having worked on the railways nationalized and private privatised comes out top - to say "oh we,ll increase the number of trains" is sadly not the answer - the east coast line is at maximum capacity the only way to increase capacity is to put down more tracks complete with vast costs and loads and loads of people being " displaced" they are trying to improve the line line between peterborough and lincoln to take more freight which includes raising the height of many bridges . to me mister corbin was just trying to make political brownie points . i regul;arly travel on the east coast line ( no reservation) and i always find a seat
He claimed he sat there cos no seats, cctv from virgin proves he ignored seats and he is on floor for no reason, I put that clip up to accompany my next post about chucking him a couple of quid, he stood up later got the guitar out and did American pie
in terms of goverment ownership by far the biggest chunk of the railways is government run - the french government , the dutch government and possibly the biggest single operator the german government
Have you not noticed yet that Jezza is actually a bit of a dimwit ? As for Team Corbyn, who appear equally dim-witted, I'd suggest picking a personal fight with Branson is not going to end well...
Corbyn occasionally makes some valid points, however he is (as with many politicians) a slave to dogma, in his case the conviction that state ownership is best regardless.
It's surely a fair point that shareholders making money from government subsidies however you frame the arguements is basically "wrong"?
I'm not sure if any of the train operators are subsidised now, most pay a premium and to make a profit they have to work more efficiently. If the operators do the job cheaper / better what's the problem with them making a profit?
Anything to do with basic human needs such as power, water, shelter shouldn't be private only....I think they, hospitals, public transport and elements of the food chain should be on a not for profit private enterprise that is kept well away from direct central government control. Actual profit has to be reinvested, some ring fenced for innovation and performance checked. The Toyota model allows for higher costs initially to ensure experts do expert roles and innovation walks hand in hand with efficiency. Shareholder profits are by definition pure waste in any process other than one that rewards people that add no actual value to the job at hand.
What if they do add value? Edit: I suppose you could compare Network Rail to the road builders / maintainers who are paid by the state to provide infrastructure. Any company that directly or indirectly provides a service to the state is receiving a payment and making a profit.
I did pop a quid in his guitar case at Bradford Interchange recently; he was doing a belting version of Macarther Park, Donna Summer style.
They only add value in raising initial capital, with most big plc's the share holders do very little if anything at all as primarily there are so many of them. I have shares in BP, believe me they don't take my advice.
I believe Corbyn is an honest and decent bloke. He believes what he campaigns for. I don't believe he is a leader, or capable of winning over enough of the general public to get his party elected. It is good that he has shifted the debate though.
If all his party had stood united behind him then maybe he would be able to. Also, if the media didn't have such a hate campaign. I have friends who work in the NHS in public and private areas and are devastated about the expenditure that goes into privatised parts of it. Overspending and wastage that provides little benefit to customer care but instead increases private profits.
