On Fri, 15 May 2015 13:39:11 -0500,
wrote:

In article , d
() wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2015 12:59:06 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 15/05/2015 09:42, d wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2015 08:10:06 +0100
e27002 aurora wrote:
I suspect that most jobs on the railway (except perhaps tube station
ticket office staff)

Now we may observe an enormous public sector folly in real time. Only
a public body could be this stupid. Pity the poor tourist arriving in
London in need of guidance on using TfL services.

To be fair the blame can be squarely laid at the door of the blonde
buffoon. TfL simply have to do as their told. God help us if Boris ever
becomes PM, it'll be a ****ing disaster (and I speak as a Tory voter)
not least because the man is bone idle and is more interested in
promoting himself than doing what he's paid to do.

The grant from central government to the GLA for transport has been
significantly cut back.

I don't see how moving staff out of ticket offices and investing in even
more expensive ticketing machines is going to reduce spending. Unless of
course the long term plan is to dispense with said staff in a few years
when they've been deemed to be "ineffective". Though hopefully whoever the
next mayor is can at least stop this in its tracks before too much damage
is done.

Sadly the truth is that even more expensive ticketing machines are cheaper
than the salaries and pensions of staff.

TfL, or a public body of its nature, should by sufficiently well
financed, and efficiently run, that it can appoint the staff
neccessary to do the job.

There is an ongoing need for a human presence. Strangers need a
point, a window, or counter, to which they can go for help.

On 16/05/15 08:14, e27002 aurora wrote:
There is an ongoing need for a human presence. Strangers need a
point, a window, or counter, to which they can go for help.

Since many strangers in London are foreign, good multilingual machines
are almost certainly much more use than an English-only counter service.

Ian

On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:51:16 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 15/05/15 20:13, d wrote:
But unfortunately they're outnumbered by the idiots
and you can see what happens when idiots get voted into power - towit the
SNP.

The SNP were almost voted into power in 2007 and formed a minority
government. That was sufficiently popular that they were properly voted
into power as a majority government in 2011. That was sufficiently
popular that they were voted in to represent Scotland in 56 out of 59
Scottish constituencies this month. It's therefore a little hard to see
what disasters you think happened.

You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

Mind you, it's always amusing to here UKIP supporters such as yourself

Actually I vote Tory, but I sympathise with UKIPs main message and
it seems 15 million other people did too.

use precisely opposing arguments to explain why (a) Scotland MUST stay
in the UK and (b) why the UK MUST leave Europe. It sounds like a pretty
good example of cognitive dissonance which is easily resolved by

I don't give a flying **** about the scots. Seems to me so long as
they have their benefits, booze, heroin and can carry on with their
self pitying sense of entitlement and have a nice long whinge (300
years and counting) most of them will be as happy as McLarry. My
only reason for wanting scotland to stay in the UK is for military
reasons.

recognizing that UKIP are a bunch of loony little Englanders who loathe
all foreigners and classify Scots as foreign.

Keep taking the pills, one day you may even find a clue in the bottle.

--
Spud

On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight
years of SNP government in Edinburgh or from a week of high SNP
representation in Westminster.

Ian

On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:20:04 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight

I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

Around about now with an independent Scotland Sturgeon would be heading
off to Brussels with a begging bowl to join the queue behind greece
and spain.

--
Spud

On 16/05/2015 17:16, d wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:51:16 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
[...]
Mind you, it's always amusing to here UKIP supporters such as yourself

Actually I vote Tory, but I sympathise with UKIPs main message and
it seems 15 million other people did too.

I've no idea why I'm reading this, but where do you get 15 million
people from?

It's never amusing to hear UKIP detractors such as yourself use ill
thought-out generalisations to denigrate people who hold an alternative
opinion.

I voted UKIP ten days ago so I qualify as a UKIP supporter.

a) I do not say Scotland MUST stay in the UK;
b) I do not say UK MUST leave the European Union although I recognise
that it may be eventually become advantageous to do so;
c) I am not a little Englander and I do not hate all foreigners;
d) I do not classify Scots as foreign.

I live in Leyton, one of the most cosmopolitan areas of London. I could
easily afford to move to an all-white part of the country but I choose to
stay in Leyton.

I suggest you refrain from glib and specious generalisations and instead try
to understand why around 4 million people voted UKIP in the recent election.

In uk.railway d twisted the electrons to say:
I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

This would be the alternative timeline where the SNP formed a majority
rather than minority government in the period 2007-2011 and was thus able
to pass it's referendum bill in that session of parliament, and in a
further change to our timeline people voted for it?

Because in our timeline, the proposal from the SNP was (in the event of
"Yes" winning) that independence would come about in May 2016. Meanwhile
Better Together was claiming that was agressively optimistic and that it
might take much longer than that to achieve independence in the event of
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On Sat, 16 May 2015 19:24:49 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 16/05/2015 17:16, d wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2015 21:51:16 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
[...]
Mind you, it's always amusing to here UKIP supporters such as yourself

Actually I vote Tory, but I sympathise with UKIPs main message and
it seems 15 million other people did too.

I've no idea why I'm reading this, but where do you get 15 million
people from?

11 million Tory voters + 4 million UKIP.

And while you might say that perhaps some of those Tory voters don't give
a monkeys about a EU referendum I would suggest most do and the difference
will be made up by the large amount of Labour voters who also do.

--
Spud

On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...

So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to be
dumb enough to fall for it?

Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS. The SNP knows this which is why its so
pro EU because once its waved bye bye to westminster and the hand outs stop
it'll need Brussels to provide the money. Of course the privosos that will
come with it will be far worse than Westminster would ever ask for but by
then Salmond and Sturgeon will be doing the after dinner circuit basking in
their self righteousnous and won't give a ****.

--
Spud