Forum menu
Or lease them as now whilst building a load of new ones. New units will keep the Roscos honest.
Article 1 protocol 1 of ECHR prevents governments seizing property without compensation
Leaving aside the problems pointed out with your misrepresentation already. They could borrow a policy from the Maybot and exit the ECHR.
Just harking back to the squabble over Marx on the earlier pages, THIS Youtube links is only 8-9 minutes and is a worthwhile and fairly balanced examination of Marx's ideas and where they have relevance today.
just watched it and it's just as obvious that that system won't work in the real world.
It seems to me the best way forward is to encourage some sort of shared ownership within companies - like Waitrose/John Lewis or even more so. Everyone seems pretty happy working there.
Give companies tax advantages to structure themselves like that.
I'm loving fans of Brexit saying that Labours plans are economically risky
a lot more risky than brexit, by a long way.
just watched it and it's just as obvious that that system won't work in the real world.
Have you listened to it? Or just watched it? There is no "system" proposed or discussed in the video.
Including the well known coastal city of Birmingham.
its to do with the Grand Union redevlopment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icknield_Port_Loop
which has been kicking about for a while, tho i think the faesibility study will not get far!
as a scientist who lives in milton keynes, works in london and collabrorates with labs in oxford and cambridge the Science Vale Transport Arc is something im ver keen on
Is Corbyn for or against Brexit now? I've lost track.
TurnerGuy - Member
a lot more risky than brexit, by a long way.
care to quantify that or is it just a feeling
definitely not riskier than leaving the worlds largest trading block that we joined as the sick man of europe 🙄
Thanks, Kimbers. Makes sense as canals.
Same as May
a lot more risky than brexit, by a long way.
You should have a read about Brexit and the implications, it's interesting in a "WTF are we thinking?" kind of way.
My take on that is that he doesn't like the undemocratic aspects of the current EU, but is in favour of a union of European countries.corroded - MemberIs Corbyn for or against Brexit now? I've lost track.
I believe he genuinely decided that staying and reforming was the better option at the referendum, but that might be me being naive.
It's become very complicated since the referendum, as it showed that many core labour voters had voted for brexit. I don't think they've handled it very well, but it's also difficult to say exactly what they should have done in order to attract the most GE votes.
And remember, we would be in control of all these changes so can halt them/modify them to get what is required. No pesky 'unelected' EU 'bureaucrats' taking all our money and telling us what to do.
A Brexiters dream (although missing any immigrants to blame)
[s]Br[/s]Immingham Flashy
It's all well and good liking the manifesto. Let's say it has some appeal to those outside labours core vote. But at the moment its only words on paper, it would have to be delivered along with the 1,000's of other matters relating to government. How many voters believe Corbyn and his team are capable of all this ? I guess we'll find out on June 8th
How many voters believe Corbyn and his team are capable of all this ?
if only he had Mays track record....
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/theresa-mays-record-home-secretary-isnt-reassuring/#
Maybot will still win though
But at the moment its only words on paper
Well not quite.
It tells us that's what they WANT to do. They want to make the country a better place with all these social policies. Even if they don't manage it, they still want to.
The alternative is a government that apparently wants to asset-strip the country to keep taxes down and let rich people do the rest of us over.
But at the moment its only words on paper, it would have to be delivered along with the 1,000's of other matters relating to government. How many voters believe Corbyn and his team are capable of all this ?
All manifestos are just words on paper. The MPs don't actually do all of the work involved so whether Labour or Conservative things gets done by those in civil service etc,.
As molgrips says, the intent is key here and shows how they want it to be even if they don't fully get there.
dragon - MemberBased on the Guardians numbers that is going to cost £10billion a year, alone.
Funding for student loans, today, is done entirely by the state- the SLC does its borrowing at arms length through the government. Then in 30 years time (or less) at least half of the loan book (and growing fast) is written off or sold off for a fraction of its supposed value.
The £10bn figure manages to ignore both of these facts. It seems a fairly true cost but ignores the current cost, which is not how maths works.
gofasterstripes - Member
Where I live near the German/Dutch border, we're absolutely flooded with brand new trains, new track, new stations and even new pedestrian bridges over the tracks. Where's this money all coming from?
From the profits arriva makes?
Yes, back in the UK 😛
Who thinks the utilities, mail and railways should be nationalised then?
Yep on those. Especially utilities. The market doesn't work, is complicated and effectively an oligopoly.
I'm happy paying more to subside those that don't do very well out of the 'market' - the vulnerable and old etc.
We really don't need to be swapping all the time. It's a waste of time and effort to benefit those that can be bothered that can actually afford to pay a bit more.
For those claiming nationalised industries don't innovate - are you aware the post office invented one of the first computers in the 40s?
the post office invented one of the first computers in the 40s?
If you're referring to Colossus, there were some rather more pressing needs around at the time than delivering letters. PORS more civilian developments came later.
It was based on work he did whilst at the post office though.
The alternative is a government that apparently wants to asset-strip the country to keep taxes down and let rich people do the rest of us over.
Sounds like Labour under Blair and Brown - gold reserves, anyone?
For those claiming nationalised industries don't innovate - are you aware the post office invented one of the first computers in the 40s?
Babbage invented one of the world's first computers in the 1800's, plenty of individuals invent things while working for large companies, which often get put to one side because there's no use that the invention can be put to, or the monolithic management can see no use, so it ends up going to a private company that has the foresight to see a use.
I am old enough to remember when many industries were nationalised, and they were hopelessly inefficient due to the sclerotic nature of the management, would anyone like to buy an Austin Alegro? How about waiting months to have a telephone installed, and I'm loving the Rose-tinted view that people have of the nationalised railway system.
Then there were all the strikes, only being able to work so many hours a day or week, because the power would go off, and you can't do artwork or printing in the dark with no power, and being told you can't do your job because some union high-up with a s****y car and house says you can't, because then you'd be strike-breaking, and you never agreed to being in a union, but if you didn't join the firm would be blacked and you'd be out of a job, and you aren't being paid anyway...
I have a seriously jaundiced view of what some people think was some sort of golden age. 🙄
Sure, you can look that far back- or you can look at a more modern example, east coast rail. Which I just had the misfortune to book a ticket with for a trip to London for the first time since it was reprivatised, and paid about 50% more for the exact same service.
For those claiming nationalised industries don't innovate - are you aware the post office invented one of the first computers in the 40s?
Yes, it's frustrating isn't it. The state is often the innovator - private sector tends to package things up.
MRI body scanners or GPS anyone?
Trains. We've discussed before. Our service in this country is indeed poor (it was when state run too), it would be worse if nationalised / taken back into state ownership. Unions walking all over a Labour Government, picking needless fights with a Tory one etc etc.
Was east coast worse when nationalised?
Was the East Coast service worse when run by the state? By what metric/measurement?
Our railways are already under state ownership
it would be worse if nationalised / taken back into state ownership.
Proof?
it would be worse if nationalised / taken back into state ownership.
An truly incredible opinion coming from someone who lives in a country with such a fantastic and fully nationalised rail system, which is now running a couple of UK lines at a profit and effectively subsidising their own service.
jambalaya I have too have lived in both countries and used trains extesively all over both, the simple fact is that despite covering twice the land mass and having a trade union that makes the RMT look like the WI, SNCF works out significanty cheaper per km (and often much faster) when you factor/average out the uk's ridiculous 'airline ticket/earlybird/stupicdly high for last minute travel' system, and my opinion is that SNCF is simply superior in all aspects.
A long time since I was over there but I would have made a simliar same comparison between uk TOC's and Ferrovie Dello Stato 20 years ago too.
Quite liking the labour manifesto, now I'm deeply confused
jonnyboi - MemberQuite liking the labour manifesto, now I'm deeply confused
It's ok to be confused: if you lived in scandinavia it would look like a very 'vanilla' manifesto, firmly in the middle ground politically. Corbyn would be like the 'Hilary Benn' or even Ken Clark of parliament if he went to Finland tomorrow. We have one of the most RW press/media in Europe so what you are told from all corners is quite possibly at odds with your actual sense of right and wrong. Actually these are just like comparable and more popular policies all over the developed world (with the exception of the USA), not just with people who don't think they like Labour.
chestrockwell - MemberWas east coast worse when nationalised?
Remember, it's only OK to have publically owned infrastructure if it's a foreign government that owns it. We stupid British couldn't possibly do it as well as the famously efficient French.
@julian I commuted up to London every day for 25 years fyi, an expensive and generally crap experience. A good friend was involved in the Clapham disaster (not hurt physically) and the vast majority of those recommendations where ignored by Labour and Tory governments. For whatever reason our railways are poor
Quite liking the labour manifesto, now I'm deeply confused
That's the point of it isn't it - they can spout populist policies in a book of dreams with no fear that they will ever have to implement it
they can spout populist policies in a book of dreams with no fear that they will ever have to implement it
Why are we talking about Brexit again?
I have no issue with services being bought under public ownership. Using the trains as an example; if someone's going to turn a profit for providing a shit service better UK PLC than Branson or some French outfit. Having not read the manifesto, I'd like to know how he proposes to pay for it.
wrecker - MemberHaving not read the manifesto, I'd like to know how he proposes to pay for it.
East Coast, while under public ownership, made us money. I think we can afford that.
A few hundred trains is going to cost, and not all lines will be as profitable as the South coast which would likely subsidise the less busy/profitable ones. Where's the money going to come from?
wrecker - MemberA few hundred trains is going to cost
Why would they be buying a few hundred trains?
East Coast, while under public ownership, made us money
And we don't make money off the franchise fees?
Why would they be buying a few hundred trains?
How do you nationalise the service without the government taking ownership of the rolling stock?
How do you nationalise the service without the government taking ownership of the trains?
In stages, using your brain to work out when already signed contracts end and taking them back into public ownership at the end. Lease existing rolling stock and transfer when appropriate.
As for money from franchises do you have the total figures?