The railways are subsidised MORE now than they were in pre-privatisation days. The difference is that a lot of the subsidy goes into the shareholders pockets.
I remember doing a long motorway trip back in the seventies, when the speed limit was 50mph. Petrol consumption was astonishingly low.
Transport "union"
-
reohn2
Oracle wrote:Reohn2
Not sure why you comment on the altruistic society observation of mine. I try to adhere to the principles of altruism as often as I can – as much to the delight of those who know me at times – but I do believe society is somewhat selfish these days. Sadly, we are becoming less dependent on each other as ‘those with’ can just purchase whatever they require from the global market. Regards the class system, perhaps the sooner those from all strata realise they have a role to play the better the UK plc will become, but sadly, there are some who appear unwilling to take responsibility for their actions. I’ve lost count of the number of times I have picked up litter and suggested to the culprit “I think you accidentally dropped something, or do you want me to put it in a bin for you” and sadly, if I were to assign a class to the said culprit, it would be the class that appear to want the most help who are most blameworthy.
We can always blame governments or ‘those with’ for all the woes, but perhaps individual responsibility is the first step and we all have a duty in that sense, no matter what ‘class’ we belong to.
I was agreeing with you in my last post.
But as for belonging to a "class"I'm sorry i can't help you with that one, I'm class"less".
The last time I was almost stratad was when working on a 2'6in high coal seam(I once was a miner,one of the ones Lady Astor called earthworms) that took a weight and was reduced to just under 1'6in in a matter of 20minutes.
Before that, it was at secondary school and they got that wrong too.
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36780
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Meic
Never been a great believer in ‘force and oppression‘, always believed in education and opportunity. I criticise people for not adhering to socially accepted standards, not really ‘my rules’.
As for your comment ‘for many people their role is to do all the dirty work and get none of the rewards’, and my criticism of them for not playing by the rules, do I assume that you believe we should turn a blind eye to unacceptable behaviour just because the perpetrators happen to from those doing all the dirty work for no rewards, or should we just go for the force and oppression option for everyone? I think we might just be stoking more fires of hate with the latter.
Just to make it perfectly clear, I don’t believe in a class system, but support the ‘opportunity for all’ environment. There will always be a scenario where the less skilled receive less reward than the highly skilled, whether this is doing all the dirty work for no reward is debatable. I am aware that opportunity exists for all to better oneself, all that is needed is a little application. I have to remain optimistic and believe there can be hope if everyone accepts responsibility. I would have thought this, coupled with supporting an altruistic society, would be generally supported. It may be seen as futile or naive, but without hope, what is left? I realise we will never voluntarily reach nirvana, but have some reservation about attempting to reach it by force and oppression.
Never been a great believer in ‘force and oppression‘, always believed in education and opportunity. I criticise people for not adhering to socially accepted standards, not really ‘my rules’.
As for your comment ‘for many people their role is to do all the dirty work and get none of the rewards’, and my criticism of them for not playing by the rules, do I assume that you believe we should turn a blind eye to unacceptable behaviour just because the perpetrators happen to from those doing all the dirty work for no rewards, or should we just go for the force and oppression option for everyone? I think we might just be stoking more fires of hate with the latter.
Just to make it perfectly clear, I don’t believe in a class system, but support the ‘opportunity for all’ environment. There will always be a scenario where the less skilled receive less reward than the highly skilled, whether this is doing all the dirty work for no reward is debatable. I am aware that opportunity exists for all to better oneself, all that is needed is a little application. I have to remain optimistic and believe there can be hope if everyone accepts responsibility. I would have thought this, coupled with supporting an altruistic society, would be generally supported. It may be seen as futile or naive, but without hope, what is left? I realise we will never voluntarily reach nirvana, but have some reservation about attempting to reach it by force and oppression.
The opportunity for all to better their positon is quite self evidently untrue. One of those lies told to try and ease the guilt of the better off.
There is an opportunity for SOME to better themselves. The good jobs are in limited supply no matter how many people get degrees.
When you go to a comp. the statistics are that the bottom half are going to end up missing out. After a couple of years most people have worked out where they stand in the order of ability. Why should they continue to support a system which only needs them to be failures to mirror the sucsesses. This isnt sour grapes, I got letters after my name but I understand why the other kids hated those of us that climbed out of the pit on their backs. Inteligence and ability is only half the story, priveledge and advantage carry just as much weight.
Public school boys are more likely than not to be an officer or go to uni. Comprehensive kids are more likely not to do so.
As for socially acceptable behaviour, the rules for this are made up by a minority society and imposed on the majority.
I would no sooner drop litter than hit myself, it is against my "religion" but I have no right to impose my religion on others. If it isnt their religion I can tolerate them or impose my will by force. The only moral advantage I hold is only valid in MY OWN value judgement system. When people start to decide their value system is more valid than someone elses and feel justified in imposing it, we tend to end up with conflict.
There is an opportunity for SOME to better themselves. The good jobs are in limited supply no matter how many people get degrees.
When you go to a comp. the statistics are that the bottom half are going to end up missing out. After a couple of years most people have worked out where they stand in the order of ability. Why should they continue to support a system which only needs them to be failures to mirror the sucsesses. This isnt sour grapes, I got letters after my name but I understand why the other kids hated those of us that climbed out of the pit on their backs. Inteligence and ability is only half the story, priveledge and advantage carry just as much weight.
Public school boys are more likely than not to be an officer or go to uni. Comprehensive kids are more likely not to do so.
As for socially acceptable behaviour, the rules for this are made up by a minority society and imposed on the majority.
I would no sooner drop litter than hit myself, it is against my "religion" but I have no right to impose my religion on others. If it isnt their religion I can tolerate them or impose my will by force. The only moral advantage I hold is only valid in MY OWN value judgement system. When people start to decide their value system is more valid than someone elses and feel justified in imposing it, we tend to end up with conflict.
Whatever 'class' people are or how well educated they are or whether they take resposibility for their actions or drop litter or dont drop litter -
individual people are not in a position to effect a change in any transport system (or any other public service)
It is govenments role to run our country efficiently and that includes providing public services and an infrastructure that works.
And, I dont beleive that govenment does not provide a decent transport system because they think we will balk at paying more taxes - they dont care if we disagree with any other decision (unless it just before an election) after all it was made very clear that a vast amount of the population were against going to war in Irak but it made not teh slightest difference.
It is not about more money, as had already been said, subsidies to rail companies are now far greater than were ever given to British rail.
This (and the previous) govenment seem to have opted out of providing anything (prisons, schools, health etc) in favour of handing all resposibility (as well as loads of money) and the running of public services over to the private sector.
The private sector exists to make money for its shareholders for the minimum effort and outlay - therefore poor -and totaly disjointed- public services.
on a global scale Capitalists run the world to make money not to make life better for the poorest or to save the planet - and govenements have little power or will to do anything to stop them
individual people are not in a position to effect a change in any transport system (or any other public service)
It is govenments role to run our country efficiently and that includes providing public services and an infrastructure that works.
And, I dont beleive that govenment does not provide a decent transport system because they think we will balk at paying more taxes - they dont care if we disagree with any other decision (unless it just before an election) after all it was made very clear that a vast amount of the population were against going to war in Irak but it made not teh slightest difference.
It is not about more money, as had already been said, subsidies to rail companies are now far greater than were ever given to British rail.
This (and the previous) govenment seem to have opted out of providing anything (prisons, schools, health etc) in favour of handing all resposibility (as well as loads of money) and the running of public services over to the private sector.
The private sector exists to make money for its shareholders for the minimum effort and outlay - therefore poor -and totaly disjointed- public services.
on a global scale Capitalists run the world to make money not to make life better for the poorest or to save the planet - and govenements have little power or will to do anything to stop them
As the resent (Or maybe not so resent) fuel blockade by the lorry drivers showed, there only so far you can go with hiking up fuel duties before 'them what need fuel to earn a living' as a pose to just being a luxury, get upset.
However the present state of having a car costing money just to sit in the drive whether its used or not is one of the big disincentives to people using public transport. Private motoring costs should be all based on miles being driven and nothing else.
Hiking up the cost of four wheel drive road tax by couple of hundred quid will just make those that pay all the more determined to get value for money out of their vehicle.
However the present state of having a car costing money just to sit in the drive whether its used or not is one of the big disincentives to people using public transport. Private motoring costs should be all based on miles being driven and nothing else.
Hiking up the cost of four wheel drive road tax by couple of hundred quid will just make those that pay all the more determined to get value for money out of their vehicle.
Cheers
J Bro
J Bro
I agree with you JB but would you consider a modification from paying by miles driven to paying by fuel used?
I dont know about the rest of you but I loved the fuel blockade. The people in my village came out of their houses and all congregated on the road and got to meet and talk to each other in some cases for the first time.
The peace and quiet was wonderfull.
I dont know about the rest of you but I loved the fuel blockade. The people in my village came out of their houses and all congregated on the road and got to meet and talk to each other in some cases for the first time.
The peace and quiet was wonderfull.
Yes, fuel use would be better, even better would be a fuel ration, say enough to do twelve thousand a year in a average fuel efficient car. then if you'd rather have a scooter you cold do a million miles or if your a chieftan tank enthusiast youd be down to a couple f hundred miles per year but still use the same amount of fuel per head as the scooterist.
Doubt if the fuel companies would wear that though.
Doubt if the fuel companies would wear that though.
Cheers
J Bro
J Bro