|
The Tube: top quality
Hi all -
It's easy to bitch about the Underground, and to compare it unfavourably with metros in Singapore, Hong Kong and so on. To redress the balance, I thought I'd share details of my recent trip on the Rome Metro. My girlfriend and I were getting a train from Termini (the major station; I guess KXSP would be the best comparison) to Circo Maximo (historical bits, public park - Green Park-ish). The time was about 11:30am on a Sunday, so not quite the peak... Approximate order of events: * we discover staircase from station forecourt to Metro station stinks of ****. * we discover there are no ticket machines and no ticket office, so have to seek out a newsagent to buy our travelcards. * on getting the ticket, we get sent on a gigantic wild goose chase through dingy, graffiti-ed ****-stinking passages, eventually reaching the platform. * the platform is absolutely rammed, reflecting the crap train frequency. * when the train eventually arives, it's clearly 30 years old, unrefurbished and entirely covered in graffiti. * the on-board temperature is well over 40 degrees C. * there are no seats to be had; girlfriend almost faints from heat and humidity * Circo Maximo station also stinks of ****, although it's less confusing than Termini * we abandon all thoughts of getting the Metro anywhere else during our stay and stick to the buses. Using the Victoria Line at rush hour this week has been an absolute joy by comparison. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
The Tube: top quality
John B wrote:
It's easy to bitch about the Underground, and to compare it unfavourably with metros in Singapore, Hong Kong and so on. To redress the balance, I thought I'd share details of my recent trip on the Rome Metro. The Tube is a fantastic system... when parts of it aren't broken. -- Michael Hoffman |
The Tube: top quality
John B wrote:
It's easy to bitch about the Underground, and to compare it unfavourably with metros in Singapore, Hong Kong and so on. To redress the balance, I thought I'd share details of my recent trip on the Rome Metro. A trip on the Rome Metro last year was incredibly bad, but on our very last day, on the way back to the scAirport, we got a brand new train, and I kid you not, all the locals together, you could actually hear them go "Ooooooh" as the train pulled in and they boarded! -- To reply direct, please swap SEEMYSIG with railwaysonline http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk |
The Tube: top quality
On 16 May 2006 08:43:12 -0700, "John B" wrote:
Hi all - It's easy to bitch about the Underground, and to compare it unfavourably with metros in Singapore, Hong Kong and so on. To redress the balance, I thought I'd share details of my recent trip on the Rome Metro. I went to Rome for the first time last year. Approximate order of events: * we discover staircase from station forecourt to Metro station stinks of ****. The entrances to the Metro were enough to put me off. * we discover there are no ticket machines and no ticket office, so have to seek out a newsagent to buy our travelcards. I bought myself a weekly at a newsstand at Termini when I arrived as I knew I'd have to use buses and did not want to find a tobacconists every 5 minutes. Although I made a financial loss the convenience was the main reason for doing this. * we abandon all thoughts of getting the Metro anywhere else during our stay and stick to the buses. I was tempted to use the Metro from Colesso just to see what it was like - sad aren't I? The general standard of cleanliness and upkeep at what is a main tourist station was appalling and I decided not to bother. I got myself a transport map from a news stand and used the buses. While they were rammed the whole day long on the main routes they did at least work well despite the traffic! I have to say the level of usage and overcrowding is quite something even when compared to London. Using the Victoria Line at rush hour this week has been an absolute joy by comparison. Not sure I've ever seen the Vic Line rush hour described as an absolute joy before. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
The Tube: top quality
Thanks for that. I had a similar experience using the Paris metro a
couple of years ago. The queue for tickets at Gard Nord was slow moving, the single down escalator was out of order and the signs confusing. The station close to our hotel had stairs that stank and the ticket office there was closed and those awful plastic bucket seats were horrid. |
The Tube: top quality
In message . com, John
B writes To redress the balance, I thought I'd share details of my recent trip on the Rome Metro. When in Rome ... walk! Some years ago, and against my better judgement, I accompanied a friend who had never been to Rome before on a half-day sightseeing tour by coach. The first hour was spent crawling 500m along the Via del Trittone, after which we had to get and out walk because of the pedestrian zones around the Piazza Navona. The coach eventually picked us up on the Zanardelli, and then took almost other an hour for another 500m to the Vatican - at which point the air-conditioning packed up and we left to continue on foot. Highly unrecommended! Last time I was in Rome I took the Metro B Line out to Tiburtino, from where mainline trains were leaving because Termini was closed. It was quite early on a Saturday, so no over-crowding, but the graffiti and smell were both astonishing! -- Paul Terry |
The Tube: top quality
On 16 May 2006 10:50:39 -0700, "
wrote: Thanks for that. I had a similar experience using the Paris metro a couple of years ago. The queue for tickets at Gard Nord was slow moving, the single down escalator was out of order and the signs confusing. IMHO Paris Nord needs some sort of really, really, obvious ticket machines with huge signs in a range of languages which people can't miss as they get off arriving trains. These would take coins, notes and non-French credit cards, and issue "travelcards", and it should be really simple to work out at a glance which machines sell main line, which suburban and which metro tickets. I keep a stock of single Metro tickets at home now, so I can avoid the hell of trying to buy a ticket there, though I'm told there is a newsagent "downstairs" which sells tickets, and can be used to avoid the queues. Having got a ticket, I then get stuck in the atrium by the suburban platforms which seems to have been designed by Escher. I've not been to Rome, but everyone I know who has says the metro is anb example of how not to run a metro. Milan was a bit chaotic when I went there, with all the metro ticket machines at the (misleadingly named) Central station dead. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
The Tube: top quality
Before everyone gets a bit too carried away about how rubbish other
systems are compared to the tube you might like to be interested in my experiences of the metro in Kiev, Ukraine which I had the pleasure to use for a while this month. A one month card which covers the whole system costs 25 Gryvna which is roughly 2 pounds 80 pence. This is for a service where the trains run every 2 mins 30 seconds the whole day. The stations are clean, the trains are quick and have video screens in most of the carraiges. The gates are swipe card/ enter token on entry, one way turnstile on exit (as in other countries - much more sensible than the bloody stupid london system where you have to use your ticket on exit too, causing delays which are totally unnecessary) and there are actually staff on the platforms who look professional and didn't disappear at the first sign of someone wanting to ask them a question. The only downside IMO is that they're pretty bad at station signs and directions. But at less than 3 quid a month I can live with that. Plus for the prices of other metros around europe I could live with the smell of **** on the stairs too if it meant I didn't get ripped off for well over a grand a year to use a **** poor 3rd rate system that would embarrass a banana republic in its ineptness. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
wrote:
Before everyone gets a bit too carried away about how rubbish other systems are compared to the tube you might like to be interested in my experiences of the metro in Kiev, Ukraine which I had the pleasure to use for a while this month. A one month card which covers the whole system costs 25 Gryvna which is roughly 2 pounds 80 pence. This is for a service where the trains run every 2 mins 30 seconds the whole day. Of course, your average Ukrainian earns a lot less than your average Londoner. 45 times less, apparently, according to: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=285 (Average weekly earnings of £556 for Londoners, 2005) http://manila.djh.dk/Ukraine/stories/storyReader$5 (Average *monthly* earnings of US$100 for Ukrainians, 2000) That's about £53 per month versus £2409 per month. Based on this, a £2.80 pass to a Ukrainian is equivalent (ignoring the difference in the year of measurement) to an £127 ticket for a Londoner. The Kiev metro is nowhere near as extensive as the London Underground - it has 59km of route and 45 stations (compared to 408km and 275 stations). Zone 1 would be comparable; a Zones 1&2 monthly travelcard costs £85.30. Make of that what you will. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
The Tube: top quality
On Wed, 17 May 2006 23:30:37 +0100, Arthur Figgis
] wrote: IMHO Paris Nord needs some sort of really, really, obvious ticket machines with huge signs in a range of languages which people can't miss as they get off arriving trains. These would take coins, notes and non-French credit cards, and issue "travelcards" I had no problems in buying a Carnet of 10 metro tickets from an RATP ticket machine using my Nationwide Visa credit card a few months ago. --- Phil Richards London, UK Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk |
The Tube: top quality
On Sat, 20 May 2006 07:27:16 GMT, Phil Richards
wrote: On Wed, 17 May 2006 23:30:37 +0100, Arthur Figgis ] wrote: IMHO Paris Nord needs some sort of really, really, obvious ticket machines with huge signs in a range of languages which people can't miss as they get off arriving trains. These would take coins, notes and non-French credit cards, and issue "travelcards" I had no problems in buying a Carnet of 10 metro tickets from an RATP ticket machine using my Nationwide Visa credit card a few months ago. Interesting. I've failed with Nationwide (they must have mopped up the trainspotter market by now?) and Halifax, and Barclays come to think of it, and I've heard of others coming unstuck. Maybe it is just us... -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
The Tube: top quality
On Fri, 19 May 2006 Dave Arquati wrote:
Of course, your average Ukrainian earns a lot less than your average Londoner. 45 times less, apparently The average Londoner may earn 45 times more than the average Ukrainian. 45 times less than this is an awful lot of negative income. -- Thoss |
The Tube: top quality
Dave Arquati wrote:
http://manila.djh.dk/Ukraine/stories/storyReader$5 (Average *monthly* earnings of US$100 for Ukrainians, 2000) Well for a start that report is over 6 years out of date and secondly while that might possibly be true averaged as a whole over the country there is a lot of money floating about in Kiev , and I'm not just talking about the Mafia. Besides which , if everything cost 1/45th of that in Britain then your argument may hold water , but lots of things , eg mobile phones , radios, white goods, some foods, cost the same or more than they do in britain. The Kiev metro is nowhere near as extensive as the London Underground - it has 59km of route and 45 stations (compared to 408km and 275 stations). Zone 1 would be comparable; a Zones 1&2 monthly travelcard costs £85.30. Make of that what you will. Yeah , this argument is frequently trotted out as if size has any bearing on the running of a system. You might as well say that HSBC can't be expected to be run as well as Northern Rock because its so much bigger. If you have the staff & resources in place , clued up management and workers who treat their jobs as a priviledge , not a right , then it would all work smoothly. You don't, so it doesn't. And if you don't think thats a valid point, go check out the Moscow Metro. Its the busiest in the world and it runs just as well as the one in Kiev. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
On Sat, 20 May 2006 16:36:51 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Arthur Figgis ] writes Interesting. I've failed with Nationwide (they must have mopped up the trainspotter market by now?) and Halifax, and Barclays come to think of it, and I've heard of others coming unstuck. Maybe it is just us... The most annoying I've come across is the NY subway, where you enter down a flight of steps to be met with a machine and card operated gates. The machine takes you card, takes the money, gives you the single/reurn/multi-use ticket you choose, you swipe the ticket at the barrier which takes one journey off said ticket but the gates say invalid and don't let you through, even worse when with a partner who is on the other side. When you do get to a manned station, they test your ticket and tell you that as it's been swiped it's your own fault. Parisians seem to be a lot more willing than Londoners to climb the barriers when something goes wrong - perhaps down to having fewer gateline staff. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
The Tube: top quality
wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote: http://manila.djh.dk/Ukraine/stories/storyReader$5 (Average *monthly* earnings of US$100 for Ukrainians, 2000) Well for a start that report is over 6 years out of date and secondly while that might possibly be true averaged as a whole over the country there is a lot of money floating about in Kiev , and I'm not just talking about the Mafia. Besides which , if everything cost 1/45th of that in Britain then your argument may hold water , but lots of things , eg mobile phones , radios, white goods, some foods, cost the same or more than they do in britain. I accept that the report is out of date. Deeper digging (link below from the IMF) has uncovered a figure for August 2004 of 604.2UAH, which is about £64 at current exchange rates (in the absence of an exchange rate for 2004). This is still 11.5% of London monthly wages (£2409). http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2005/cr0521.pdf Although I accept that averages cover up fluctuations across the country, the following ILO document (p46 in Acrobat Reader) suggests that Kiev workers have a lower wage than the Ukrainian average. It is out of date, but it shows that fluctuations go both ways. http://www.ilo.org/public/english/pr...cs/ukraine.pdf Finally, the key issue is that a Kiev ticket price of £2.80 is about 4.4% of monthly wages, whilst a London ticket for Zones 1&2 of £85.30 is about 3.5% of monthly wages. Those percentages can be compared, unlike the nominal values. If some goods cost the same or more than they do in Britain, that means that Ukrainians have *even less* to spend on transport. For example, if either buys a £30 radio, the Ukrainian has £34 left to spend that month (of which transport would be 8%) whilst the Londoner has £2379 left (of which transport would still be around 3.5%). The Kiev metro is nowhere near as extensive as the London Underground - it has 59km of route and 45 stations (compared to 408km and 275 stations). Zone 1 would be comparable; a Zones 1&2 monthly travelcard costs £85.30. Make of that what you will. Yeah , this argument is frequently trotted out as if size has any bearing on the running of a system. You might as well say that HSBC can't be expected to be run as well as Northern Rock because its so much bigger. If you have the staff & resources in place , clued up management and workers who treat their jobs as a priviledge , not a right , then it would all work smoothly. You don't, so it doesn't. I wasn't attempting to compare the running of the systems. I was only comparing the ticket prices, which seem nearly equivalent. The reason I "trotted out" the size of the system was that a travelcard on the Kiev metro can only realistically be compared to a Zones 1&2 travelcard in London because the London system is so much larger overall (thus making a comparison with a Z1-6 travelcard a fallacy). And if you don't think thats a valid point, go check out the Moscow Metro. Its the busiest in the world and it runs just as well as the one in Kiev. I am making no judgment about performance. I'd be very glad to check out the Moscow Metro if someone will buy me a ticket to Moscow... -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
The Tube: top quality
On Fri, 19 May 2006 19:47:09 +0000 (UTC),
wrote: [Kiev metro] The gates are swipe card/ enter token on entry, one way turnstile on exit (as in other countries - much more sensible than the bloody stupid london system where you have to use your ticket on exit too, causing delays which are totally unnecessary) That system only works where there is a flat fare. |
The Tube: top quality
asdf
That system only works where there is a flat fare. And thats what we should have in London. It works in other big cities, no reason it can't work here. Except for the fact that we always think we know best in Britain. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
Dave Arquati wrote:
Although I accept that averages cover up fluctuations across the country, the following ILO document (p46 in Acrobat Reader) suggests that Kiev workers have a lower wage than the Ukrainian average. It is Thats contrary to my experience. Even if that were true , well lets multiply the monthly card by 10. That still only makes it 28 quid. Still 1/5th that of london. metro can only realistically be compared to a Zones 1&2 travelcard in London because the London system is so much larger overall (thus making a comparison with a Z1-6 travelcard a fallacy). So what if its larger? One of the metro lines goes a good 6 or 7 miles out of the city centre. That would make it at least the same as zone 4 and if you take into account the fact that kiev is somewhat smaller than london it would make it the equivalent of zone 6. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
|
The Tube: top quality
From: "Richard J."
So, at what price would you set the flat fare for a single journey on the Underground? Remember this has to be valid for, say, Waterloo to Leicester Square as well as for, say, Northwood to Newbury Park. Two pounds seems like a nice round number. A bit more expensive for a within a single zone journey but a lot cheaper for all others. No doubt there will be immediate bleatings about how the subsidy required can't be afforded. Well in that case , give me the economic case why other countries can afford it and the 4th richest country in the world and one of the higher taxed (ie us), can't. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
|
The Tube: top quality
"Richard J." wrote in news:jyqcg.73896$wl.16438
@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk: Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. But it would all equal itself out. And Joe Public won't complain, because £2 is less than £3 which is what that 1-mile journey currently costs! |
The Tube: top quality
Tristán White wrote:
"Richard J." wrote in news:jyqcg.73896$wl.16438 @text.news.blueyonder.co.uk: Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. But it would all equal itself out. And Joe Public won't complain, because £2 is less than £3 which is what that 1-mile journey currently costs! The fare for such a journey is either £1 or £1.50 - there's no point using cash fares because most of Joe Public uses Oyster. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
The Tube: top quality
Tristán White wrote:
"Richard J." wrote in news:jyqcg.73896$wl.16438 @text.news.blueyonder.co.uk: Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. But it would all equal itself out. And Joe Public won't complain, because £2 is less than £3 which is what that 1-mile journey currently costs! £1 or £1.50 with Oyster at present. Joe Public will certainly complain if his Council Tax goes up yet again. I'm prepared to support Ken's purchase of new buses and subsidies for youngsters, but I don't see why I should subsidise commuters making 20-mile journeys into Central London for £2. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
The Tube: top quality
Dave Arquati wrote in
: Tristán White wrote: "Richard J." wrote in news:jyqcg.73896$wl.16438 @text.news.blueyonder.co.uk: Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. But it would all equal itself out. And Joe Public won't complain, because £2 is less than £3 which is what that 1-mile journey currently costs! The fare for such a journey is either £1 or £1.50 - there's no point using cash fares because most of Joe Public uses Oyster. OK, Oyster-enabled Joe Public pays £1.25 per journey irrespective of length, and people without Oyster pay £2 per journey irrespective of length. No need to use ticket upon exit, as on the continent and other places. Quicker to get through the barriers, less confusing for all. |
The Tube: top quality
In message , Richard J.
writes Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. Paris has the same zonal system that London has. You also pay extra if your zonal ticket includes journeys which use the SNCF part of the system. -- Clive |
The Tube: top quality
On Tue, 23 May 2006 02:36:54 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Richard J. writes Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. Paris has the same zonal system that London has. You also pay extra if your zonal ticket includes journeys which use the SNCF part of the system. It's the same in so far as it is concentric in nature. They have more zones though - 8 IIRC. I'm ignoring our diddy 6ABC add on area for comparative purposes. Season tickets (Carte Orange) are part funded through employer contributions in Paris so that's a huge difference compared to London. Their fare structure differs in that the Metro is flat fare but as Richard J says the Metro is much smaller in terms of geographic spread. You also have the anomaly that there are different fares to La Defense if you go by Metro rather than RER. Tram services have graduated fares while the buses are now flat fare - at least within the Paris city walled area. The RER and SNCF suburban network are on a completely different farescale to the Metro (outside of the Central area) and you have the same complexity about through ticketing that we have here. One huge difference is the bus system where RATP's coverage does not extend very far into the suburbs and frequencies can be very low. Local bus networks then take over and they are very thin in terms of network density and frequency. I sometimes stay with friends in the North West of the Paris region (on the RER network and well within the zonal area) and they have an hourly daytime RATP service and nothing else. There is no comparison when you look at somewhere like Wembley or Sudbury in London which have a far, far better bus service and are a similar geographic distance from the centre. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
The Tube: top quality
Tristán White wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote in : Tristán White wrote: "Richard J." wrote in news:jyqcg.73896$wl.16438 @text.news.blueyonder.co.uk: Obviously we could afford the subsidy if we took money away from other things or people, which might or might not be a good idea. But the London tube system is much bigger than other cities' metros (end-to-end line distances typically twice those in Paris for example). I don't think it's sensible, or a good use of public subsidies, for a 1-mile journey to have the same fare as a 30 mile journey. But it would all equal itself out. And Joe Public won't complain, because £2 is less than £3 which is what that 1-mile journey currently costs! The fare for such a journey is either £1 or £1.50 - there's no point using cash fares because most of Joe Public uses Oyster. OK, Oyster-enabled Joe Public pays £1.25 per journey irrespective of length, and people without Oyster pay £2 per journey irrespective of length. No need to use ticket upon exit, as on the continent and other places. Quicker to get through the barriers, less confusing for all. OK, now you're charging everyone a price based on the lowest possible fares - meaning extra subsidy is required. Demand would increase, particularly from the outer zones, but it's unlikely to cover the shortfall in revenue (it's probably not very elastic), and means overcrowding. Instead of rationing train capacity by price, it will be by queuing. There's also the fact that since Underground users have high average wages compared to the rest of the country, spending extra tax money to subsidise their fares is a poor social decision. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
The Tube: top quality
In message , Paul Corfield
writes I sometimes stay with friends in the North West of the Paris region (on the RER network and well within the zonal area) and they have an hourly daytime RATP service and nothing else. Several years ago I stayed in Maisons-Laffitte (zone 4 NW Paris) and found the service to be about every ten minutes during the day. -- Clive |
The Tube: top quality
On Tue, 23 May 2006 11:24:24 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Paul Corfield writes I sometimes stay with friends in the North West of the Paris region (on the RER network and well within the zonal area) and they have an hourly daytime RATP service and nothing else. Several years ago I stayed in Maisons-Laffitte (zone 4 NW Paris) and found the service to be about every ten minutes during the day. Hourly bus service. The RER thankfully is every 15 mins or so. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
The Tube: top quality
I found Milan's system quite useful when I was there (I think a few places
do it). You get a 24-hour pass (similar to a One Day Travelcard) which works on trains, trams, buses, etc. As soon as you put it through the barrier it activates it for 24 hours (well, it puts a time stamp on it). So if you use it at 1pm it works until 12:55 pm the following day. It's very useful for visiting tourist like myself, who may only be there for one night for a football game (in my case). A good way of doing something nice and cheap for the tourists. Unlike here, where the tourists now actively get ripped off with far bigger fares than Oyster-users. |
The Tube: top quality
Dave Arquati wrote:
It's very difficult to argue with less-than-anecdotal evidence and figures plucked out of thin air. Given that my fiances family live and work in Kiev I'm not entirely sure which bit you think is less than anecdotal. beyond comparison. Apples and oranges. £2.80 lets me travel round Brighton all day by bus; £3 lets me travel round London all day by bus. Does that mean Brighton is better value for money? So if LU only had the central line for example , you'd be quite happy for people to have monthly cards from epping that cost them a few quid? Since obviously the only criteria for you is how many lines there are. Incidentaly , the Moscow metro as I've said before is the busiest in the world. I remember a monthly card being about 450 roubles. Thats 9 quid at current exchange rates. I'm not quite sure where that leaves your argument but holed below the water line would be my thoughts. Unless you're going to insist thats a teensy ickle system compared to london too. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
Dave Arquati wrote:
There's also the fact that since Underground users have high average wages compared to the rest of the country, spending extra tax money to subsidise their fares is a poor social decision. You've conveniently forgotten that london is the engine of the british economy. Any money spent on getting more people to work here on time and unstressed will ultimately be repaid more than hansomely in GDP. Something successive governments seem to forget when the idiots in the treasury get aroundto their yearly book balancing. And if you want to debate subsidies, perhaps you might want to investigate the amount we subsidise the scots so they can have their pointless toytown parliament. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
wrote:
Incidentaly , the Moscow metro as I've said before is the busiest in the world. I remember a monthly card being about 450 roubles. Thats 9 quid at current exchange rates. I'm not quite sure where that leaves your argument but holed below the water line would be my thoughts. Unless you're going to insist thats a teensy ickle system compared to london too. a) compare Moscow workers' wages to London workers' wages (NB mean wage doesn't cut it - Moscow's plutocrats drive around in Mercedes so don't use the metro) b) compare historical and cultural traditions in the ex-USSR to those in the UK c) compare yourself to someone with a clue. Feel free to reflect on these comparisons and answer. Or preferably not. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
The Tube: top quality
Oh look , Mr Budget Media Talking Head has parachuted into the
discussion to devastate us with his insight. Ok , johny , lets play... "John B" wrote: a) compare Moscow workers' wages to London workers' wages (NB mean wage doesn't cut it - Moscow's plutocrats drive around in Mercedes so don't use the metro) Ok , not the mean , how about the median then? Being , as you so modestly put on your website "a highly capable analyst, a lucid and coherent writer," you could avail us all with your knowledge... b) compare historical and cultural traditions in the ex-USSR to those in the UK You mean decent state subsidies for essential public services? I'm pretty sure I remember us having something like that here. c) compare yourself to someone with a clue. Well what can I say , I'm not been "interviewed as an expert by the Economist, the BBC, the Financial Times and the Telegraph". Was Andi Peters unavailable at the time just out of interest? Feel free to reflect on these comparisons and answer. Or preferably not. Feel free to reflect on your website. If you're expecting to get business from it you might want to consider an update. B2003 |
The Tube: top quality
When I took the metro in Sao Paulo I was expecting a disaster. In fact,
it was clean, cheap, efficient, and fast. Brazil is a country where famously nothing works, but even they manage to run a metro system that is classes ahead of the Underground. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk