West Country, where there was and is comparitively little semiconductor design or manufacturing.
Interestingly, there isn't much money going into semiconductors in the UK. I don't know if you saw the news today comparing Malaysia and Ghana. They came from the same place and time, malaysia has semiconductors and ghana doesn't.
What I want to know is why we gave it up, or what replaced it? Are we going to be like Ghana is now in another fifty years?
Yes, that's the problem isn't it Dilbert? All I would say is that all succesfull economies require a good transport system and "I" think, areas of speciality in various skills.
Unfortunately, we seem to have destroyed both in our recent history, and valued their expertise as "expendable" because "we can buy it elsewhere cheaper", ALL those skills are now of course .....lost.
Taking the railways as an example, my personal belief is that a "privatised" system will NEVER meet the needs of the Nation because only the government of the day can plan so far ahead in something SO crucial to industrial performance.
A "private" railway is concerned rightly about it's profits and shareholders. The trouble was that when they were under government control, we neither valued them, funded them or modernised them sufficiently.
We are now engaged in the same short sighted approach to roads.
Therefore I fear that your fears for the future may be justified. Chickens.......Roost, and all that?
Sorry, edited to add, Yes, I did see the progam about Malasia and Ghana! Yes, we ARE the next....... Ghana.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Thursday 23 June 02:01
Unfortunately, we seem to have destroyed both in our recent history, and valued their expertise as "expendable" because "we can buy it elsewhere cheaper", ALL those skills are now of course .....lost.
Taking the railways as an example, my personal belief is that a "privatised" system will NEVER meet the needs of the Nation because only the government of the day can plan so far ahead in something SO crucial to industrial performance.
A "private" railway is concerned rightly about it's profits and shareholders. The trouble was that when they were under government control, we neither valued them, funded them or modernised them sufficiently.
We are now engaged in the same short sighted approach to roads.
Therefore I fear that your fears for the future may be justified. Chickens.......Roost, and all that?
Sorry, edited to add, Yes, I did see the progam about Malasia and Ghana! Yes, we ARE the next....... Ghana.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Thursday 23 June 02:01
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff