Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 12:34:58 GMT
Who wants to get out of Birmingham quicker anyway? Or out of London come to think of it. FTFY
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Feb 12, 2020 12:55:02 GMT
There has been no referendum on HS2. Why not? It's our money! It will be built using tax payers' money and then someone like Tax-Haven Beardie Branson will get to run his toy trains on it and suck up the profits. They've learnt their lesson on referenda, especially ill thought out ones with little planning or factual info to educate the voting populace beforehand. Yes I know, we were told, nay promised, about the £350 million.... But bugger all else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 13:10:57 GMT
There has been no referendum on HS2. Why not? It's our money! It will be built using tax payers' money and then someone like Tax-Haven Beardie Branson will get to run his toy trains on it and suck up the profits. They've learnt their lesson on referenda, especially ill thought out ones with little planning or factual info to educate the voting populace beforehand. Yes I know, we were told, nay promised, about the £350 million.... But bugger all else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 13:11:33 GMT
quicker = leaving at the same time but arriving earlier go stand in the corner. Leaving at 0900 instead of 0920 is not 'leaving at the same time'. you know sometimes on your bus, do you have to explain things slowly to the kids, and they still don't get? that.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Feb 12, 2020 13:11:35 GMT
There has been no referendum on HS2. Why not? It's our money! It will be built using tax payers' money and then someone like Tax-Haven Beardie Branson will get to run his toy trains on it and suck up the profits. They've learnt their lesson on referenda, especially ill thought out ones with little planning or factual info to educate the voting populace beforehand. Yes I know, we were told, nay promised, about the £350 million.... But bugger all else. Ah but Jim ..... we were told we had joined a free trade area and that was all it was, there was no intention of joining a political union or being governed by Europe. If they told the truth before the referendum we wouldn't have had to wait 47 years to get out of the bloody thing !!!
|
|
|
Post by IainS on Feb 12, 2020 16:01:56 GMT
I think both of you are right to a certain degree. Availability of cheap surplus vehicles plus a sudden increase in people who ha been trained to drive them added to a massively subsidised road building program gave road transport a huge boost against both waterborne and rail goods carriage. (snip) It's far, far more complex and you need to also look at the thing that destroyed the traditional port system which was containerisation. Also limited access to large areas by reliable large scale waterborne transport necessitated a good road transport system for those areas and it is only natural for them to "poach" from the other methods, after all their bread and butter is assured by the areas without waterways anything they steal from the canals is "jam" Plus the fact that road transport is effectively subsidised by the state. Even at the rates of duty paid in road tax by HGVs, it's nowhere near the same rate adjusted for road wear as other motorists pay. OK, I know Road Fund Licence goes into the general tax pot, but the principle holds) Even in the matter of fencing, railways lose out. It wasn't containerisation that destroyed the traditional port system, it was the dockers' opposition to it.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Feb 12, 2020 16:22:30 GMT
Leaving at 0900 instead of 0920 is not 'leaving at the same time'. you know sometimes on your bus, do you have to explain things slowly to the kids, and they still don't get? that. If I tell you my bus is departing this stop at 0817, for example, don't get there at 0837 because the chances are I've gone. If you want the 0817, get there 20 minutes earlier ( not quicker) than 0837. Thank goodness the 7-year olds I cart around understand what I say, even though it be a foreign language. They never miss my bus. Unlike some.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 16:26:00 GMT
The point of the new route is to decrease the time it takes to get to the other end..
Not sure why you cant get your head around that and keep banging on about getting the earlier train to get to the other end earlier.
Maybe we should all go back to riding horses and just set for work 12 hours earlier?
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Feb 12, 2020 16:27:55 GMT
There has been no referendum on HS2. Why not? It's our money! It will be built using tax payers' money and then someone like Tax-Haven Beardie Branson will get to run his toy trains on it and suck up the profits. They've learnt their lesson on referenda, especially ill thought out ones with little planning or factual info to educate the voting populace beforehand. Yes I know, we were told, nay promised, about the £350 million.... But bugger all else.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 12, 2020 16:27:57 GMT
I think both of you are right to a certain degree. Availability of cheap surplus vehicles plus a sudden increase in people who ha been trained to drive them added to a massively subsidised road building program gave road transport a huge boost against both waterborne and rail goods carriage. (snip) It's far, far more complex and you need to also look at the thing that destroyed the traditional port system which was containerisation. Also limited access to large areas by reliable large scale waterborne transport necessitated a good road transport system for those areas and it is only natural for them to "poach" from the other methods, after all their bread and butter is assured by the areas without waterways anything they steal from the canals is "jam" Plus the fact that road transport is effectively subsidised by the state. Even at the rates of duty paid in road tax by HGVs, it's nowhere near the same rate adjusted for road wear as other motorists pay. OK, I know Road Fund Licence goes into the general tax pot, but the principle holds) Even in the matter of fencing, railways lose out. It wasn't containerisation that destroyed the traditional port system, it was the dockers' opposition to it. It depends how you look at it. Bettertransport say... "Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) on Britain’s roads are not paying anywhere near the full cost of the damage they cause to roads and communities, leaving taxpayers to pick up the bill, research published today by Campaign for Better Transport shows [1]. Campaign for Better Transport is calling on the Government to stop giving lorries a free ride. The group’s executive director, Stephen Joseph, says: “This research shows that lorries are paying for only between a third and two-thirds of the damage they inflict on society in terms of congestion, road damage, environmental pollution and impact on other road users, leaving taxpayers to pick up the rest of the bill. The Government must ensure that HGVs pay for the costs they impose on society and introduce lorry road user charging.” But then on average, transport companies only make a 3% profit on turnover, so any increase in operating costs would only be passed on the consumers at the supermarket checkout anyway.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Feb 12, 2020 16:35:12 GMT
The point of the new route is to decrease the time it takes to get to the other end.. Not sure why you cant get your head around that and keep banging on about getting the earlier train to get to the other end earlier. So what is wrong with leaving on an earlier train if you want to arrive somewhere earlier? What's 20 minutes? By the time you've signed in to Thunderboat and read a few posts, that's your 20 minutes up. Why can't people catch an earlier train if they want to go to Birmingham and be there earlier? Yes, we know HS2 is quicker - by what - 10 minutes? Is that really worth the cost? So that people can get to New Street and have an extra 10 minutes to stand around sipping their £4 cappuccino in a paper cup on Platform 3 whilst waiting for the train to Redditch?
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Feb 12, 2020 16:35:49 GMT
I think both of you are right to a certain degree. Availability of cheap surplus vehicles plus a sudden increase in people who ha been trained to drive them added to a massively subsidised road building program gave road transport a huge boost against both waterborne and rail goods carriage. (snip) It's far, far more complex and you need to also look at the thing that destroyed the traditional port system which was containerisation. Also limited access to large areas by reliable large scale waterborne transport necessitated a good road transport system for those areas and it is only natural for them to "poach" from the other methods, after all their bread and butter is assured by the areas without waterways anything they steal from the canals is "jam" Plus the fact that road transport is effectively subsidised by the state. Even at the rates of duty paid in road tax by HGVs, it's nowhere near the same rate adjusted for road wear as other motorists pay. OK, I know Road Fund Licence goes into the general tax pot, but the principle holds) Even in the matter of fencing, railways lose out. It wasn't containerisation that destroyed the traditional port system, it was the dockers' opposition to it. If you remmeber it all changed a few years ago with big reductions on the road tax lorries pay, I still think foreign lorries operating here should pay an appropriate tax whilst here
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 16:37:40 GMT
Plus the fact that road transport is effectively subsidised by the state. Even at the rates of duty paid in road tax by HGVs, it's nowhere near the same rate adjusted for road wear as other motorists pay. OK, I know Road Fund Licence goes into the general tax pot, but the principle holds) Even in the matter of fencing, railways lose out. It wasn't containerisation that destroyed the traditional port system, it was the dockers' opposition to it. so any increase in operating costs would only be passed on the consumers at the supermarket checkout anyway. Which we know will not happen, the public demand a cheap basket and will shop elsewhere to get it, means the chains will continue to push transport companies to keep the prices down, always someone out there willing to undercut your price. The likes of Stobart and co will be fine, cant imagine they pay anywhere near the pump rate for fuel, look at his place on the A5...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2020 16:40:16 GMT
The point of the new route is to decrease the time it takes to get to the other end.. Not sure why you cant get your head around that and keep banging on about getting the earlier train to get to the other end earlier. So what is wrong with leaving on an earlier train if you want to arrive somewhere earlier? What's 20 minutes? By the time you've signed in to Thunderboat and read a few posts, that's your 20 minutes up. Why can't people catch an earlier train if they want to go to Birmingham and be there earlier? Yes, we know HS2 is quicker - by what - 10 minutes? Is that really worth the cost? So that people can get to New Street and have an extra 10 minutes to stand around sipping their £4 cappuccino in a paper cup on Platform 3 whilst waiting for the train to Redditch? New street to Redditch leaves on platform 12B.
|
|
|
Post by naughtyfox on Feb 12, 2020 16:45:02 GMT
|
|