Lets freeze rail fares?

Thrugelmir

With regards to rail prices the cost from here is ridiculous.

A peak time return to London costs £197. I can get a return flight to Copenhagen for £78 on the same day. :eek:

If Centrica makes say £50 per customer for supplying gas. How much could prices be realistically reduced?

Moby

The government can choose to ‘find money’ for anything which can be purchased in £ Sterling. The UK government is in fact the only source of £ Sterling – other issuers are known as counterfeiters. The government has to spend into the economy in order for there to be ‘money’ to pay wages and taxes. Tax is not the income of the UK but is one of the ways in which inflation is prevented by removing XS money from the economy. Tax also gives ‘value’ to money and creates momentum for ‘money’ to flow through the economy.

Hence, ‘money’ is easy to find if a government chooses to spend it (with the proviso that it does not exceed the potential capacity of the economy because that would be inflationary). If you remember, government created £375bn in QE to buy back bonds in order to inject ‘money’ into the economy. However, the banks and other financial institutions chose to invest in emergent countries rather than in the UK. Government could have chosen instead, to invest in the real economy directly. For example, in funding the NHS properly, like they did after the second world war.

Both Deficit and Debt, in terms of the UK economy, mean something different from the way that they are used in a private household. The UK economy bears no relation to a household. Private holders of the national debt (like UK pension funds and insurance companies) certainly do not want the ‘debt’ to be paid off. Most of the national debt is effectively corporate welfare… and the UK government could choose to pay back a majority of the capital anytime it wants.

However, the gap, between the reality and the TINA economic misconceptions which have been fostered in the British public over the last 30 years, means that politicians have to create some sort of credible narrative for ‘where’s the money going to come from?’ It is about perception not facts and that is why I don't believe a word they say. Due to their panicking over the poor campaign they are running the tories have just now said they will find an extra £8 billion a year for the NHS and are promising to freeze rail fares and offer paid volunteering leave.:rotfl: If Labour had done that without showing how it would be paid for there would be such a hysterical reaction about uncosted promises and money trees etc.

Cyberman60

Spidernick wrote: »

This 'freezing' will be an increase based on RPI, whereas any money the government gives out is based on the (currently) lower CPI. This is not a freeze by any stretch of the imagination!

The policy was announced as a 'freeze in real terms for five years'. That does mean that there will be inflation-linked rises, but obviously nothing above that. Surely good news for rail commuters, especially if inflation remains around zero for any length of time, as it is likely to under the Tories spending and deficit-reducing plans. :T

the_flying_pig

another thing to say is that fares have been capped at RPI+1 for more than a decade, so moving to RPI+0 doesn't to me feel like the very biggest game changer ever.

MARTYM8`

Spidernick wrote: »

This 'freezing' will be an increase based on RPI, whereas any money the government gives out is based on the (currently) lower CPI. This is not a freeze by any stretch of the imagination!

Yes - the classic real terms freeze.

Most people of course get no where near an RPI pay rise each year - when it involves spending its CPI but for income (e.g. business rates and fares) its RPI.

We have had effective council tax freezes for years - so why are fares freezes so crazy. We have amongst the highest transport fares in the world - and the government provides huge subsidies to the rail sector so its hardly a true market as most franchises are effective state monopolies.

Cyberman60

MARTYM8` wrote: »

Yes - the classic real terms freeze.

Most people of course get no where near an RPI pay rise each year - when it involves spending its CPI but for income (e.g. business rates and fares) its RPI.

We have had effective council tax freezes for years - so why are fares freezes so crazy. We have amongst the highest transport fares in the world - and the government provides huge subsidies to the rail sector so its hardly a true market as most franchises are effective state monopolies.

I get RPI or 3%, whichever is the higher, on my private pension, so I really want a Tory government for the benefits of lower inflation and strong pound for my travels.

Cyberman60

BobQ wrote: »

Volunteering paid for by firms with as few as 250 staff is not a bad thing but had Labour suggested this the Tories would lave said it was loading costs on businesses as the Institute of Directors spokesman observed.

I agree there is a difference between the two cases but it is still interfering with the market. In the case of Rail, this Government started by claiming that price increases were needed to transfer the burden from tax paper subsidy to the consumer. Now it increasing the subsidy and having to find the money from elsewhere. PIckles had no idea where.

As you say it is a subsidy to the mainly wealthy SE and rural train users.

The lefties tend to bring their stupid policies in for those companies of more than 50 employees. That is the difference and it is huge. :eek:

marvin

michaels wrote: »

So volunteering paid for by big companies is a bad thing?

It is not volunteering it is seconding volunteering involves no payment it is voluntary and free.

When I ran charities I was surprised that one of the top search terms people visited charity sites for was "Paid Voluntary work" it seems that work you have to do to pay the bills is not voluntary anything outside that is Voluntary, paid or otherwise, this is a change I don't like.

Generali

marvin wrote: »

It is not volunteering it is seconding volunteering involves no payment it is voluntary and free.

When I ran charities I was surprised that one of the top search terms people visited charity sites for was "Paid Voluntary work" it seems that work you have to do to pay the bills is not voluntary anything outside that is Voluntary, paid or otherwise, this is a change I don't like.

I've seen some pretty cool forms of volunteering. One was where the company would pay you minimum wage for volunteering but the money went to the charity not you. Another (Goldman Sachs) gave you an extra day of holiday to volunteer and came up with some amazing volunteer schemes that they organized.

For example, Goldmans used to hire a bunch of nurses to look after people with Alzheimer's and then we'd take their carer OH's out to Kew Gardens.

Loughton_Monkey

Generali wrote: »

I've seen some pretty cool forms of volunteering..

What would be a very good idea is if Cameron would make a start with the Civil Service. He should ask them to "volunteer" to do some work every day, then perhaps most of our tax payer money wouldn't be wasted......