Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#1
.......a policy which is supported by both labour and the liberals is a bad idea.
Such is what we see with the soon to be announced go-ahead with HS2.
Dear me it's all going to end in tears once again and it's the taxpayer who will, once again, have to foot the bill for this folly.
If you thought wind farms were a stupid idea you might agree that this particular monster is too.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#2
I was a little taken aback on seeing the letter of support for this folly in yesterday's Grauniad signed by Union leaders various.
BUT
All of this has not one thing to do with the Country or we, it's people. This is all about countering the Conservative Gerrymandering proposals. All about 'them' again yet.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
philip'
i was under the impression this was supported b ty the conservative party
still folly?
or was this just political point scoring?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#4
If HS2 is a folly I suppose that makes HS1 a folly as well, I doubt if those using HS1 would agree.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Nunn
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,321
#5
Rock on Jan. The country needs a new north/south railway. Anyone opposing it is a Luddite.
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#6
Oh yes I was there in the forefront with Seth armed with cudgels and bludgeons smashing up our masters mechanical looms. Work of the devil I tell you, work of the devil those things.
Afterwards we both took my car to London using Seth's satnav to take us to the Apple store to buy an Ipad.
I think you will find that those who oppose HS2 are far from Luddites in fact they see how much is being spent, how much is knocked off journey times and who really benefits.
The alternatives are cheaper and much more efficient but unfortunately every prime minister since the job was invented always has to have a pet legacy project they can tell their grandchildren about.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
i think you will find that the opponents are mainly people worried about their property values.
the line is needed for sound economic reasons and will help spread prosperity nationwide.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
My son lives right next door (in an ex Stationmaster's house) to the existing line to Birmingham in what is a beautiful part of the Cotswolds. Having to travel to London and Birmingham at times for work he is in favour of the new line.
Those who live in the area of the new line are mainly thinking of their property values and are also afraid of change fearing it will be for the worse. Exactly as those in Kent did when the HS1 was planned or the Channel Tunnel, the countryside in the vicinity of both is just as beautiful except for a narrow stretch either side.
The alternative of upgrading the existing line might be cheaper but with all the twists and turns will never be as efficient as a straighter new line.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#9
"the line is needed for sound economic reasons and will help spread prosperity nationwide."
Who, without your direct line to the all-knowing-one, could argue with that Howard?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#10
"the line is needed for sound economic reasons and will help spread prosperity nationwide."
Yes well that's very true if you are in an extremely well paid job. Most of the proles, however, will not be able to afford the journey.
So far there has been no sensible economic case for this line 'cept unquestioning soundbites from those who stand to gain most who inevitably are those most railed against on this forum as being rich and not in touch with "the people".
Add to that any opposition is shouted down as "Hey nimby, not in my back yard".
It's about time people started delving deeper into issues rather than merely repeating the mantra from their betters methinks.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#11
Yes, Philip. Let those who expound the virtues of 'trickle-down economics', be confined to the wearing of dark trousers and let those of us who attend to the matter in hand choose from the broader palette what colours to sport.
One, if in receipt of a wind-fall, may well envisage a larger car-port, fit enough for a RR, but what fool expands his hard-standing in the hope that such a car will be theirs simply because it would fit?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
i am still trying to understand philip's objections, it will not be on environmental grounds i am sure.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#13
some thought provoking there
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#14
Not belonging to the ranks of climate change cranks the environmental issues surrounding this project are not a concern. Having said that the cranks in the government have actually proposed that this new line would be, wait for it, carbon neutral. How they have managed to override every single law of physics is beyond me frankly but that's why they are cranks and there is no rhyme nor reason to crankiness.
It's nothing more than blue sky thinking gone mad. If you examine the business model it makes no sense. The alternatives have barely been considered before being dismissed out of hand.
As I said earlier the only people who could possibly afford to take a trip on this line are the rich, oh, and politicians who are four square behind this in the main.
Justine Greening, you know the one who has objected to most strongly the expansion of Heathrow, is likely to give this hairbrained scheme the go-ahead.
Now I thought we were going through tough times but a vanity project like this is just another example of a lack of coherence and vision by our masters.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#15
For once I sort of agree with Philip - this is a vanity project that makes little real difference to rail journey times, but very nicely lines the construction companies, contractors and consultants pockets.
An almost identical improvement in journey times could be achieved by signal, track layout improvements and some track upgrades on the Euston to Birmingham line at a significantly lower cost (with the same construction cos etc likely to get that work).
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#16
Listening to a discussion on the radio on this issue makes me smile. So far it's like trying to reason with drunk people. I suspect this project will unravel to the point where it's conveniently forgotten about in much the same way we can all only hope that any future wind farms might be.
Or is that a wish too far?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#17
only just over a mile of new line will actually be overground with 8 miles of tunnels planned to be built.
i don't see that as having a major environmental impact.
Guest 656- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,262
#18
We need to bring our trains up to speed to match our european counterparts, the HS1 is a fine example of this and the HS2, well I see it as the next chapter in efficient train travel in the UK.
People using this line on a daily basis are of course in full time employment and can therefore afford to use it, the rest of us who occasionally travel by train pay a just a few pounds more and there are various deals to be had which is a blessing as train fares have recently just increased yet again.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#19
£32 billion (at today's prices so triple or quadruple that) for a mere half an hour knocked off journey time?
It would be cheaper to buy second homes for those commuting to Birmingham rather than this folly.
It seems to me the government have run out of ideas and the only thing they can come up with in terms of somehow reinvigorating the economy is to pump tax payers money on this.
I think that this idea originally came from the last labour government is testament to that.
Oh and let's not forget who exactly will build the rolling stock, certainly not any company in the UK.
Bombardier eat your heart out.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#20
# 17. ........but it will keep a `few` Chipping Norton`` type sets happy.
...........rolling stock contracts etc,etc..........please not with this Government in control.
Cameron`s latest headline effort..............we must protect our Manufacturing industry..............Bombardier ????????