Margaret Thatcher Dies at 87

[-:Undertaker:-]

Probably not a bad idea actually, it would save a lot of money..

So in other words, you haven't any attachment to the concept of nationhood or British institutions.

Fair enough, but quite a great many of us value centuries of tradition and history. It is after all, what makes us a nation rather than Orwell's 1984.

[Southe,]

Whether you agree with her policies or not, she deserves it based on the fact that she led the Falklands War (the only just war we've engaged in since 1945) and like Churchill she's being honoured with a ceremonial funeral, with the family meeting half of the costs.

There's a difference between World War 2 and Falklands (which some people would say it wasn't a just war) and the family should be meeting ALL the costs. If people who want to suck up to here want to pay for part of it then let them do it out of there own pockets.

I think the attitudes shown, ie bringing in family, just go to show how low those on the left are willing to sink concerning her legacy.

That's such a graceful and kind comment concerning an 87-year old who has just died, you come across really well.

I didn't say i was doing it did i? i was merely stating what people are currently doing and was wondering what else people were planning.

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/margaret-t...liament-872091

"MPs can claim up to £3,750 in travel costs to pay tribute to Margaret Thatcher in parliament today - sparking warnings the bill could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds.


Parliament’s expenses watchdog has confirmed that MPs can put their travel costs to attend the special session of parliament on expenses – including their family.


Taxpayers now face a potentially hefty bill for today’s recall of parliament, where MPs will discuss Baroness Thatcher's contributions to British politics and her legacy following her death on Monday."

More wasted money

[Adam]

Celebrating somebodies death is disgusting.

End thread.

[Chippiewill]

So in other words, you haven't any attachment to the concept of nationhood or British institutions.

Fair enough, but quite a great many of us value centuries of tradition and history. It is after all, what makes us a nation rather than Orwell's 1984.

Point being we're in a financial pit, perhaps we shouldn't be spending money on funerals.

[Ardemax]

Slight? There's a big difference between the both.

My sarcasm skills have reached expert levels, I see

I bet it wouldn't cost me £6 to get to the nearest town (11 minute journey!!) if it was government run.

Indeed, because the government would simply take it out of your back pocket via taxation and then subsidise the railways. Like they do now.

The NHS costs you 'nothing' when you arrive at the hospital or doctors, but where do you think the money comes from? it doesn't fall from space.

Genuine question: are the railway and train services in countries like Germany, Italy, France etc. privatised? Their train services are fantastic.

[Chippiewill]

French is state owned
German is private but most stock is held by state
Italy is state owned

On a sidenote Japan was state owned until 1987 but is now made up of 7 private companies, the 6 which provide passenger service rank in the best companies globally. There are also smaller companies for local rail and some regional governments manage their own rail.

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/margaret-t...liament-872091

"MPs can claim up to £3,750 in travel costs to pay tribute to Margaret Thatcher in parliament today - sparking warnings the bill could run into hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Parliament’s expenses watchdog has confirmed that MPs can put their travel costs to attend the special session of parliament on expenses – including their family.

Taxpayers now face a potentially hefty bill for today’s recall of parliament, where MPs will discuss Baroness Thatcher's contributions to British politics and her legacy following her death on Monday."

More wasted money

Don't agree with the inclusion of family on that. I agree though that any expenses system applies to a state event, just as it would with the State Opening of Parliament.

Point being we're in a financial pit, perhaps we shouldn't be spending money on funerals.

Perhaps, but then again that would also be an argument for cutting everything I stated - and I think that'd be a great shame as those traditions have gone on through war after war, and through bankruptcy. If people are serious about cutting the debt, then the things you have to be looking at are foreign aid, social security, EU payments, the NHS budget, quangos and so on.

My sarcasm skills have reached expert levels, I see

Genuine question: are the railway and train services in countries like Germany, Italy, France etc. privatised? Their train services are fantastic.

I constantly hear praise for the railways on the mainland yet the praise, from what I have also read, is largely overdone. In many cases i've heard people complain that the railways in France for instance are far worse than our railways. It depends who you speak to on them, but as I haven't riden in them I can't comment.

I can say however two points - I don't want to be forced into paying for other peoples railway fares via government subsidies (as we are now) and Spain for example has nice shiny railways - which lead to nowhere and the costs + quality of those railway lines are totally unsuited to the areas the railways cover. The railway fanatics in this country have it stuck in their head that we can roll out bullet trains across the country and somehow this will benefit us - maybe it would have post-war, but instead we spent out loan money on the NHS/new school buildings.

Low cost air travel has largely made the railway even more redundant than it was prior to the 1960s with the mass sale of cars.

[Chippiewill]

Low cost air travel has largely made the railway even more redundant than it was prior to the 1960s with the mass sale of cars.

A high speed rail network would not be redundant. Air Travel may be low cost, but things like security add frustrating delays. Cars would easily be beat out by 200MPH+ trains.

Frankly however, I really do not see the benefit in the government paying for it, Japan's rail network is pretty damn good, and fast. Yet it's all private now.

[Ardemax]

I constantly hear praise for the railways on the mainland yet the praise, from what I have also read, is largely overdone. In many cases i've heard people complain that the railways in France for instance are far worse than our railways. It depends who you speak to on them, but as I haven't riden in them I can't comment.

I can say however two points - I don't want to be forced into paying for other peoples railway fares via government subsidies (as we are now) and Spain for example has nice shiny railways - which lead to nowhere and the costs + quality of those railway lines are totally unsuited to the areas the railways cover. The railway fanatics in this country have it stuck in their head that we can roll out bullet trains across the country and somehow this will benefit us - maybe it would have post-war, but instead we spent out loan money on the NHS/new school buildings.

Low cost air travel has largely made the railway even more redundant than it was prior to the 1960s with the mass sale of cars.

The one thing I fail to understand is that a country like Italy, who has suffered greatly economically wise, has a much better railway network than ours.

Also the fares are so cheap. Like super cheap. A ride on the Berlin subway (all day ticket) costs only a couple of euros. Is it £6 something for the Underground?

I wish the government would stop overlooking what is a disappointment. No doubt it would do wonders for our economy too.

[-:Undertaker:-]

The one thing I fail to understand is that a country like Italy, who has suffered greatly economically wise, has a much better railway network than ours.

Italy doesn't have the same welfare bills to pay as we do so it's government can spend money on railways as opposed to a gigantic National Health Service like ours. You can't have both, and personally i'd have neither as I don't see why the state should be involved in running healthcare or the railways. I'm not under the illusion that I can vote myself seemingly 'free' things you see.

Also the fares are so cheap. Like super cheap. A ride on the Berlin subway (all day ticket) costs only a couple of euros. Is it £6 something for the Underground?

If the railway is operating at a profit then thats because there's enough customer demand for that service. If it's not and the company in question is recieving government payments then it's not really cheap is it? it just looks cheap on the surface, just as the NHS may appear 'free'.

As for tickets prices, again, are you calling for even more subsidies? if so, why should I pay to subsidise your fare?

I wish the government would stop overlooking what is a disappointment. No doubt it would do wonders for our economy too.

Italy is different from us as it's on the continent and a lot more continent orientated. We are an island of 70m people, not a continent of 400m or an island like Japan of 160m. A lot of these railways were also built a few decades ago and have largely been made pointless with airline travel becoming ever more cheap. The newer lines have largely been wasteful vanity projects of the political class in each country (ie, Spain).

The fact is, people don't like using public transportation because it constricts you. If possible people prefer to use their own car (as opposed to a bus) and prefer to use flexible and reliable airlines (as opposed to more expensive railways). We're moving on from public transport to individual transport and it's a great thing, just as the explosion in the car industry was a great thing for people's ability to travel freely.