Rail fares rise above inflation rate.
- Thread starter gothic_hobbit
- Start date
It's obvious that rail fares rise - I think most people accept this. The issue is that they are set to rise above inflation and not everyone is in a position to ask for a pay increase to cover it, even of they work in London, therefore people will be worse off and this will hurt spending and the economy.
In estebanreys world people would be limited to the locale in which they live because he doesnt want to subsidise commuters, even though the subsidy covers the whole country and not just certain groups. This scenario would be even better for the economy because all local towns are thriving with work and the cost of living across the country is the same for everyone, right?
Oh and because there is tonnes of free space in London and its cheap to live there, we should all pile in there if we want a reasonable quality of life and stimulating work, otherwise tough, we have to work locally and have a limited future (depending on our area of work and the local employement in the area).
In estebanreys world people would be limited to the locale in which they live because he doesnt want to subsidise commuters, even though the subsidy covers the whole country and not just certain groups. This scenario would be even better for the economy because all local towns are thriving with work and the cost of living across the country is the same for everyone, right?
Oh and because there is tonnes of free space in London and its cheap to live there, we should all pile in there if we want a reasonable quality of life and stimulating work, otherwise tough, we have to work locally and have a limited future (depending on our area of work and the local employement in the area).
Last edited:
Virgin is sending the lawyers...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19402133
I can understand Virgin's annoyance when the DfT haven't clearify, supposedly after 3 weeks on the process transparency. Worst is when First Group undercut their offer with what everyone generally feel it's higher risk.
If the current Franchise is running fine, does the government really need to change it because the paper figures looks nicer?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19402133
BBC said:
I can understand Virgin's annoyance when the DfT haven't clearify, supposedly after 3 weeks on the process transparency. Worst is when First Group undercut their offer with what everyone generally feel it's higher risk.
If the current Franchise is running fine, does the government really need to change it because the paper figures looks nicer?
Man of Honour
I can't help but feeling more than a few people in Westminster have mates at First Group....
The Government makes more money this way, they don't care about commuters.
They spin charging them more as acting in their interest along the lines of investment. All that happens is the investment doesn't happen, and if the profit margin cannot be maintained the company hand the responsbility back to the state.
Win win lose. Government/Business/Consumers.
I wish Virgin all the best of luck with their legal action and refusual to accept this dodgy practice.