State ownership of companies

[Obelix]

Plenty of countries have an army with no nuclear weapons. As it stands we have loads of nuclear weapons.

We dont have to invest in trident

 

We don't have "loads" of nuclear weapons. We have less than 200 warheads and a single delivery system which is going out of date. Unless we invest in the next delivery system we don't have a way of using the small number of warheads we have.

 

The issue is we are fighting an unreasonable foe. It might be a case 'talks' are not possible.

 

You admit we are fighting an unreasonable foe that could easily build a nuclear device, that are perfectly willing to die inglouriously in a suicide run... and you think we should get rid of the only deterrence we have against that?

 

So we get rid of Trident, and ISIS decides to spend three months building a gun assembly bomb that they drive into London.... it's rather trivially easy to build a working bomb you know....

 

The need for a credible deterrence has never been greater. Putin is getting even more authoritarian, we have fundamentalists agitating all over the place, and the world is becoming more unstable....

 

Getting rid of Trident is an astoundingly bad move.

[unbeliever]

Not just trident. But its clear that government prioritises this more than say paying nurses a good wage.

 

So now that you don't have your imaginary £3.7 billion/year from Trident and other defence cuts, where are you going to get the money for the nurses?

 

 

go on read up on it, i dont have the time...

 

I have. You haven't. If you have no idea then I suggest you don't talk like you do.

[Obelix]

I'm still seriously struggling to believe that hs2 is in any way a solution to either the time or capacity problems it's touted as.

 

For the cost of HS2 you could raise very bridge on the WCML, redo the electrics and buy double deck trains....

 

Or extend the platforms and put on 12 coach trains.

 

Or possibly even do both....

 

Certainly you can solve the capacity problems.

[psynuk]

I'm not being funny but nurses do get paid a good wage, I'ts not an awesome wage, but it's not bad. It is a basic starting wage for -with due respect- a job that practically anybody with a handful of brain cells could be trained to do.

There's a strange thing of putting nhs staff up on a pedestal.

 

flame away

[TJC1]

 

Getting rid of Trident is an astoundingly bad move.

 

we never going to agree on this. vote for it at the next GE. I will be voting for whoever wants to scrap it.

 

---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 13:45 ----------

 

 

I have. You haven't. If you have no idea then I suggest you don't talk like you do.

 

so why are you asking me where it goes? what times?

 

---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 13:46 ----------

 

I'm not being funny but nurses do get paid a good wage, I'ts not an awesome wage, but it's not bad. It is a basic starting wage for -with due respect- a job that practically anybody with a handful of brain cells could be trained to do.

There's a strange thing of putting nhs staff up on a pedestal.

 

flame away

 

you agree that you need to do a degree and professional training?

its not an unskilled position.

[unbeliever]

For the cost of HS2 you could raise very bridge on the WCML, redo the electrics and buy double deck trains....

 

Or extend the platforms and put on 12 coach trains.

 

Or possibly even do both....

 

Certainly you can solve the capacity problems.

 

Wouldn't you also have to upgrade the track and signalling?

I'm actually asking. I have vague recollections from years ago that the state of the track places serious limits on our rail capacity, but I can't find where from.

 

---------- Post added 11-08-2015 at 13:50 ----------

 

 

so why are you asking me where it goes? what times?

 

 

Because you defended it as good for UK productivity and I wanted to expose the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Job done.

[TJC1]

 

Because you defended it as good for UK productivity and I wanted to expose the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Job done.

 

so cutting train journeys in half between uk major business hubs is not aiding productivity?...you really are clueless.

[unbeliever]

so cutting train journeys in half between uk major business hubs is not aiding productivity?...you really are clueless.

 

Ah. Some numbers, sort of. From where to where are train journeys to be "cut in half"?

[TJC1]

Ah. Some numbers, sort of. From where to where are train journeys to be "cut in half"?

 

Travel time of 45 minutes between Birmingham and London, down from the current 83 minutes.

Travel time of 38 minutes between Birmingham Interchange Station and London from the current 70 minutes.

Travel times of 41 minutes between Birmingham and Manchester (reduced from 90 minutes) and 57 minutes between Birmingham and Leeds (reduced from two hours).

[Obelix]

Wouldn't you also have to upgrade the track and signalling?

I'm actually asking. I have vague recollections from years ago that the state of the track places serious limits on our rail capacity, but I can't find where from

 

The actual double deck coaches are not much bigger than current ones - you don't have width problems so curves are still feasible without rework.

 

You have to lift the catenary by a bit, so bridges need jacking up, some tunnels will need reworking. The track though would have the same loading, and trains at the same speed (remember with colour lights you can run block signalling at 140mph). So there would be no track infrastructure needed, just overhead stuff.