Margaret Thatcher Dies at 87

[buttons]

guys, our generation:




top notch arguing from diaz there too. "she made SCOTLAND (no) crap she was the one that stopped milk going to schools and everything". bandwagon at its finest lol

[Kardan]

guys, our generation:




top notch arguing from diaz there too. "she made SCOTLAND (no) crap she was the one that stopped milk going to schools and everything". bandwagon at its finest lol

I still had milk when I was in school in the 90's?

[buttons]

ya i think i had milk and raisins at school. he is just listening to what others say

[AgnesIO]

I still had milk when I was in school in the 90's?

I believe it is free milk vs paid milk.

[GommeInc]

I'm amazed at how much controversy there is revolving around the idea that the Queen may be attending. The arguments seem to be focusing on political bias and if the Queen goes she's out of touch and biased towards the Tories

http://www.channel4.com/news/margare...een-row-guests

It was on my Facebook. The comments on the C4 Fb page are hilarious.

[Lee]

RIP, there where parties in Liverpool the other night which was disrespectful, but I can see why.

[-:Undertaker:-]

But this argument really doesn't stand. The railway tracks are not the profitable bit - the trains are. It is like telling Ryanair to build itself an airport, or Ford (+ other car companies) and taxi drivers to build their own roads. It simply wouldn't make sense.

Build the train track, then rent it out - then you don't subsidise it, I promise you it would work - if it was efficient, and therefore low priced.

Commuters don't choose to get the train journey because it is super cheap, they do it because it is SO MUCH less hassle than getting a car everyday - which doesn't help ticket price increases, as the companies know this.

If iniatially there's no infastructure then thats an argument.. but there already exists one so any upgrades should be cheaper and worth investing in should your idea be so economically sound. And besides, it goes to show that again your falling into the trap - you think government wouldn't simply tax the rail operators ridiculous amounts of tax? of course it would, just like it does with any other industry. So who picks up the bill at the end of the day? the consumers do, as all taxes are ultimately passed onto the consumers.

You're arguing in favour of massive spending on the railways with doubtful results at the end... yet all this is simply because you think your ticket is too expensive. A massive build and upgrade like this you will be paying for ultimately as more expensive lines require more expensive maintainence.

So brilliant these private train companies are!

And government isn't corrupt and doesn't do appalling things? at least with the railways (if they were truly private, which they are not) you have the option of not travelling on them which would send a message to any poor railway company that it needs to improve.

Subsidise a bad service and that bad service will only continue/get worse.

RIP, there where parties in Liverpool the other night which was disrespectful, but I can see why.

Being from Liverpool I can tell you that most of the people celebrating probably didn't even know what decade she was Prime Minister.

[Ardemax]

I hardly think you can compare a railway line in a crowded city of 7m odd (London) is comparable to the concept that we should state fund railways and roll out brand new ones across this country. If the London Underground is state subsidised (I haven't checked) and struggles to be profitable despite the massive usage then I think that goes to prove my point on railways and the future of British transport.

But on the ticket prices being 'sorted' - again, what do you mean by that statement?

Nearly everything increases year on year. That's what happens when you have a monetary system backed by nothing.

I don't think the London Underground struggles to be profitable? They've just launched a new fleet of trains. Hardly scraping for cash.

By that statement I mean reduced to the prices of train tickets across central Europe and, quite frankly, the world. Train operators are literally raking in the money and provide very little in terms of quality service.

Just to clarify, you believe the railway system is a waste of space/money?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't think the London Underground struggles to be profitable? They've just launched a new fleet of trains. Hardly scraping for cash.

By that statement I mean reduced to the prices of train tickets across central Europe and, quite frankly, the world. Train operators are literally raking in the money and provide very little in terms of quality service.

Well as I said, I don't know about the London Underground.

But if it is indeed private, not recieving government subsidies and is making a profit... then the train operators absolutely deserve those profits.

Just to clarify, you believe the railway system is a waste of space/money?

The position is clear; privatise the railways properly and allow them to sink or swim. By the state owning or subsidising the railways, you only encourage bad services - the Thatcher sell off of state owned companies in the 1980s proves this.

If a railway line still isn't profitable after all of the above then it ought to be closed - like any other business.

[Lee]

Being from Liverpool I can tell you that most of the people celebrating probably didn't even know what decade she was Prime Minister.

This is true, I am also from Liverpool and not to say that I did end up get involved in such parties, I can see why these scousers are no matter if they know why or not. A lot of people round here will use anything as an excuse. That's a shame for genuine liverpudlians who may not have their frustrations taken seriously by anybody else anymore.