spooky3 Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Bombardier is the only rail manufacturer with a British factory, with both design and build happening there. Well I know who gets my vote then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puisseguin Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 http://www.railjournal.com/newsflash/british-government-confirms-8-billion-investment-in-rail.html In no articles can I see anything mentioning repayment. It all states investment. To boot, it looks like the contracts will go to either Bombardier or Siemens, how British are these, or are the government giving large contracts to foreign companies again? You don't need to look to hard Richard Scott Transport correspondent, BBC News... The possible 10.8% increase in season ticket costs will not be welcomed by commuters. It's a formula that's set by government though, not train companies. And for every fare which rises by 5% more than the 5.8% average, another has to rise by 5% less (so 0.8% in this case). In other words the fare rises have to balance to make the 5.8% average. It's also weighted so train companies can't increase fares on busy routes and cut them on quiet ones. The increases are part of the plan to shift more of the burden of railway costs to the fare payer. Currently costs are shared by taxpayer and fare payer - the long-term objective is for fare payers to meet 75% of the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aries22 Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 None, they make the taxpayer pay for something that is working at a loss, not a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent Orange Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Is the cheap flight to Barcelona with a nationalised airline then? No it's not. I was pointing out the distance versus cost madness of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 You don't need to look to hard Richard Scott Transport correspondent, BBC News... The possible 10.8% increase in season ticket costs will not be welcomed by commuters. It's a formula that's set by government though, not train companies. And for every fare which rises by 5% more than the 5.8% average, another has to rise by 5% less (so 0.8% in this case). In other words the fare rises have to balance to make the 5.8% average. It's also weighted so train companies can't increase fares on busy routes and cut them on quiet ones. The increases are part of the plan to shift more of the burden of railway costs to the fare payer. Currently costs are shared by taxpayer and fare payer - the long-term objective is for fare payers to meet 75% of the cost. Not to be paid back though? Still only benefiting rail users! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Energy and public transport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted November 26, 2010 Author Share Posted November 26, 2010 None, they make the taxpayer pay for something that is working at a loss, not a good idea. Energy firms aren't working at a loss. Bumper profits every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 I can't believe that people still assume that government can run businesses efficiently, if anything has been learnt from the last 13 years it's that government run public services are by nature inefficient. If the power and water companies were nationalised we'd be paying twice, once through our bills and once through our taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treatment Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Gas, Electricity and Water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 I can't believe that people still assume that government can run businesses efficiently, if anything has been learnt from the last 13 years it's that government run public services are by nature inefficient. If the power and water companies were nationalised we'd be paying twice, once through our bills and once through our taxes. We pay private sector providers twice as well, through bills. Bailouts and subsidies. The only difference is with private sector suppliers is we also pay their shareholders to make a profit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.