FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should southern railway beable to strike for 28 days?
Should southern railway beable to strike for 28 days?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"It's south Western trains not southern" That is right. I got mixed up with them 2. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profit" No I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period." That's exactly why they choose now ... to focus the company's minds more | |||
| |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period." Strikes are most effective when they cause maximum disruption. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period." But thats the things with industrial action, it needs to cause disprution for the company or its fairly pointless. While it can be a pain for the public at times, the less we all stand together and show support- the more likely we all are to be fucked over in the future. At least its been announced up front so people can look at making alternative plans. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period. Strikes are most effective when they cause maximum disruption. " That is right it is that too. | |||
| |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period. But thats the things with industrial action, it needs to cause disprution for the company or its fairly pointless. While it can be a pain for the public at times, the less we all stand together and show support- the more likely we all are to be fucked over in the future. At least its been announced up front so people can look at making alternative plans." Yes, at least they did warn the people before no doubt it will be more expensive to commute for some as the might have to take a taxi or arrange something else to get to work. | |||
"The southern rail strike caused massive upheaval and disruption. People lost jobs, resigned and took power paid jobs, had additional child care costs of hotel costs because they couldn't get home. The effects were husband widespread. Many commuters turned against the strikers because their lives were badly affected." That is right it did that too, many people lost their jobs cos of the strikes which is the not so good side of it. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period. But thats the things with industrial action, it needs to cause disprution for the company or its fairly pointless. While it can be a pain for the public at times, the less we all stand together and show support- the more likely we all are to be fucked over in the future. At least its been announced up front so people can look at making alternative plans." In a lot of cases it's not possible to make alternative plans. I am an advocate for the right to strike. I think that both sides need to negotiate and negotiate hard. Once public sympathy is lost and make no mistake this will be reported by the media and presented by government in such a way that it is, it becomes much more difficult to maintain momentum. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"A little bit of perspective: SWR MD has promised that "there will always be a guard on our trains, and our guards will maintain a safety critical role on our trains". The proposed changes are to enable the drivers to close doors using platform located camera screens, which could allow a train to run (rather than just being cancelled) in the event of a guard not being available, WHERE SAFE TO DO SO (guards, like drivers, can be displaced/unavailable for any number of reasons, especially during disruptions. Southeastern (I used to work in the Southeastern control centre) had similar issues when they brought in DOO (Driver Operated Only) trains on some of the Kent routes a few years ago. Unfortunately, for the unions, they played it badly by accepting the changes providing there was a substantial pay increase for the drivers. Southeastern told them where to go....end of discussion!! " Another bit of perspective. The guard on the train being in control of the whole of platform interference duties and dispatch (were a platform staff are not present) is regarded by frontline rail staff to be the safest form of dispatch. Figures suggest there is more risk of deadly/serious injury platform interference incidents on driver only services. And imagine a situation like the Watford tunnel crash a couple of years ago where two trains hit head on and both drivers injured. The guards on both trains were credited for their action and professionalism in seeing to safety procedures and looking after the safety and welfare of passengers on board. Imagine say a rail crash with a packed train with literally 100s onboard (as can be) and the only member of staff onboard, the driver is incapacitated? Its common knowledge that the DFT are trying to both get rid of the guard and casualise labour and working conditions for some time. Unfortunately for the government the trade unions have made this difficult to do in one big sweep, as the have not just done what they're told and taken it up the arse. So the strategy now is to try and do it in baby steps, bit by bit down a slippery slope. The original intent was full driver only. With Southern they aimed to see a downgrade from the safety critical role with a view (as any sensible person can see) to reduce pay according and eventually remove the now demoted onboard supervisor. Dispite knowing that extra pressure from risks/distractions associated with the platform add risks to the driver of error. And remember their jobs as newly demoted onboard supervisors were only guarantee till the end of the current franchise. And its fallacious to the aim was to only go without a guard in extreme circumstances. There was a whole list of reasons originally why a train could not run without an onboard supervisor with Southern. So many reasons in theory most trains would be able to run without them. It's only because the driver union then used its solidarity to negotiate this wide list down to a couple or so. Do not be fooled. See the original intent as it was originally sold. The goal DFT hasn't changed, just the tactics. The DFT are hell bent on placing profit before safety and eroding jobs, working conditions and the strength of the unions. So much so for example they spent £86 million of the tax payers money keeping the Southern strike going and preventing Southern from ending the strike with a safer agreement. Because of rail staff's solidarity they have not been able to steam roller things through. So now they are trying to chip away slowly. Be under no illusions what they are doing is less safe (and will result in more causalties) and the role of the guard is under threat (despite short term assurances of job protection). The railway does not need DOO or other forms of operation, neither does the public (especially people with special assistance needs). What it needs is proper safe dispatch, well trained fully staffed trains and a safe service especially in time of unforeseen accidents, disasters and security events. This current problem is to do with the government putting profits before people and fighting its ideological battles with the trade unions (for no reason) at the expense of the tax payer and travelling public. | |||
| |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey." Exactly this. I know a few guards, the job they do is extremely important. Do I agree with the strike? Sometimes it's the only way to focus the mind. Do I agree with it in December? See above. Does it affect me? Yes. Twice a day. The current travelling conditions at rush hour are dreadful. I'm standing for an hour every morning and for an hour and a half in the evening, too many passengers on too few trains with too few carriages. It also means I have to be up at 5, and don't get home till around 7 every day. Massive inconvenience and discomfort every day. I heard this morning the MD of southern has gone and someone from another TO now sits in his seat, apparently having successfully resolved the situation in his region. Not a great time to be announcing a 2.5% fare rise. The guards are much needed. This about profit for the TO, nothing more. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey." We had strikes over the same thing up here. It's not just about jobs but as you say, passenger safety too. The workers/union won in the end and we still have guards. | |||
"I think people need to remember who the villains are in this piece and not me hoodwinked by right wing media. Don't blame the rail staff, blame the company, DFT and government who are hell bent on putting the profits before safety. What sickens me more is that the government will fully support the rail operator (as I suspect it's the DFT pulling the strings on this) at the excruciating cost of the taxpayer. This battle for the government is battle of ideology over safety and T&Cs. The rail staff need to act as they see fit to fight to maintain the safest form of train dispatch, terms and conditions and long term security of the role. Look what has happened in industries were staff have lost their solidarity and unions have lost power? Abuse of zero hour contracts, erosion of terms and conditions, less power to raise grievance at unfair practices/treatment, reduction/stagnation in pay, intrusion of technology into home life, greater impact of unsociable working hours. You just need to look at retail to see how far we have regressed in terms of working conditions. Remember employers have rarely given rights and better working conditions out of the goodness of their hearts. These are things that have had to be fought for, often through solidarity and the Unions. The only winner is the top 5% when working people turn their backs on other working people fighting to maintain safety and T&Cs. " Absolutely agree with all of this! | |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey. We had strikes over the same thing up here. It's not just about jobs but as you say, passenger safety too. The workers/union won in the end and we still have guards." | |||
| |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey." | |||
| |||
"Interesting points eveeyone and yes the guards are very important and as one said rather than with strikes they have to negotiate abit harder you wont see other professions strike like they do "Not true. Midwives, nurses, doctors, the fire brigade and near where I live we had lots of strikes and protests by shipyard workers. Words don't work unfortunately, hitting them in the pocket and causing difficulty and inconvenience do. The train gaurd strikes had quite a lot of support here as frustrating as the interruption was. I wish people had a little more empathy and solidarity. It would probably help make more of a difference if they did. | |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey. "the guard is in charge of the train the driver the locomotive should something unfortunate happen to incapacitate the driver who would you want to be in charge of your safetey and security some poorly trained "revenue protection agent" or a fully trained guard who knows the route the track layout the signaling and saftey systems and exactly how the correct procedure .also ask your self why those on strike are prepared to forego 27 days wages at the most expensive time of year this strike is not about pay its about keeping you the traveling public as safe as posible | |||
| |||
"Interesting points eveeyone and yes the guards are very important and as one said rather than with strikes they have to negotiate abit harder you wont see other professions strike like they do
Not true. Midwives, nurses, doctors, the fire brigade and near where I live we had lots of strikes and protests by shipyard workers. Words don't work unfortunately, hitting them in the pocket and causing difficulty and inconvenience do. The train gaurd strikes had quite a lot of support here as frustrating as the interruption was. I wish people had a little more empathy and solidarity. It would probably help make more of a difference if they did."The difficulty with the railway is that the Government is hell bent on breaking the unions, probably more for ideological reasons than anything else. So they hand over millions of tax payers money in discretionary compensation to the rail operators. Thus the rail Operators are less incline (and I suspect under orders from the DFT not) to come to a speedy resolution. For example the Government paid £86 million of tax payers money to Southern to stop Southern from having to come to an agreement with the RMT. I think its actually more about ideology than profits for the government. They want working conditions on the railway to be as flexible and poor as industries like retail. They hate workers have the power to have a say in the conditions they work in. And who pays for their ideological battle, us, the tax payers. | |||
| |||
| |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profit"
I agree | |||
| |||
| |||
"I may being thick, but if it is so dangerous to have driver only trains, how come it is normal on the Underground trains?" Exactly. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Interesting points eveeyone and yes the guards are very important and as one said rather than with strikes they have to negotiate abit harder you wont see other professions strike like they do
Not true. Midwives, nurses, doctors, the fire brigade and near where I live we had lots of strikes and protests by shipyard workers. Words don't work unfortunately, hitting them in the pocket and causing difficulty and inconvenience do. The train gaurd strikes had quite a lot of support here as frustrating as the interruption was. I wish people had a little more empathy and solidarity. It would probably help make more of a difference if they did." | |||
| |||
"I may being thick, but if it is so dangerous to have driver only trains, how come it is normal on the Underground trains? Exactly. " What I say to that is the Greyrigg rail disasters (more on that in a bit). The trouble is you need to understand the difference between the London underground and the wider rail network. London underground is a small urban/slightly suburban network (in terms of the national rail network). You are never too far away from a station, road, emergency service access or the emergency services them self. Even the longest stretch under ground is just over 3 miles. On the national network there are whole stretches miles away from emergency service access and in difficult terrain. The Greyrigg derailment was a train carrying 500 people jack-knifed of the track causing 1 death, 30 serious/life threatening injuries and 58 other injuries (recorded). It was in a remote area. Because of the remote area the rescue involved RAF helicopters, mountain rescue, International Rescue Corps and tractors from local farms to tow all the emergency vehicles that were stuck in the difficult terrain. Imagine in such a remote place how far/long normal emergency services were away even if there was good access? The driver of that train broke his neck and was jammed in the wreckage. In cab communication was dead and he was drifting in and out of consciousness. So would you like to be on a train with 500+ people on board many serious injured, possibly you too, where the only member of staff (the driver) is incapacitated or dead? Who will carry out the correct emergency reporting procedure? Who will get a line block from the signaller straight away to prevent other trains smashing into yours? Who on the train has the relevant route knowledge (as train crew are trained to know) to know where you exactly are, even in the dark? Who will manage a safe train evacuation? Who will carry out the railway emergency protection protocol to prevent other trains being involved (if no contact with signaller can be made)? Who would even know how to get hold of the singnaller/signal centre ASAP in an emergency? So now do you see the need for at the very least a fully trained safety critical guard with full route knowledge on board mainline trains and why driver only trains are a bad idea? The mainline is very different from a urban/suburban area where access to and the emergency services them self are never more than a few minutes away. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period." But that’s the point. Do it during the period you’re bound to make the most disruptions. If they did it each evening during the hours of 12 and 5am, it wouldn’t achieve anything. If you do it when you’d disrupt travel the most, you’re making a bigger noise and more likely to get what you want. | |||
"I may being thick, but if it is so dangerous to have driver only trains, how come it is normal on the Underground trains? Exactly. " Underground trains have people on the platforms more than one person if the platform is long / peak times. | |||
"I may being thick, but if it is so dangerous to have driver only trains, how come it is normal on the Underground trains? Exactly. Underground trains have people on the platforms more than one person if the platform is long / peak times." They also have CCTV linked to TV screens at the front of the platform which the driver can see. | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period." how else do they get the message out if I was to strike if pic a time when it was effective | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profitNo I am not, just that they dont need to do it during the festive period. But thats the things with industrial action, it needs to cause disprution for the company or its fairly pointless. While it can be a pain for the public at times, the less we all stand together and show support- the more likely we all are to be fucked over in the future. At least its been announced up front so people can look at making alternative plans." | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The right to strike is an important right, marking the limited employment rights in the UK, despite a period where employment conditions have deteriorated in favour of employers. The privatization of the railways is a complete mess, with taxpayers paying for increased subsidies, whilst private companies take large profits overseas, as they deliver poor services to the mugs here. Strikers don't get paid, showing the serious nature of their complaints. The loser is the UK " Network Fail are the primary recipient of subsidies from the taxpayers.....you would not believe how much better their pay and terms and conditions are in relation to TOC staff! It has also been publicly stated by TOC's (and NOT challenged) that 98% of profits from the TOC's is reinvested.....difficult to see how 2% equates to "large profits going overseas"!!! | |||
"So you're happy for workers rights to be taken away, companies to be able to manipulate and dictate what employees do with little chance of retort until we're mearly a totally disposible commodity? Good luck with your ever bleaker looking future, but i'm behind anyone who has to resort to a strike for a genuine reason, to protect their job over the interests of making shareholders and hedge fund companies a bit more profit" Not agreeing or disagreeing, but what about the 100s 1000s of other jobs and peoples lives that will be affected - do they not count? | |||
"I think people need to remember who the villains are in this piece and not me hoodwinked by right wing media. Don't blame the rail staff, blame the company, DFT and government who are hell bent on putting the profits before safety. What sickens me more is that the government will fully support the rail operator (as I suspect it's the DFT pulling the strings on this) at the excruciating cost of the taxpayer. This battle for the government is battle of ideology over safety and T&Cs. The rail staff need to act as they see fit to fight to maintain the safest form of train dispatch, terms and conditions and long term security of the role. Look what has happened in industries were staff have lost their solidarity and unions have lost power? Abuse of zero hour contracts, erosion of terms and conditions, less power to raise grievance at unfair practices/treatment, reduction/stagnation in pay, intrusion of technology into home life, greater impact of unsociable working hours. You just need to look at retail to see how far we have regressed in terms of working conditions. Remember employers have rarely given rights and better working conditions out of the goodness of their hearts. These are things that have had to be fought for, often through solidarity and the Unions. The only winner is the top 5% when working people turn their backs on other working people fighting to maintain safety and T&Cs. " Pretty much sums up what's happening in most western countries at the moment who claim to be "progressive" | |||
| |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. " And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised." Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. " And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... | |||
"The company is trying to make guards role meaningless. Under current rules the guard must have route knowledge of the line. Signals and direction of travel. In the event of a driver being unable to protect a train in an emergancy the guard must do so and arrange emergancy services giving the location of the train. The guard is not just for tickets. They are there for YOUR saftey."
They can strike for as long as they like in my view. | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up...." You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? " I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... | |||
| |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time...." It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. | |||
"The 28 day strike started yesterday and the passengers wont be happy as they will also strike during the christmas and new year, why are they doing it every year and what are they trying to achieve also will they get paid during that period? The company could do better to not allow it, privatisation is an option. I would say to them "get back to work"." the railway management of south west trains want to take away the safety critical aspect of the guards duties, they aren't trying to take guards away from the trains just avoiding the need for them to work empties into sidings and aspects such as that where the public aren't involved, i don't see the problem personally, this strike action really is quite ridiculous and weekdays leading up to xmas will be a nightmare for commuters into and out of London    | |||
| |||
| |||
"Pretty much all modern trains are run by computers these days and have dozens of redundancy systems, safety has increased 10 fold far in excess of what it used to be. So do guards really play as significant a role as they did ? funny how the biggest advocates of strike action here are not the ones affected by it!!" i personally think the guards play an important role they act as mediator for problems or queries, they sell tickets and give information, they act as a chaperone to those travelling late at night and they relay and problems on the line that the driver cannot because he's concentrating on his job | |||
"Pretty much all modern trains are run by computers these days and have dozens of redundancy systems, safety has increased 10 fold far in excess of what it used to be. So do guards really play as significant a role as they did ? funny how the biggest advocates of strike action here are not the ones affected by it!!"
Modern day trains are run by computers????? I think you'll find they're run by people iirc. Some people make me lol | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. " Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you?" Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% " So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am? | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am? "We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources "Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data. You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me). | |||
| |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me). "Yes!! | |||
"Just to add, you don't pay corporation tax unless you are incorporated (LTD or PLC) Most small businesses aren't." Another assertion based assumption majority of small businesses and start ups are LTD these days go to your sources and check figures . And did say small, medium and large | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
"So you were collecting government spending data at the time? If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today? | |||
"It's south Western trains not southernThat is right. I got mixed up with them 2." bit like being in the wrong platform, eh? | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?"Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information. Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail. Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?
Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information.
Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail.
Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go"So; the government spending money subsidising the private rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail. This is honestly what you are now saying? | |||
| |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?
Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information.
Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail.
Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go
So; the government spending money subsidising the private rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail.
This is honestly what you are now saying? "Its nothing to do with me or may opinion, these are actual facts, please go and consult your sources and stop preaching edited and doctered left wing propaganda. I care about jobs and people and my staff and their futures and livelihoods. Have a good day | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?
Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information.
Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail.
Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go
So; the government spending money subsidising the private rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail.
This is honestly what you are now saying?
Its nothing to do with me or may opinion, these are actual facts, please go and consult your sources and stop preaching edited and doctered left wing propaganda. I care about jobs and people and my staff and their futures and livelihoods. Have a good day
"It's an "actual fact" that the government spending money subsidising rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail? | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?
Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information.
Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail.
Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go
So; the government spending money subsidising the private rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail.
This is honestly what you are now saying?
Its nothing to do with me or may opinion, these are actual facts, please go and consult your sources and stop preaching edited and doctered left wing propaganda. I care about jobs and people and my staff and their futures and livelihoods. Have a good day
It's an "actual fact" that the government spending money subsidising rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail?
"Please do some fiscal accounting studies. While your sitting at home saying go SW trains guards, stick it to the man from your armchair completely detached from the reality of the strike. Think of all the poor peoples jobs, lives and livelihoods that will affected, ordinary people. It's easy to shout com'on you reds when you have nothing to loose or not directly affected. | |||
"I hope all the people cheering on the strikers will be just as jolly when the railway company announce a higher than expected fare increase to cover the costs of keeping these jobs. Yes they have to make a profit, that is the idea of running a company. Yes the fatcats want their lb of flesh, that is why they invest money. Unfortunately if it wasn't for fatcats and your pension fund investing money for a profit a lot of companies would cease to excist and many of us would loose our jobs. Yes caoitalism is shit, but its a dam sight better than communism where everyone is "equal" but as we have seen communism doesnt work. Anyone have a sensible suggestion for how to keep making a profit and paying investors because this is the purpose of a business, it is not there purely to provide jobs. Those days went back in the seventies when everyone decided they wanted more money. And this is why infrastructure is too important to be subjected to the vagaries of the market and should be nationalised. Is nationalisation the right answer, those of us who remember pre privatisation. national rail, it was a huge money black hole, huge taxes on average worker, billions and billions of pounds poured in nothing out, resulting in appalling service (if you you think services is bad these days!! ) Riddled with strike action (far more than these days) that was about money not jobs. Governments wasted soooo much money without any decernible benefits at the cost of other services. A positive Utopia. And since privitisaion, more money has poured into giving these companies subsidies than national rail ever cost us, service has got worse, prices have gone up.... You know this because when British rail was privatised you were 9? I didn't realise that in order to know about something you actually had to be there. If only humanity had invented a way of recording things so that people could access them at a later time.... It is the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. (For the academics out there) Primary being actual knowledge and secondary reported knowledge, secondary being far less reliable, depends on the accuracy of the original source. Oh, so you were collecting government spending data in the 80s were you? Yes! Especially as we run your own businesses and you want to make informed decisions about how government policy, spending and how it will our business and staff, do you? Someone who uses South West trains a lot and the strike is going to effect business significantly effect our business and staff, no I'm not in the top 5%, just people who are trying to make living and for our staff, do you? Oh PS pretty much all businesses small , medium and large) in the UK pay corporation tax, backbone of this country and biggest contributors to the economy, not just Corporations or top 5% So you were employed by the government, collecting the data? Or were you just reading the reported data, thus using the exact same secondary source as I am?
We were actually working and contributing at the time, paying taxes running business so we are actually primary sources
Working and paying taxes doesn't make you a primary source for government spending data.
You are only the primary source for data if you have collected it yourself, otherwise you are using the reported data just like everyone else (including me).
Yes!!
So you were collecting government spending data at the time?
If you were - how does it compare to spending on rail today?
Your argument as a fallacy and likely based on leaked draft of the labour manifesto but armchair socialists and labour supporters use miss information.
Government support for the rail industry isn’t the same thing as public spending on rail.
Was more interested to see where it went ant how far away to the left from the facts it would go
So; the government spending money subsidising the private rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail.
This is honestly what you are now saying?
Its nothing to do with me or may opinion, these are actual facts, please go and consult your sources and stop preaching edited and doctered left wing propaganda. I care about jobs and people and my staff and their futures and livelihoods. Have a good day
It's an "actual fact" that the government spending money subsidising rail companies is not the same as public spending on rail?
Please do some fiscal accounting studies. While your sitting at home saying go SW trains guards, stick it to the man from your armchair completely detached from the reality of the strike. Think of all the poor peoples jobs, lives and livelihoods that will affected, ordinary people. It's easy to shout com'on you reds when you have nothing to loose or not directly affected. "Keep digging, it's very funny. | |||
| |||
"I may being thick, but if it is so dangerous to have driver only trains, how come it is normal on the Underground trains? Exactly. What I say to that is the Greyrigg rail disasters (more on that in a bit). The trouble is you need to understand the difference between the London underground and the wider rail network. London underground is a small urban/slightly suburban network (in terms of the national rail network). You are never too far away from a station, road, emergency service access or the emergency services them self. Even the longest stretch under ground is just over 3 miles. On the national network there are whole stretches miles away from emergency service access and in difficult terrain. The Greyrigg derailment was a train carrying 500 people jack-knifed of the track causing 1 death, 30 serious/life threatening injuries and 58 other injuries (recorded). It was in a remote area. Because of the remote area the rescue involved RAF helicopters, mountain rescue, International Rescue Corps and tractors from local farms to tow all the emergency vehicles that were stuck in the difficult terrain. Imagine in such a remote place how far/long normal emergency services were away even if there was good access? The driver of that train broke his neck and was jammed in the wreckage. In cab communication was dead and he was drifting in and out of consciousness. So would you like to be on a train with 500+ people on board many serious injured, possibly you too, where the only member of staff (the driver) is incapacitated or dead? Who will carry out the correct emergency reporting procedure? Who will get a line block from the signaller straight away to prevent other trains smashing into yours? Who on the train has the relevant route knowledge (as train crew are trained to know) to know where you exactly are, even in the dark? Who will manage a safe train evacuation? Who will carry out the railway emergency protection protocol to prevent other trains being involved (if no contact with signaller can be made)? Who would even know how to get hold of the singnaller/signal centre ASAP in an emergency? So now do you see the need for at the very least a fully trained safety critical guard with full route knowledge on board mainline trains and why driver only trains are a bad idea? The mainline is very different from a urban/suburban area where access to and the emergency services them self are never more than a few minutes away. " What if the guard was also incapacitated by the event? | |||
