Trains...why?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 2345
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Cugel » 27 Apr 2019, 9:01am

Vorpal wrote:And by contrast, NSB, the national rail system in Norway is government managed (through a government owned company), efficient and easy to use. It's quite clear which trains take bikes by reservation only, and which ones are first-come-first-served. The same company serves the entire country, and it is reasonably well-coordinated with services from neiboring countries, and other modes of transport.

Oldjohnw has the right of it. There is a clear strategy in some places to apply increasingly stringent budgets on public sector services, including public transport. Then, the people clamour for reform in the face of the resultant degradation. IMO, the same thing has been happening to the NHS.

The reform thus far has mainly been privitisation and consolidation, neither of which have helped much because the investment has continued to decline.

I somewhat prefer state run enterprise to privitisation, but either way, significant improvements require significant investment. And no, you can't wave HS2 in my face because that sort of thing has limited impact on the rest of the system. New rolling stock, cross rail; these things will help, but not enough to make up for 30 years or more of increasingly stringent budgets.


The starve-the-public-service trick is a mild version of the Shock & Awe tactic devised and recommended by the Chicago School of Economics and it's Chief Moneygrabber Milton Friedman. The full-on version is the sort of Yank antic seen in bringing about regime changes such as those promoting Pinochet in Chile or the more recent Iraq debacle. Bomb them to bits then offer to rebuild the country with Yank Big Business stuff.

Our neolib Tory (and Toryesque New Labour) governmenst starve public utilities and services 'til they become inefficient or moribund. They then employ the private sector PR via the oligarch-owned&run newspap to go on about how the private sector is "customer first" or some other euphemism for "well-able to construct gullible consumer fools".

Bits of the public service are privatised, with regular wholesale privatisation of whole areas of public service, generally with the cry "more efficient". They neglect to mention that this means "more efficient at making profit for fat cats and shareholders but pretty bad at providing services or saving tax income".

Consumer dopes fall for the PR, particularly the lovely decor of the front-of-house and the white-toothed grins of smart-looking receptionsists. Behind the facade, things are black-toothed - full of slavering fang, biting at the consumer wallets in exchange for not-a-lot.

It amazes me that government is still doing this and the public don't seem to have cottoned-on in large numbers.

Cugel

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 9434
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Cunobelin » 27 Apr 2019, 9:06am

pete75 wrote:
irc wrote:
PH wrote:First we’d need to decide if public transport was a service or a business, all decisions would follow from that one. If we treated the road network as a business motorists would soon be crying in their petrol.


Why is that. Road expenditure is far less than motoring taxes/

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road ... data-chart


As is often mentioned here roads are for everyone not just drivers.


.. and ironically the reason why a hypothecated "Road Tax" was abolished so many years ago

Entertainments may be taxed; public houses may be taxed; racehorses may be taxed and the yield devoted to the general revenue. But motorists are to be privileged for all time to have the whole yield of the tax on motors devoted to roads. Obviously, this is all nonsense Such contentions are absurd, and constitute an outrage upon the sovereignty of Parliament and upon common sense.


Churchill then went on further to point out that there were drivers wh
"Claimed ownership of the roads that they paid for"

RubaDub
Posts: 26
Joined: 30 Mar 2019, 10:27am

Re: Trains...why?

Postby RubaDub » 27 Apr 2019, 9:23am

Why?

Because I don't like driving and living in Ireland they are free for people of my age. I've brought my bike on a train many times and met interesting people. I also live close to a station and can avoid peak times.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 9436
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Trains...why?

Postby horizon » 27 Apr 2019, 12:24pm

PH wrote:
Lance Dopestrong wrote:
Could well be, could well be. But where would we get the funds from to subsidise it today?

First we’d need to decide if public transport was a service or a business, all decisions would follow from that one. If we treated the road network as a business motorists would soon be crying in their petrol.


Why as a business? We could treat roads like English Heritage: set up a trust and finance it by selling tea towels, calendars and memberships. :lol: :lol:

Actually the best might be a TOC set up as a trust like a big housing association. Would have to be quite a tough organisation but ATEOTD would serve its customers not its shareholders while avoiding the downsides of the old British Rail.
I have two doctors, my left leg and my right leg. (G. M. Trevelyan)
PS I always wondered why the YHA HQ was called Trevelyan House. :)

brynpoeth
Posts: 10729
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Trains...why?

Postby brynpoeth » 27 Apr 2019, 6:15pm

Kim jong-un likes train travel too, he took one from Pyongyang to Valdivostok
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we love life

Oldjohnw
Posts: 1653
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Oldjohnw » 28 Apr 2019, 11:33am

horizon wrote:
PH wrote:
Lance Dopestrong wrote:
Could well be, could well be. But where would we get the funds from to subsidise it today?

First we’d need to decide if public transport was a service or a business, all decisions would follow from that one. If we treated the road network as a business motorists would soon be crying in their petrol.


Why as a business? We could treat roads like English Heritage: set up a trust and finance it by selling tea towels, calendars and memberships. :lol: :lol:

Actually the best might be a TOC set up as a trust like a big housing association. Would have to be quite a tough organisation but ATEOTD would serve its customers not its shareholders while avoiding the downsides of the old British Rail.


We should do that for weaponry. People should stand on the street corner with collecting tins for tanks and pay for soldiers injured in warfare fully from the exchequer rather than the other way round, as it now is. And why should we need charity collections for school books?
John

Cycling and recycling

reohn2
Posts: 35581
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Trains...why?

Postby reohn2 » 28 Apr 2019, 11:43am

Oldjohnw wrote:...... And why should we need charity collections for school books?

Or cancer research and treatment,or for emergency service helicopters,or for the homeless,etc.

Because we'd rather have a low tax economy so the necessities for a caring society are ar at the whim of people dropping their loose change in a tin.......
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

PH
Posts: 7402
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Trains...why?

Postby PH » 28 Apr 2019, 1:00pm

irc wrote:
PH wrote:First we’d need to decide if public transport was a service or a business, all decisions would follow from that one. If we treated the road network as a business motorists would soon be crying in their petrol.

Why is that. Road expenditure is far less than motoring taxes/


Cunobelin made the case for the unreliability of the figures based on what you do or don't include, I thought it was generally accepted that motorists don't pay the full cost of the services they use, but I'm not going to argue it.
I was only partly thinking in those terms when I wrote that roads were not treated as a business, certainly not in the same way as the railways. All rail investment considers how it will increase revenue, use is charged on a supply and demand basis - just compare peak and off peak fares - can you imagine this happening for road transport? Maybe if you want to drive up the M1 you should book two weeks in advance or pay a premium, then when there's enough space sold for it to be free flowing you stop selling tickets. The list goes on... roads are considered an essential part of society and we seem to forgive just about everything on that basis, OTOH railways have been seen as an inconvenience by successive governments and planners.

brynpoeth
Posts: 10729
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Trains...why?

Postby brynpoeth » 1 May 2019, 9:33am

I do like to visit the train station even when I am not travelling, I enjoy the smell of the electric and diesel, I read the timetables, it is fun to see people meeting on the platform, kiddies run to meet the grandparents
People saying 'how do you do?', they are really saying 'I love you' :wink:
..
Buses..why? :?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we love life

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 2345
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Cugel » 1 May 2019, 12:23pm

brynpoeth wrote:..
Buses..why? :?


The best comedy shows I ever attended were on the top deck of the Number 86 bus returning from a neet oot in Newcastle to South Shields, when Ah wos an older teenager. Everyone was a bit drunk and always there were one or three wags taking the micvkkey oot of themselves and everyone else. The bus would be a-roar with helpless laughter all the way back.

Of course, if some lout said summick wrong. then the mood would turn and another form of entertainment would ensue.

I often recall bus journeys of my yoof. I enjoyed many kinds, especially those where the bus was crammed and there was a sort of race between how long the bus took to get to your stop and how long the conductor was going to take to push his way down the heaving crowd to get your fare.

Cugel

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17073
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Vorpal » 2 May 2019, 12:06pm

irc wrote:
Why is that. Road expenditure is far less than motoring taxes/

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road ... data-chart

It depends on what is included.

Here are a couple of previous threads about how motoring is subsidised...

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=120805
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=115700
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=89938
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
100%JR
Posts: 807
Joined: 31 May 2016, 10:47pm
Location: High Green,Sheffield.

Re: Trains...why?

Postby 100%JR » 15 May 2019, 1:47pm

I saw earlier in the week that "Train Spotters" were "dangerously close to the tracks" to get photos of the Flying Scotsman :roll:
According to the report this caused over 1000hrs of knock on effect delays :?: :?: A THOUSAND HOURS?????Surely a mistake?

I don't like trains.I don't get "Train spotters"...especially turning up to see a relic :|

Can I change the title to Train spotters...why?

I saw the Flying Scotsman.....or parts of it when it was being rebuilt at the National Railway Museum in York(sons school trip) a few years ago.It's just an old train!
Canyon Ultimate CF SL
Boardman CX Comp
We hate "speed" Cameras Fracking is the future.

Mike Sales
Posts: 3228
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: Trains...why?

Postby Mike Sales » 15 May 2019, 2:01pm

100%JR wrote:I saw earlier in the week that "Train Spotters" were "dangerously close to the tracks" to get photos of the Flying Scotsman :roll:
According to the report this caused over 1000hrs of knock on effect delays :?: :?: A THOUSAND HOURS?????Surely a mistake?

I don't like trains.I don't get "Train spotters"...especially turning up to see a relic :|

Can I change the title to Train spotters...why?

I saw the Flying Scotsman.....or parts of it when it was being rebuilt at the National Railway Museum in York(sons school trip) a few years ago.It's just an old train!


Do you understand old car enthusiasts? Or those men who coo over flashy modern ones?

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 9436
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Trains...why?

Postby horizon » 15 May 2019, 4:03pm

100%JR wrote:I can assume this is not going to be a popular post here but Trains.Why?



Yesterday I used trains to do a journey of about 50 miles each way. That's about 1.5 hours each way by car in narrow lanes and a couple of busy town centres. It actually took me about 2.5 hours each way by train due to the fact that it's an awkward journey involving 2 - 3 changes on each leg. So that's a loss of 2 hours. Or is it?

Going by car might well involve the odd stop (getting petrol, going to the loo, having a tea break, dealing with extra traffic and then parking). All that eats into the time advantage. But worse still for the driver, the time on the train isn't wasted - you can read, nap, look at your emails etc.

And then there is the real cost: £45 (45 ppm according to HMRC) compared to £9.00 off-peak with rail card. That's two hours' working time for an average person to make up plus the cost of parking. And the breaks between trains were used for sitting in the sunshine.

There's simply no comparison: travelling by car as the driver is hugely inefficient and time wasting, even when the train is a bit slow, noisy, crowded and dirty (none of which my trains were). Going by car is initially inviting but by the end of the day you have a tired driver and a refreshed rail passenger (at least in my case).

Some people love driving and enjoy the personal space of their clean, smart car, listening to music as they drive. And yet they spend their leisure time complaining to newspaper comment columns about the behaviour of cyclists. Can't be all that wonderful then.
I have two doctors, my left leg and my right leg. (G. M. Trevelyan)
PS I always wondered why the YHA HQ was called Trevelyan House. :)

irc
Posts: 4535
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: Trains...why?

Postby irc » 15 May 2019, 4:23pm

Vorpal wrote:
irc wrote:
Why is that. Road expenditure is far less than motoring taxes/

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road ... data-chart

It depends on what is included.

Here are a couple of previous threads about how motoring is subsidised...

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=120805
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=115700
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=89938


Not that old chestnut. Counting things like reduce d physical activity as a subsidy for cars while not doing so for public transport. By that logic cycling is subsidised because someone doing a 5 mile commute by bike expends less effort than a pedestrian.
Likewise noise pollution counted as car subsidy but not bus or train subsidy.