What has the UK become?

I hate what the UK’s become with a passion but right now the one thing I’m immensely grateful for is our NHS

SWMBO a week into a four week stay at the Christie.. they’ll be getting a donation cheque from the SKI fund for all they’ve done this year
 
I was on a delayed train in the 90s and some guy was saying how much better things would be under privatisation. I told him it would be worse and I actually had a piece published in a trade mag saying how competition couldn't really work with one company running the infrastructure, another owning the rolling stock and leasing it to operators, massive accountancy and legal costs dividing up revenue and attributing blame when things go wrong. I didn't know about coming up with a process for track changes that takes years [ https://www.railengineer.co.uk/grip-governance-for-railway-investment-projects-process-explained/ ] or for timetable changes with different companies' competing demands - the first manifestation was train companies running local services demanding to know why their trains should wait for another company's express at a junction.

It's a crazy system really.
There’s no question the train system could be a lot better and cheaper…and as you say the system seems crazy.

Whether a better run/conceived private system would be ultimately a better service than what British rail would offer is a pub debate, as you’d need to run two parallel operations on equal terms to truly know. I’m honestly not qualified to judge, so won’t pin my flag to either mast.
 
There’s no question the train system could be a lot better and cheaper…and as you say the system seems crazy.

Whether a better run/conceived private system would be ultimately a better service than what British rail would offer is a pub debate, as you’d need to run two parallel operations on equal terms to truly know. I’m honestly not qualified to judge, so won’t pin my flag to either mast.


Depends what your objective is ...is to make the most money ?Then the current model probably delivered that until COVID

Or Is it to delver an efficient service on behalf of the population .... then no . they are miles away
 
There’s no question the train system could be a lot better and cheaper…and as you say the system seems crazy.

Whether a better run/conceived private system would be ultimately a better service than what British rail would offer is a pub debate, as you’d need to run two parallel operations on equal terms to truly know. I’m honestly not qualified to judge, so won’t pin my flag to either mast.

I'd dispute that. It will be 30 years next year That rail privatisation in the UK began. To soften it up it was deprived of adequate funding for a number of years so to have experienced the old BR you'd probably have to be about 50. A lot of people and "political commentators" lazily parrot the stuff others are feeding them.

As for running 2 parallel services when private services hand the keys back because they are shit and not making any money the Govt does take over and when they do services improve as does customer satisfaction which is why they look to sell it off ASAP
 
There was a mindset, not quite extinct, that assumed anything in the private sector must be more efficient than the public sector.

This was a crock of shite from day 1. Apart from anything else, it depends on what you mean by 'efficient'.

However, we can now quote obvious examples of the failure of this spurious doctrine.

1. Railways. Disorganised, and more expensive, both to passenger and state.
2. Buses. So shite that even the Tories are allowing regulation again to minimise the fuck up.
3. Royal Mail. Shit service and vastly more expensive stamps.
4. Water. More expensive. Pours more shit than ever into rivers. Has failed to invest in infrastructure in favour of paying dividends.
Don't forget the power industry either. Fuel poverty was unheard of until the tories sold our power stations off. It was supposed to be a regulated competitive market that would ne beneficial for the consumer, price competition would keep prices down and allow choice for customers.....what a fucking pack of lies that was. Who's benefited? Certainly not 80 year old Joe Bollocks who can't afford to put his heating on or make a piece of toast, families with young kids who can't afford to put the oven or the heating in when it's -5 outside. A lot of twats are getting very rich out of this while a lot of people are suffering.
Privatisation = profits for the few and misery for the rest.
 
I know quite a lot of railway history. So I can tell you this - most of the old private companies never made a bean. (They survived because, oddly, there was a concept of public service that is quite extinct today, certainly in the private sector.) Dividends were often low or non-existent for decades. The Cambrian Railways, serving much of rural Wales, is a good example. Run on a shoestring with antique rolling stock, it was never going to make anyone rich. The people behind it were largely bigwigs with a concept of noblesse oblige. They ran the railway chiefly for the public good, although most of them had interests in Wales, such as landowning, so they benefited indirectly.

As statutory companies, they did not go bankrupt. The very worst that could happen was they were put into receivership under the supervision of the courts, either until someone took them over or they somehow managed to square the books and exit this status.

This was in the glory days before WWI when there was no effective competition unless you count the carrier's cart and coastal shipping. Everything went by rail, from newspapers to elephants.

The railways that did make money were few and far between. What they had in common was heavy goods and mineral traffic. The North Eastern, with a virtual monopoly of what was a very prosperous area at the time, was an example of a large, profitable company. The Taff Vale, which mainly existed to take coal to Cardiff Docks, is an example of a small one.

In all cases, passenger traffic was the icing on the cake, not the cake.

World War One effectively fucked this model. Our coal export business died for a start. Then, after the war, every Tom, Dick and Harry bought a war surplus lorry and started a road haulage business. From that, the present road haulage industry grew.

In short, the railways gradually lost all their most profitable traffic. It's a bit of an exaggeration to say that they were all basket cases by the end of WW2, but only a bit. The war and its aftermath propped them up for a while, but cheap oil and petrol soon ended that.

Anyway, with very rare exceptions, passenger traffic just is not profitable. Commuter traffic, which requires stock to sit in sidings for much of the day doing nowt, is particularly unremunerative.

The cold truth is that for national, social and political reasons, the railways need to be subsidised. And our train fares are less subsidised than most in Europe which is why the fares are so stupidly high.

Now, given that you are going to subsidise the service - or certainly the great majority of it - is there any advantage in giving that public money to private companies when we could give it to an industry that we own?

Privatisation has led to the ludicrous situation where one company runs the trains, another leases out the rolling stock, and a third (owned by the state!) provides the infrastructure. This is instead of an integrated structure! The inefficiencies should be obvious.

It also leads to the absurdity that the three trains an hour from Manchester to Sheffield are run by three different companies, with all the cheap tickets only valid on one. You have to pay more if you want to just travel on any train. How is that sane? It's more like something out of Alice in Wonderland. Under BR, with very rare exceptions, your ticket, however cheap, was valid by any train. You did not have to look at the livery of the coaches to work out whether you were allowed on.
 
Agreed that the railways was a bad idea. I'm not that sure about some of the others.

This is pretty much ancient stuff tho, guys. Govt can reign in the Electric and Gas companies if it wants, but modern Toryism takes Thatcher era "competition" mindset to mean everyone can do whatever they want. Bollocks.

And then rails against liberals. Liberal is one of those terms that is used as anyone feels like it, these days. RW's rail against Human Rights law as the work of 'Liberals'. But RW Tories who were anti-lockdown from the start called it an impingement on freedom. And we had to liberate ourselves from the EC. Liberalised, freedom... these two words overlap a lot. Social conservatives who want less control on alcohol and so on, cry freedom, and then you know all the ladies need to go back to the kitchen, and if the state could forcibly deport a load of coloured folk, or forcibly do anything to people like that, then, yeah! That's freedom! Complete bollocks.

Don't get me started on some of what we've seen from modern leftism. Frankly the debate is just a huge mess and turn off. Electorates are not easily led but it's definitely possible to mislead and confuse issues. That's the standard for modern PR. Don't win the argument. Just make it a fucking headache, total nonsense, confuse people. No effective or focused politics is ideal for friendly billionaires to do their business.

It's like Globalism. Yeah. Who ever really said that was a good thing? International trade? Sure. Can be amazingly effective. If it's organised and under the jurisdiction of institutions representing the common interest. So... we get rid of the EU membership. And now just deal with anyone who will have us. Undermine the UN regularly. And then get upset because there's no international deal tackling people who do work on the global scale moving money about to keep it out of the hands of Nations who demand fair payment for trade done on their good shores.

Complete backwards thinking. Like we're ten year olds or something. Can't protect our own interests, because of these bogus debates about bogus confusing terms such as Liberal and Globalist. The loudest and shoutiest idiots buy pretty much whatever the PR mobs send out on twitter and so forth. Because that's how empty brains work. People who don't have a stake in politics, or don't understand it, or are just lunatics by design, always make the most noise.

People who aren't right, who aren't living that well... jeez, count me in that group. But I'm not that much of a lazy or uneducated person to realise that makes us vulnerable to trying to use our voice and politics to make up for that fact.

Loads of people are, because they don't like how they feel, don't like themselves, don't accept things are the way they are, don't really accept reality. Because they've got a lot at stake personally, they make the most noise, because that's the brain's stupid way of coping with feeling insignificant and powerless, of coping with the reality that no one really knows that much about what's going on, but some of us like to think we know an awful lot more than we do, because that's ego compensation for being a small dicked intellectual midget who never took responsibility for themselves and sneered at others and likes to pretend it's their fault.


Being like that, a little, feeling like that, occassionally, is about normal. That's how life fucking is! It's mental. The economy? The last article on economics I read, I felt I should read up on a term mentioned, so went on to wikipedia.

Here's what Wikipedia said was going on.
Bellman_flow_chart.png


Who understands this stuff? Maybe one in a thousand. But oh my, listen to us all chirp on like we know all about this stuff.

There's 70million in this country and none of them listen to me, believe me. Less and less the older I get. Watch out for people. If I ever hear someone say they are part of the majority again, I'll mentally slap your bottom. Absolute self-important shite. Sorry life scares you so much you brought that bullshit. Bought it from politicians who know it's about the swing seats, and they are young families, so you make them feel like the biggest group, bigger than all the others, everyone likes believing shite like that.

But in reality, there is no majority group in Britain. What would that be? White english working class males? White English working class families? No such group is going to be more than about 40% of the total population by my reckoning. Because Scots and so on are counted differently. (Sure as fuckfire most younger scots, welsh, london lads don't identify with people waving the Union Jack). Everything is divided up so there are many minorities. Has always been that way. Likely that it always will. That's how all democracies are, because it's allowed to be that way, because we're not allowed to use threats and violence and coercion against each other, and people organise automatically so that one group doesn't emerge that's too big to reign in if they start acting like that.

And in any group, it's usually split up inside, up to half of them don't turn out for elections. So they don't fucking count as democratically active. And that's all there is. The votes. Find me any example where anything like 50% of the population voted for one party, or cause. Never. Ever. Happens. Not as a percentage of everyone who can vote.


Britain and others is being tested by old lies, like that one. And the new ones, where people keep turning any debate into a farce by repeating stupid shit they heard on the net, or from politicians mouths. We've repeatedly failed to recognise the signs of idiocy and failed to organise or protect ourselves against it.

But I don't think it matters that much, because the balance is, you either stay in power by any means possible (like Boris wanted), or you are judged on what you deliver. And the people who would stay in power by any means possible, are always the ones who fuck up on delivery and leave a massive mess, because there's liars and salesmen, and they just know how to tell you what you want to hear, get the money, and for most of them, leaving the place in a mess is a bonus, because the next guy will have to sort it out, and that will hamper him so he doesn't make your effort look as bad as it really was.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd dispute that. It will be 30 years next year That rail privatisation in the UK began. To soften it up it was deprived of adequate funding for a number of years so to have experienced the old BR you'd probably have to be about 50. A lot of people and "political commentators" lazily parrot the stuff others are feeding them.

As for running 2 parallel services when private services hand the keys back because they are shit and not making any money the Govt does take over and when they do services improve as does customer satisfaction which is why they look to sell it off ASAP

For well over their first 100 years they were private companies, nationalised in 1948.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.