Nice people thread part 7 - a thread in its prime

Nikkster

lostinrates wrote: »

I miss having a heated front windscreen. It was amazing.

I haven't had to use it yet, but I have seen it in action (as previous owner was mum). I will be very grateful for it, I'm sure!

Its still feeling very new to have any kind of windscreen at all :rotfl:

zagubov

Nikkster wrote: »

Depends on the route - the past few times that I've booked trains, it has asked for all my preferences (table/ no table, forward/ backward facing etc) then told me that there were no reservations on that service.

It horrifiesme that we can't run affordable train transport. It cost us £38 to get two bus tickets for a 400+ mile journey. Cost us £60 in petrol to come back (which we felt was cheap. We couldn't have done either journey by train for a two-digit sum. Any party that would run the rail system better would get my vote.

We admire America way too much. The country where car companies bought up light rail companies and convereted them to bus systems (hang on that's just what we did too, except it was government policy rather than private companies). We need new examples of countries to model ourselves on.

Nikkster

I'm watching Newsnight. So, I know that the US elections are important. But why do the BBC need to send so many people out there? Can Paxo not just talk to people from the comfort of the studio in London? I think one of the breakfast presenters (Huw?) was out there this morning. I just don't understand why this is a good use of money.

michaels

lostinrates wrote: »

I think it would be fairer if there were seats for all, and enough trains provided for the people who need them!

Already a lot of the tax we pay goes on subsidising train fares whilst the average train commuter earns above average wages which makes it pretty regressive. In most other cases we let prices changes until there are enough takers for each seat and no more but the railways are not allowed to implement this for some reason. May be they should introduce two ticket prices at peak - right to a seat and standing only?.

lostinrates

Nikkster wrote: »

I'm watching Newsnight. So, I know that the US elections are important. But why do the BBC need to send so many people out there? Can Paxo not just talk to people from the comfort of the studio in London? I think one of the breakfast presenters (Huw?) was out there this morning. I just don't understand why this is a good use of money.

I am so bored of it all, I have stopped watching anything about it. I knew more about us candidates than was available for our up coming police thingy ma jiggies.

michaels

Nikkster wrote: »

I'm watching Newsnight. So, I know that the US elections are important. But why do the BBC need to send so many people out there? Can Paxo not just talk to people from the comfort of the studio in London? I think one of the breakfast presenters (Huw?) was out there this morning. I just don't understand why this is a good use of money.

Recently several police officers spent a few days n Cyprus or somewhere similar searching for a child who disappeared 21 years ago and I suspect that was done for similar reasons - it is a nice jolly.

Nikkster

zagubov wrote: »

It horrifiesme that we can't run affordable train transport. It cost us £38 to get two bus tickets for a 400+ mile journey. Cost us £60 in petrol to come back (which we felt was cheap. We couldn't have done either journey by train for a two-digit sum. Any party that would run the rail system better would get my vote.

When I went to Suffolk (via London) on my epic journey a few weeks ago, I had to decide whether to go by train or by car. Google maps estimated that it would cost about £35 each way (I think) and I got my return ticket for £60. Only needed a taxi to the station on the Sunday (£12) so still cheaper (just). And I didn't have to risk driving back whilst feeling like death warmed up.

Mind you it took about 5 hours to get there and 6 to get back. And on the return journey there was the dreaded rail replacement bus service... (was about that point that I wished that I had driven)

lostinrates

michaels wrote: »

Already a lot of the tax we pay goes on subsidising train fares whilst the average train commuter earns above average wages which makes it pretty regressive. In most other cases we let prices changes until there are enough takers for each seat and no more but the railways are not allowed to implement this for some reason. May be they should introduce two ticket prices at peak - right to a seat and standing only?.

Yep, it's crazy, whole system seems odd and nonsensical to me. I think standing only carriages would have to be the way to go though, for that to work.
Trains should be great, time saving, moneysaving, enviro benefiting things...you expect a few grips about them how ever good they are. People never being satisfied, but, they seem to me to be .....not great. Maybe 'sort of ok, a good percentage of the time)

Nikkster

michaels wrote: »

Recently several police officers spent a few days n Cyprus or somewhere similar searching for a child who disappeared 21 years ago and I suspect that was done for similar reasons - it is a nice jolly.

That I don't have a problem with - if my child had disappeared whether it was 20 years ago or 20 days ago, I would still be looking for answers.

Sending a plane load of people to report on a foreign election when they could cover it just as well from a studio here (they never usually have too much problem talking to people in other locations) I think is different?

Edit: And surely as a British citizen there is still a responsibility to try and find out what happened to him?

chewmylegoff

Spirit wrote: »

Off topic and a bit of a whinge - posted this on another thread - see, I am very whiney (andexhausted).
Tonight on my journey back from London I paid to upgrade my ticket and got the last seat in 1st Class. It was £20+ but a whole lot better than standing for over an hour after a very long day.

My day return ticket had already cost over £75 and I had had to stand for part of the journey in the morning.

I would be happy to pay a few £ extra to prebook a seat rather than the random scrum when an already full train pulls in and you have to board. I am not convinced that first come first served is a reasonable principle when customers at 'later' stations will always have an unmet demand for seats.

can you imagine getting on a london commuter train in the morning and saying to someone "errr, sorry, you're sitting in my seat". all you'd be paying extra for is the privilege of being told to shove your seat reservation up your rear end each and every morning!

i get on at the last station where you are guaranteed a seat (except on the 7.51 for some reason). at the next station there is always a horrendous mad dash for the last couple of seats, which i always enjoy very much.

i enjoy getting to putney even more - where half the contents of the platform can't get on the train.