Cheeky wrote:

Well ISTR a report in the Sunday press a while ago which noted that a
3mile rail tunnel is being built under Kiel for £400 million whilst a
5 mile tunnel in London is costed at £17 billion....

I'm sure that such a blind comparison is completely valid, oh yes. Why
not bring the Big Dig into it too?

"Colin" wrote in
:


"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 02:07:13 +0100, Colin wrote:
That was the first time around many years ago, where the project
was
killed
off by a committee of (mainly Tory) London MP's with a 'not in my
back
yard'
and anti-subsidy agenda.

Things have somewhat progressed since then.

What, you call people that live in Manchester or Wales subsidising
the transport needs of Londoners "progress". All government subsidy
is the most definitely anything but progress, but when you charge
people that have no benefit whatsoever, you become worse then Ken!

If taxpayers do have to subsidise it, it should come out the local
taxes of London business and commuters.

You are obviously ignorant of the fact that Londoners massively
subsidise the rest of the UK with their tax outlay - something that
Ken is always quick to highlight.

Crossrail would only go a small way to redress the huge historic
inbalance.

Perhaps London should go independent and keep all our tax revenue to
ourselves - then you'd be sorry!

While this is true in pure numbers terms, the wealth of this country that
Londoner's pay themselves for (mis)managing was never generated in London.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:58:35 +0100, Colin wrote:
Perhaps London should go independent and keep all our tax revenue to
ourselves - then you'd be sorry!

Why? I live and work in London

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 09:31:30 +0000, Cast_Iron wrote:
So by that argument high wage earners in London payting higher a\mounts of
income and other taxes shouldn't contribute to the unemployed of other parts
of the UK?

No. Tax is evil, social security is evil, and subsidising rail is evil.

We live in a society where we all pay in to a central pot and everyone
benefits from that central pot.

And that society is wrong

On a different theme, why is building a new railway "subsidy" and a road
"investement"? They're both for the same purpose.

Except car drivers pay £30bn a year in taxes through Car tax and petrol
tax, yet only see £5bn investment in roads. In reality train users should
be paying something like £150pw for a travel card for zone 1 alone.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:58:35 +0100, Colin wrote:
Perhaps London should go independent and keep all our tax revenue to
ourselves - then you'd be sorry!

Oh yes, the rest of the country would love to get rid of the arrogant
whiners in the south east

Paul Weaver wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 09:31:30 +0000, Cast_Iron wrote:
So by that argument high wage earners in London payting
higher a\mounts of income and other taxes shouldn't
contribute to the unemployed of other parts of the UK?

No. Tax is evil, social security is evil, and subsidising
rail is evil.

We live in a society where we all pay in to a central pot
and everyone benefits from that central pot.

And that society is wrong

So why do you continue to live in such a society? Unless you've already left
the UK in which case what are you whinging about?

On a different theme, why is building a new railway
"subsidy" and a road "investement"? They're both for the
same purpose.

Except car drivers pay £30bn a year in taxes through Car
tax and petrol
tax, yet only see £5bn investment in roads. In reality
train users should
be paying something like £150pw for a travel card for zone
1 alone.

(Yet again) Taxes levied on motor vehicles and their use is not
hypothecated.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:00:52 +0000, Cast_Iron wrote:
We live in a society where we all pay in to a central pot
and everyone benefits from that central pot.

And that society is wrong

So why do you continue to live in such a society? Unless you've already left
the UK in which case what are you whinging about?

Ahh, so when Thatcher was in I take it you supported her every decision.
After all if you didn't like it you should have left.

Why dont we have the U.S. System where you get a referendum on taxes? Or
the Swedish system where they get a referendum on pretty much everything?


(Yet again) Taxes levied on motor vehicles and their use is not
hypothecated.

(Yet again), this is unfair theft and discrimination against the poor.

"Michael Bell" wrote in message
...
In article , Colin
wrote:

"Michael Bell" wrote in message
...
I have been told that a parliamentary commsission judged that
Crossrail was poor value for money. Can anybody confirm this?

--


Michael Bell

That was the first time around many years ago, where the project was
killed
off by a committee of (mainly Tory) London MP's with a 'not in my back
yard'
and anti-subsidy agenda.

Things have somewhat progressed since then.

Colin

Saying that they don't want it in their back yard is quite a different
thing from saying that it is "poor value for money". Saying that it is
"poor value for money" at least accepts the idea that it can be right
to spend money, but that the money might be better spent on other
things, eg making better use of what's already there by creating
interchange where routes cross over each other without interchange,
there must be several dozen such sites in London. And there must be
many other serious contenders for available funds. AS REPORTED TO ME,
the judgement was made that Crossrail did not rank high against such
competitors even within London. So why is there such a push for it?



--

Michael

Because the people with the money want it to happen:

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/our_s...onse_09_02.pdf

Quote: "The construction of Crossrail is vital for the future success of
London as a world-class city."

And what is the point of 'better interchanges' if the lines themselves are
choked full of people at rush hour and it is impossible to squeeze more
trains down them? What were these competitors you quote anyway and did they
ever happen?

Colin

In article , Steve
wrote:

[snip]


If taxpayers do have to subsidise it, it should come out the local
taxes of London business and commuters.

You are obviously ignorant of the fact that Londoners massively
subsidise the rest of the UK with their tax outlay - something that
Ken is always quick to highlight.

Crossrail would only go a small way to redress the huge historic
inbalance.

Perhaps London should go independent and keep all our tax revenue to
ourselves - then you'd be sorry!

While this is true in pure numbers terms, the wealth of this country that
Londoner's pay themselves for (mis)managing was never generated in London.


There has been a series of articles in the Guardian newspaper recently
on this topic (all available on the Guardian web site, so you can look
at it), and the conclusion is that London does get slightly more money
spent on it per head than the rest of the country, but that's not the
question I asked, which is, "Is it true that Crossrail has been judged
Poor Value for Money? And on what grounds?"



--

Michael Bell

Paul Weaver wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:00:52 +0000, Cast_Iron wrote:
We live in a society where we all pay in to a central pot
and everyone benefits from that central pot.

And that society is wrong

So why do you continue to live in such a society? Unless
you've already left the UK in which case what are you
whinging about?

Ahh, so when Thatcher was in I take it you supported her
every decision. After all if you didn't like it you should
have left.

Why dont we have the U.S. System where you get a referendum
on taxes? Or
the Swedish system where they get a referendum on pretty
much everything?


(Yet again) Taxes levied on motor vehicles and their use
is not hypothecated.

(Yet again), this is unfair theft and discrimination
against the poor.

The poor can't afford to run motor vehicles.