Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Abstra

A 250 Mph Train.

Recommended Posts

Pipe dreams.

Yes, its all very nice that the two dozen or so people who want to live in Edinburgh but work in London are being thought of, but its not like its top priority. They should move closer to where they work. That is sustainable. Environmentally and economically.

The sums involved in high speed rail are obscene, more so when you think that air travel does only not require subsidies, but actually produces a fair amount of tax.

If they must invest in rail, invest where its workable, as in big cities, keep improving and increasing the underground.

I know that there are these (mostly leftist, although the tories do seem to be paying lip service to this rubbish also) politicians and lobbyists who think a countries greatness can be measured in how many hundreds of miles an hour its trains can go, but they are dangerous ideologues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's rubbish! Everytime somebody has the great idea of taking you somewhere really fast, it's crap!

Just look at the poor buffet service they had on the Apollo missions! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

200mph trains are common in Europe been on them a couple of times, very reasonable fares, wide comfortable seats with tables, large windows, optional film shows and music with free head phones, free papers, clean modern toilets, and good buffet bar...... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

200mph trains are common in Europe been on them a couple of times, very reasonable fares, wide comfortable seats with tables, large windows, optional film shows and music with free head phones, free papers, clean modern toilets, and good buffet bar...... :)

and thats just Le Metro!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and thats just Le Metro!

Forgot to add if talking about the underground......air conditioning and you can use your mobile phone underground. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to add if talking about the underground......air conditioning and you can use your mobile phone underground. ;)

After 8PM, others can use your mobile and wallet too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pipe dreams.

Yes, its all very nice that the two dozen or so people who want to live in Edinburgh but work in London are being thought of, but its not like its top priority. They should move closer to where they work. That is sustainable. Environmentally and economically.

The sums involved in high speed rail are obscene, more so when you think that air travel does only not require subsidies, but actually produces a fair amount of tax.

If they must invest in rail, invest where its workable, as in big cities, keep improving and increasing the underground.

I know that there are these (mostly leftist, although the tories do seem to be paying lip service to this rubbish also) politicians and lobbyists who think a countries greatness can be measured in how many hundreds of miles an hour its trains can go, but they are dangerous ideologues.

There is not one statement in that post I agree with or even think is actually true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should try reading it then.

Sigh.

Yes, its all very nice that the two dozen or so people who want to live in Edinburgh but work in London are being thought of, but its not like its top priority. They should move closer to where they work. That is sustainable. Environmentally and economically.

And Glasgow, Liverpool, Birmingham and Manchester are cities of no consequence?  :rolleyes: Millions more people can't move to the South East, that isn't sustainable economically or environmentally.

The sums involved in high speed rail are obscene, more so when you think that air travel does only not require subsidies, but actually produces a fair amount of tax.

Air travel gets every tax break running, if it was taxed as any other industry the subsidy would amount to 10 billion a year or thereabouts. They don't even pay tax on aviation fuel. Rail requires subsidy to produce a profit, thanks to dangerous Tory ideologues who take the view that providing a service to the British people is disgusting and vile, whereas providing a poor service to the British people but enriching tax residents of Bermuda is entirely acceptable.

If they must invest in rail, invest where its workable, as in big cities, keep improving and increasing the underground.

This isn't "workable" and the costs are massive compared to high speed rail. Underground systems are a moneypit of the highest order. If you simply closed the London Underground for a decade you'd save enough money on maintenance alone to build HS2, operate HS2 and still have about 10 billion in your pocket.

I know that there are these (mostly leftist, although the tories do seem to be paying lip service to this rubbish also) politicians and lobbyists who think a countries greatness can be measured in how many hundreds of miles an hour its trains can go, but they are dangerous ideologues.

You're being just plain weird here. "Leftist" is an American term, I'm not sure what it means here (perhaps you can explain) but its generally been Tories who have been interested in high speed rail since the 1970s. The only people who need fear it are residents of London who expect to be overpaid merely for living in London. The 11 next largest cities in the country all support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Glasgow, Liverpool, Birmingham and Manchester are cities of no consequence?  :rolleyes: Millions more people can't move to the South East, that isn't sustainable economically or environmentally.

If they want to build commuter trains in and out of those cities that's their business; but building hundreds of miles of high-speed rail so people can commute from Edinburgh to London every day is insane. This kind of waste of money on idiotic left-wing scams is the reason why Britain is bankrupt.

Air travel gets every tax break running,

LOL. Last time I flew in and out of Britain most of the cost of my ticket was tax.

They don't even pay tax on aviation fuel.

Railways and buses in Britain get to reclaim most or all of their fuel tax, yet they're still far more expensive than driving in a car which is paying 300% tax on its fuel.

Rail requires subsidy to produce a profit, thanks to dangerous Tory ideologues who take the view that providing a service to the British people is disgusting and vile, whereas providing a poor service to the British people but enriching tax residents of Bermuda is entirely acceptable.

Rail is unprofitable because it's an expensive boondoggle that's trying to solve 21st century problems with 19th century technology, and high-speed rail is an insanely expensive boondoggle. Rail has enormous fixed costs due to the amount of rail you have to maintain, and increasing speeds greatly increases that cost; if you have one problem with the rail at 250mph you have a derailment that will kill dozens of people.

If it ever does come about you can be sure that the construction costs will be several times the estimates and the government will end up massively subsidsing the train companies. Which will indeed make it the 'Concorde of trains'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK

The sums involved in high speed rail are obscene, more so when you think that air travel does only not require subsidies, but actually produces a fair amount of tax.

Airlines are indeed subsidised by the lack of tax on aviation fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it more like 100% tax for private fuel? Bus companies can currently reclaim all of their fuel duty but that's coming to an end soon - expect bus fares to skyrocket.

Actually, you're right: looks like it's now down to about 120% tax; but that's due to the rise in the cost of oil and the collapse in the value of the pound, not due to tax reductions.

So what is your fantastic intercity transport solution then?

I don't need one 'fantastic intercity transport solution', because I don't believe in central planning. Just eliminate the taxes and subsidies and see what's left after a few years, that will tell you what the solution is... which would likely be cars, coaches and planes.

But there's also an implicit belief in your question that intercity transport is a good thing in itself. Why is having people commuting hundreds of miles a day supposed to be a good idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Airlines are indeed subsidised by the lack of tax on aviation fuel.

Lack of taxes is not a subsidy. And, as I pointed out above, 'public transport' does not have to pay fuel tax; if it's true that is coming to an end, then expect bus and train fares to rise to levels that no-one can afford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of taxes is not a subsidy. And, as I pointed out above, 'public transport' does not have to pay fuel tax; if it's true that is coming to an end, then expect bus and train fares to rise to levels that no-one can afford.

Well we will all have to stay put and vegetate, good for the economy, not.....also good excuse to met and make friends/business with our neighbours... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest X-QUORK

Lack of taxes is not a subsidy.

When everybody else pays tax on their fuel it certainly looks like one though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Air travel gets every tax break running, if it was taxed as any other industry the subsidy would amount to 10 billion a year or thereabouts. They don't even pay tax on aviation fuel.

Not imposing a tax is not the same thing as giving a subsidy. And besides, you don't have to pay a flat fee of £85 for every person who makes a long-distance car journey. By your logic, you should also have pointed out that rail passengers don't even pay VAT on their tickets.

Rail requires subsidy to produce a profit, thanks to dangerous Tory ideologues who take the view that providing a service to the British people is disgusting and vile, whereas providing a poor service to the British people but enriching tax residents of Bermuda is entirely acceptable because it's a fundamentally obsolete and uneconomic form of transport technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't need one 'fantastic intercity transport solution', because I don't believe in central planning. Just eliminate the taxes and subsidies and see what's left after a few years, that will tell you what the solution is... which would likely be cars, coaches and planes.

Get rid of all those "centrally planned" roads as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail may be faster than a car but when you consider the whole journey including getting to the station and getting to the location from the destination station it works out much longer.

Newcastle to London takes about 6-7 hours unless you live and want to get to somewhere very close to both stations. By car the same trip is roughly 4h long.

Better yet, in the car you end up paying about £20 in taxes for the trip, via rail everyone seems to make a loss.

Air travil is very successful because unlike cars or trains you don’t need to spend billions on the roads or rails to allow them to work. They can be utilised fully as planes can be diverted to locations that need them but roads and rail lines cannot be moved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail may be faster than a car but when you consider the whole journey including getting to the station and getting to the location from the destination station it works out much longer.

Newcastle to London takes about 6-7 hours unless you live and want to get to somewhere very close to both stations. By car the same trip is roughly 4h long.

London KX to Newcastle, on the train, is usually under 3.5 hours. You must have gone via Aberystwith!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thought of sitting on a train whipping along at 250mph actually does not appeal. Drivers have made mistakes when passing stop signals at 20mph in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Newcastle to London takes about 6-7 hours unless you live and want to get to somewhere very close to both stations. By car the same trip is roughly 4h long.

Only if you're going from, say, Watford to a final destination in Gateshead just off the A1.

On average traffic it takes me almost exactly five hours to drive from my home in the city centre of York, to my relatives in Motspur Park, South London, via A64-M1-North Circular-Chiswick-Barnes-Roehampton-A3 (takes longer via M25 unless in the middle of the night due to Heathrow congestion). About 30 minutes of that is from my home to the start of the motorway, and an hour from the end of the motorway through the London suburbs. If I lived on the western outskirts in York and was travelling to a north London suburb rather than a south London one, that would take about an hour and a half off the journey time.

So to a certain extent the same thing applies to road travel as with rail travel: a significant proportion of a long distance trip's total time is taken up getting to and from the high speed facility on local ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rail may be faster than a car but when you consider the whole journey including getting to the station and getting to the location from the destination station it works out much longer.

Newcastle to London takes about 6-7 hours unless you live and want to get to somewhere very close to both stations. By car the same trip is roughly 4h long.

Better yet, in the car you end up paying about £20 in taxes for the trip, via rail everyone seems to make a loss.

Air travil is very successful because unlike cars or trains you don't need to spend billions on the roads or rails to allow them to work. They can be utilised fully as planes can be diverted to locations that need them but roads and rail lines cannot be moved.

Agreed. I used to do Romford => Leicester via St Pancras but by the time I'd faffed with Romford to Liverpool Street, then the tube, to St Pancras, I found I could be in Leicester by car via M25 / M1. Then there is the cost and complexity of train tickets. I now do Huddersfield => London once a month, and I can do this on less than a tankfull of deisel (Citroen C5) less than £60 a trip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 260 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.