Snap General Election Announced Today

[craegDAMH]

 

I just want the state to fix the roads, run the schools and hospitals and, beyond that, fuck off out my way. I don't want the state heavily involved in all aspects of my life (eg the state taking me to work on public transport).

 

How often does 'the state' get in your way?

[robbojunior]

 

Well if it is indeed shit just now, I can assure you its less shit that it was.

 

Imo transport would be better if it was more widespread, better integrated and more efficient. On the last point think "automation".

This point has already been made to you but I'll make it again. When the trains were privatised they went to complete shit. The only reason they are now even semi decent is because they re-nationalised Railtrack. And the one train operator in recent times that was nationalised when the private operator pulled out, out performed every private operator in all aspects and turned a profit for government. So there's a very good argument for renationalisation.

 

Saying ah it was shit before is not a sound political argument.

[spamspamspam]

 

In my example - its been done before and it was shit. Most folk can learn the lesson. Nobody wanting to be taken seriously says "Remember that thing we did that was shit? Well, lets go and do that again."

 

Politics has progressed way beyond the things he talks about.

 

How do you find the publically owned transport system when you visit the Netherlands?

[beer gut]

Big Corbo absolutely dominated that debate tonight.

 

Second debate in a week where a tory answer has been met with a mixture of loud jeers, boos, and laughter.

Did he fuck. Nobody dominated anything. The laugh is every party will be saying the won today. It happens after every debate.

 

The debate was shite IMO. We didn't really learn anything new. They all talked over each other. The chairwoman was useless. The questions didn't really relate to the big issues.

 

Personally i feel the these debates should be between Corbyn and May only. Or at the most Farron, Corbyn, May and Nuttall so at least their is a balanced panel. The rest are just a waste of time. What is the point in having the green party, plaid cymru and the SNP on there.?

 

The debate where the audience asked the PM and corbyn questions was much better.

[spamspamspam]

Did he fuck. Nobody dominated anything. The laugh is every party will be saying the won today. It happens after every debate.

 

The debate was shite IMO. We didn't really learn anything new. They all talked over each other. The chairwoman was useless. The questions didn't really relate to the big issues.

 

Personally i feel the these debates should be between Corbyn and May only. Or at the most Farron, Corbyn, May and Nuttall so at least their is a balanced panel. The rest are just a waste of time. What is the point in having the green party, plaid cymru and the SNP on there.?

 

The debate where the audience asked the PM and corbyn questions was much better.

 

 

Like it or not the SNP are the third largest party in Westminster. They'd have more right than the Lib Dems to be in any culled debate format, it wouldnt reflect the UK voting public as a whole but then thats the democracy we live in.

 

I agree with you though on the rest, we learned nothing new. Farron came across well but it wont help his party, May lost by her absence but Corbyn failed to take any real advantage from it.

 

The C4/Sky Q&A a couple of days ago was the ideal opportunity for May to step up to the plate and actually debate her policies with the opposition, she refused. Instead she just sat and said strong,stable, leadership and brexit in multiple orders 1000 times in the hope it deflected from her refusal to rule out increasing both NI and tax, the cancellation of 80%+ of winter fuel payments and the blatant grab of houses from people with no clue as to what this cap that isnt the same cap as they said they were definitely not putting in place but a completely different cap that wont look like that cap at all will actually be.

 

She knows that if she is seriously challenged by any of the opposition on her policies and her previous record both as Home Secretary and PM live on TV she'll lose the election. She's hoping that people vote for her soundbites and believe what the Sun and Sky tell them to rather than dig into what she'll do with the power once she has it.

[360]

The debate where the audience asked the PM and corbyn questions was much better.

 

Was that the one where May's "answers" were met with a mixture of loud jeers, boos, and laughter?

[beer gut]

 

Was that the one where May's "answers" were met with a mixture of loud jeers, boos, and laughter?

Think that's every debate to be fair

[Henry]

 

 

Additionally, I just want the state to fix the roads, run the schools and hospitals and, beyond that, fuck off out my way. I don't want the state heavily involved in all aspects of my life (eg the state taking me to work on public transport).

 

 

But you're happy for the Catholic Church to tell you where and when you can deposit your spunk?

[vanderark14]

 

 

But you're happy for the Catholic Church to tell you where and when you can deposit your spunk?

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

How often does 'the state' get in your way?

 

I am not claiming to be some oppressed individual, but we must resist creeping state influence.

The state apparatus is to be a service provider, not an intrusive overlord.

 

If I am going to use public transport, id rather that was between me and a transport company. I don't see a requirement for politicians in the mix (they would only make an arse of it anyway).

[Clydeside_Sheep]

This point has already been made to you but I'll make it again. When the trains were privatised they went to complete shit. The only reason they are now even semi decent is because they re-nationalised Railtrack. And the one train operator in recent times that was nationalised when the private operator pulled out, out performed every private operator in all aspects and turned a profit for government. So there's a very good argument for renationalisation.

 

Saying ah it was shit before is not a sound political argument.

 

They didn't go to shit, as the passenger level trends clearly show.

 

No-one wanted anything to do with trains, when johnny big-baws the union man held sway.

 

 

We should be careful of Governments and profits, the Government is supposed to run the country / public services, making profit isn't / shouldn't be a concern to it.

 

Ultimately, the public want to use trains unencumbered by johnny big-baws the union man, who will only use them as pawns in his campaign of strikes over the fact the tea-machine isn't working in the canteen.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

How do you find the publically owned transport system when you visit the Netherlands?

 

We already touched on this.

 

The largest rail carrier in the netherlands is a private company, which the Government owns. Its not a nationalised company as is normally suggested by "public ownership".

 

The fact that they didnt force the nationalisation of the company is very indicative.

 

FYI I think its pretty good and certainly better than it would be if it was a nationalised company.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

 

But you're happy for the Catholic Church to tell you where and when you can deposit your spunk?

 

In fact it is the natural function of spunk, and the purposes inherent therein, which clearly indicate where it should be properly deposited.

 

That the Catholic Church is able to see this clearly is no more outrageous than e.g. a petrol station expecting you to put the petrol safely in the tank of your car, as opposed to pissing it all over the forecourt.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

 

FFS VDA - easily impressed!

 

Have you seen his wooden bat with the ball attached with elastic?

[manboobs109]

 

We already touched on this.

 

The largest rail carrier in the netherlands is a private company, which the Government owns. Its not a nationalised company as is normally suggested by "public ownership".

 

The fact that they didnt force the nationalisation of the company is very indicative.

 

FYI I think its pretty good and certainly better than it would be if it was a nationalised company.

Why can't our trains be run by a company owned by the government(nationalised)?

[Foster14]

 

We already touched on this.

 

The largest rail carrier in the netherlands is a private company, which the Government owns. Its not a nationalised company as is normally suggested by "public ownership".

 

The fact that they didnt force the nationalisation of the company is very indicative.

 

FYI I think its pretty good and certainly better than it would be if it was a nationalised company.

 

What part of being owned by the government doesn't make it nationalised?

[buchanskii]

I thought the reason that more people have been using trains was because there are more people living in Britain and more people working in cities where driving is not worth the hassle.

 

All this talk of privatization being the reason is capitalist propaganda.

[beer gut]

How many folk on here actually use the train on a daily basis? Labour want rail Nationalised because that's what the trade unions want. It has fuck all to do with whats best for passengers.

[craegDAMH]

 

I am not claiming to be some oppressed individual, but we must resist creeping state influence.

The state apparatus is to be a service provider, not an intrusive overlord.

 

If I am going to use public transport, id rather that was between me and a transport company. I don't see a requirement for politicians in the mix (they would only make an arse of it anyway).

 

I agree, services like public transport.

[robbojunior]

 

They didn't go to shit, as the passenger level trends clearly show.

 

No-one wanted anything to do with trains, when johnny big-baws the union man held sway.

 

 

We should be careful of Governments and profits, the Government is supposed to run the country / public services, making profit isn't / shouldn't be a concern to it.

 

Ultimately, the public want to use trains unencumbered by johnny big-baws the union man, who will only use them as pawns in his campaign of strikes over the fact the tea-machine isn't working in the canteen.

 

Your proof that train travel improved after privatisation is passenger numbers increased?

 

Don't be a simpleton.

[fatjim]

Did he fuck. Nobody dominated anything. The laugh is every party will be saying the won today. It happens after every debate.

 

The debate was shite IMO. We didn't really learn anything new. They all talked over each other. The chairwoman was useless. The questions didn't really relate to the big issues.

 

Personally i feel the these debates should be between Corbyn and May only. Or at the most Farron, Corbyn, May and Nuttall so at least their is a balanced panel. The rest are just a waste of time. What is the point in having the green party, plaid cymru and the SNP on there.?

 

The debate where the audience asked the PM and corbyn questions was much better.

 

 

Why Nuttal? UKIP don't even have any MPs anymore. At least the Green Party have an MP.

[fatjim]

 

mate im not saying im a political genius

 

I just think it COULD be simplified down

 

Don't worry Frankie. It's not exclusive to politics.

[dave_min]

mate im not saying im a political genius

I am SHOCKED by this statement.

[beer gut]

 

 

Why Nuttal? UKIP don't even have any MPs anymore. At least the Green Party have an MP.

Mostly for balance. 2 left wing vs 2 right wing.

[dave_min]

 

I am not claiming to be some oppressed individual, but we must resist creeping state influence.

The state apparatus is to be a service provider, not an intrusive overlord.

 

If I am going to use public transport, id rather that was between me and a transport company. I don't see a requirement for politicians in the mix (they would only make an arse of it anyway).

Aye, because there's no private transport companies in France, Germany or the Netherlands.

[spamspamspam]

 

We already touched on this.

 

The largest rail carrier in the netherlands is a private company, which the Government owns. Its not a nationalised company as is normally suggested by "public ownership".

 

The fact that they didnt force the nationalisation of the company is very indicative.

 

FYI I think its pretty good and certainly better than it would be if it was a nationalised company.

 

The government own the network and issue licences to NS to operate on the main lines. There is no competition, it is a licence which is paid for and which means RIT doesnt have to be subsidised too much by the government, what is can then be recouped and the rail network is kept up to date and expanded when needed.

The government decide what happens, how the network of trains, trams and busses interconnect and have a huge say in the timetables by making the likes of HS promise to offer certain services and timetables as part of their licence.

With that they have better trains, tram services in most large towns and cities and a reliable and timely bus service.

Its fast, cheap, reliable, clean, well run and well used.

 

I could travel from my house in Scheveningen to Schiphol in comfort and it would take just over an hour for 13 euro, £11.50. Journey wise thats the equivalent of Leith to Glasgow airport which would take 2 hours 30 minutes on shite buses, train changes, walking and cost £20.

 

The Dutch government has much more control over its public transport network than Westminster or Holyrood has or can have because of the way it set up its network and runs its infrastructure. They were going to go down the same route as us but decided the network and the public would suffer. They were right, we were wrong. Their network is far better than ours because of the government involvement.

 

When the government here took one of the networks under public ownership it flourished.

 

Public services run by the government will be nothing like they were in the 70's. They'd be run like businesses but with the backing of the country's purse. I doubt anyone would want to see a return of grumpian trunsport and their 40 year old buses that never turned up or weegiewheels with the buses sliding backwards down the hills but when you look around Europe and see the services the Germans, Dutch, Belgians and French enjoy compared to ours its an embarrassment.

[spamspamspam]

 

What part of being owned by the government doesn't make it nationalised?

 

Its more of a partnership than complete public ownership. the government is in the driving seat though and has a very large say in how the entire thing is run.

 

 

How many folk on here actually use the train on a daily basis? Labour want rail Nationalised because that's what the trade unions want. It has fuck all to do with whats best for passengers.

 

If you had trams, trains and buses that could get you to work in a quarter of the time and at half the price you'd use them. Instead we have a bus service that takes 2 hours to get from BoD to Dyce (4 miles)

People would rather drive from Aberdeen to Glasgow because it takes the same length of time, costs slightly less in petrol and is much more convenient. If we had a network that meant you saved time and money and it was clean and comfortable you'd use that instead.

[fatjim]

Mostly for balance. 2 left wing vs 2 right wing.

 

I accept that but Nuttal offered very little to the debate.

 

He had a shocker.

[spamspamspam]

 

I am not claiming to be some oppressed individual, but we must resist creeping state influence.

The state apparatus is to be a service provider, not an intrusive overlord.

 

If I am going to use public transport, id rather that was between me and a transport company. I don't see a requirement for politicians in the mix (they would only make an arse of it anyway).

 

Does the same go for all the services you use?

 

What about the internet?

[fatjim]

 

HAHA

 

I am however, a life genius

 

genie ass